Filtering by Category: Pro Life: Other,Peace
Are Evangelicals Ditching the Death Penalty?
Are Evangelicals Ditching the Death Penalty? | VICE | United States
President Barack Obama greets Dr. Joel C. Hunter, senior pastor of Northland, A Church Distributed, during the Easter Prayer Breakfast in 2014 at the White House in Washington.(AP Photo/Carolyn Kaster) This story was co-published with the Marshall Project.
Christian Leaders Intensify Campaign against Mideast Persecution
Joel Hunter joins other faith leaders against terrorism
Joel Hunter joins other faith leaders against terrorism Joel Hunter joins other faith leaders against terrorism Central Florida’s religious community will be conducting a joint event to build compassionate communities on Saturday, Feb. 28, from 1 p.m.-3:30 p.m. The event will take place at the American Muslim Community Center, located at 811 Wilma Street, in Longwood, Fla.
Participants include Dr. Joel C. Hunter of Northland, A Church Distributed; Atif Fareed of American Muslim Community Centers; Rabbi Steven W. Engel of Congregation of Reform Judaism; Pastor Jim Mory, Longwood Hills Congregational Church; Ustadh Ali Ataie of Zaytuna College and other individuals and faith leaders. Together, they will focus on how to build compassionate communities and speak out against those seeking to tear down the human family.
"We strongly condemn violence against any innocent victims in the name of God, national or international interests. This shall include the murder, beheading, burning, rape or bombing of innocent people, whether Christians, Jews, Muslims or adherents of any other faith. Acts of domestic or international terrorism and the desecration or bombing of any church, mosque, synagogue or any house of worship are violations of divine principles and will not be condoned by any of the three Abrahamic faiths."
Central Florida Muslim leaders will also sign the Judeo-Christian-Islamic Peace Covenant. The Judeo-Christian-Islamic Covenant is an agreement between the three Abrahamic faiths and its leaders to adhere to common universal principles in a spirit of mutual respect, love and indiscriminate compassion for all innocent victims worldwide ... to stand against bigotry, hate, intolerance and cooperate in a spirit of brotherhood through dialogue and love, mutual trust and understanding.
The event is free and open to the public. Please RSVP by emailing rsvp@amccenters.org.
Court Stops Execution of Mentally Ill Man Defended by Many Evangelicals
Court Stops Execution of Mentally Ill Man Defended by Many Evangelicals
Court Stops Execution of Mentally Ill Man Defended by Many Evangelicals
Evangelicals divide over the death penalty, but leaders agree on the unusual case of Scott Panetti.
Morgan Lee [ POSTED 12/3/2014 12:36PM ]
Court Stops Execution of Mentally Ill Man Defended by Many EvangelicalsED BIERMAN/FLICKR
Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals
More than 50 evangelical leaders often at odds recently united, asking Texas to commute the death sentence of a mentally ill inmate who believes he is being persecuted for preaching the gospel. Scott Panetti's execution was scheduled for today. This morning, an appeals court delayed his death with just hours to spare.
Shane Claiborne, David Gushee, Lynne Hybels, Joel Hunter, Sam Rodriguez, Jay Sekulow, and other conservatives and progressives signed the letter, which states that Christians are called to protect the most vulnerable and that Panetti, who has been diagnosed with schizophrenia since the 1970s and murdered his in-laws to “get rid of the devil” inside them, falls into that category.
“If ever there was a clear case of an individual suffering from mental illness, this is it,” says the letter, whose other signatories include author Brian McLaren, Billy Graham Center prison ministry director Karen Swanson, Evangelicals for Social Action co-president Paul Alexander, Wheaton College’s Applied Christian Ethics Center director Vincent Bacote, former North Park Theological Seminary president John Phelan, and National Latino Evangelical Coalition (NLEC) board member Danny Diaz. “Mr. Panetti is a paranoid schizophrenic.... He believes that he is being put to death for preaching the gospel, not for the murder of his wife’s parents.”
In the decade before he murdered his in-laws in 1992, Panetti, now 56, was hospitalized at least a dozen times for schizophrenia, manic depression, hallucinations, and delusions of persecution, The New York Times reports. During his trial, Panetti won the right to represent himself, and tried to subpoena Jesus, the Pope, and John F. Kennedy in court. His attorneys say he described his death sentence as “spiritual warfare.”
“These delusions are that the prison wants to kill him to prevent him from preaching the gospel on death row or telling others about corruption,” Kathryn Kase, executive director of Texas Defender Service which represents Panetti, told Time. “We’re not psychologists. We’re not mental health professionals. But we do know we’re seeing something really terrible happen.”
Earlier this year, a botched execution in April led to some evangelical outcry: NLEC president Gabe Salguero called for a change in capital punishment, while RNS columnist Jonathan Merritt pointed out for the Atlantic that “only five percent of Americans believe Jesus would support the government’s ability to execute the worst criminals.”
In 1998, evangelicals noticeably rallied to lobby for Karla Faye Tucker, a death row inmate in Texas who converted to Christianity while in prison, notes Mother Jones. After the 2011 execution of Troy Davis in Georgia, CT looked at the religious divide over the death penalty.
"This is the largest outpouring of support on a death penalty case we've seen from evangelicals, and you can see why, given the ridiculous nature of this case," Heather Beaudoin, a spokesperson for Conservatives Concerned About the Death Penalty, told Mother Jones. "A lot of folks who signed this [clemency] letter might have given pause about signing on to a letter opposing the death penalty generally, but they think we have no business executing Scott Panetti."
The New York Times editorial board argued that a “civilized society” that kills Panetti “cannot pretend to be adhering to any morally acceptable standard of culpability,” and a Change.org petition organized by Victoria Panetti on behalf of her brother garnered over 90,000 signatures.
Earlier this month, Panetti’s lawyers filed for a stay on the grounds that the defendant’s mental state had deteriorated since 2007, the year of his last competency hearing. While Texas governor Rick Perry can commute death penalty sentences, he can only do so after a recommendation from the state Board of Pardons and Paroles, which voted Monday to continue the execution. In a 5-4 ruling last Tuesday, the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals denied the motion on jurisdictional grounds. More details about the case and the Supreme Court’s 2007 ruling which blocked Panetti’s execution can be found here. RNS reports that the US Supreme Court—the final stop in cases like Panetti’s—is increasingly wary of the death penalty. In 2008, the Supreme Court mulled lethal injections as Christian support for the death penalty dropped.
CT has frequently examined the ethics of the death penalty, including how American capital punishment standards fall far below biblical guidelines, why early Christians refuted the death penalty, and why Christians don’t find bloodshed repugnant anymore. CT also published responses by three leading Christian ethicists on whether it’s biblical to be pro-life and support the death penalty, and asked whether execution can be merciful.
Court Stops Execution of Mentally Ill Man Defended by Many Evangelicals
Evangelicals divide over the death penalty, but leaders agree on the unusual case of Scott Panetti.
More than 50 evangelical leaders often at odds recently united, asking Texas to commute the death sentence of a mentally ill inmate who believes he is being persecuted for preaching the gospel. Scott Panetti's execution was scheduled for today. This morning, an appeals court delayed his death with just hours to spare.
Shane Claiborne, David Gushee, Lynne Hybels, Joel Hunter, Sam Rodriguez, Jay Sekulow, and other conservatives and progressives signed the letter, which states that Christians are called to protect the most vulnerable and that Panetti, who has been diagnosed with schizophrenia since the 1970s and murdered his in-laws to “get rid of the devil” inside them, falls into that category.
“If ever there was a clear case of an individual suffering from mental illness, this is it,” says the letter, whose other signatories include author Brian McLaren, Billy Graham Center prison ministry director Karen Swanson, Evangelicals for Social Action co-president Paul Alexander, Wheaton College’s Applied Christian Ethics Center director Vincent Bacote, former North Park Theological Seminary president John Phelan, and National Latino Evangelical Coalition (NLEC) board member Danny Diaz. “Mr. Panetti is a paranoid schizophrenic.... He believes that he is being put to death for preaching the gospel, not for the murder of his wife’s parents.”
In the decade before he murdered his in-laws in 1992, Panetti, now 56, was hospitalized at least a dozen times for schizophrenia, manic depression, hallucinations, and delusions of persecution, The New York Times reports. During his trial, Panetti won the right to represent himself, and tried to subpoena Jesus, the Pope, and John F. Kennedy in court. His attorneys say he described his death sentence as “spiritual warfare.”
“These delusions are that the prison wants to kill him to prevent him from preaching the gospel on death row or telling others about corruption,” Kathryn Kase, executive director of Texas Defender Service which represents Panetti, told Time. “We’re not psychologists. We’re not mental health professionals. But we do know we’re seeing something really terrible happen.”
Earlier this year, a botched execution in April led to some evangelical outcry: NLEC president Gabe Salguero called for a change in capital punishment, while RNS columnist Jonathan Merritt pointed out for the Atlantic that “only five percent of Americans believe Jesus would support the government’s ability to execute the worst criminals.”
In 1998, evangelicals noticeably rallied to lobby for Karla Faye Tucker, a death row inmate in Texas who converted to Christianity while in prison, notes Mother Jones. After the 2011 execution of Troy Davis in Georgia, CT looked at the religious divide over the death penalty.
"This is the largest outpouring of support on a death penalty case we've seen from evangelicals, and you can see why, given the ridiculous nature of this case," Heather Beaudoin, a spokesperson for Conservatives Concerned About the Death Penalty, told Mother Jones. "A lot of folks who signed this [clemency] letter might have given pause about signing on to a letter opposing the death penalty generally, but they think we have no business executing Scott Panetti."
The New York Times editorial board argued that a “civilized society” that kills Panetti “cannot pretend to be adhering to any morally acceptable standard of culpability,” and a Change.org petition organized by Victoria Panetti on behalf of her brother garnered over 90,000 signatures.
Earlier this month, Panetti’s lawyers filed for a stay on the grounds that the defendant’s mental state had deteriorated since 2007, the year of his last competency hearing. While Texas governor Rick Perry can commute death penalty sentences, he can only do so after a recommendation from the state Board of Pardons and Paroles, which voted Monday to continue the execution. In a 5-4 ruling last Tuesday, the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals denied the motion on jurisdictional grounds. More details about the case and the Supreme Court’s 2007 ruling which blocked Panetti’s execution can be found here. RNS reports that the US Supreme Court—the final stop in cases like Panetti’s—is increasingly wary of the death penalty. In 2008, the Supreme Court mulled lethal injections as Christian support for the death penalty dropped.
CT has frequently examined the ethics of the death penalty, including how American capital punishment standards fall far below biblical guidelines, why early Christians refuted the death penalty, and why Christians don’t find bloodshed repugnant anymore. CT also published responses by three leading Christian ethicists on whether it’s biblical to be pro-life and support the death penalty, and asked whether execution can be merciful.
SOURCE: http://www.orlandosentinel.com/opinion/os-ed-front-center-joel-hunter-20141125-story.html
Pastor 'Boldly' Opposes Execution
That Scott Panetti killed his in-laws with a hunting rifle is indisputable. So is the fact that Texas plans next month to execute the man with a lengthy history of schizophrenia who defended himself at his 1995 trial dressed in cowboy togs and summoned John F. Kennedy and Jesus Christ to testify. Joel Hunter, senior pastor of Northland, A Church Distributed, joined over 50 evangelical leaders who signed a letter to Texas Gov. Rick Perry decrying Panetti's execution. In an email interview, Hunter told the Editorial Board why he got involved. Excerpts follow. A longer version is online at OrlandoSentinel.com/opinion.
Q: The U.S. Supreme Court has frowned on executing the mentally ill. Why do you think Texas is pressing ahead on Panetti's execution?
A: Texas is a state that has not been sparing in executing those sentenced to death, but this case highlights the complexities of trying to implement the death penalty. Most Americans — even those who support the death penalty — do not want to see those with mental illness or intellectual disability executed. But what counts as mental illness or intellectual disability is debated, and we've seen those debates play out in both legislatures and the courts. In the Panetti case, the National Alliance on Mental Illness and leading mental-health professionals all have concluded that Panetti is severely mentally ill and, as a result, should not be executed. Unfortunately, so far Texas has not heeded the advice of the nation's and Texas' leading mental-health organizations and professionals.
Q: Panetti's lawyers say his execution "would cross a moral line." Do you agree?
A: Yes, executing Panetti would cross a moral line. Many of us have friends and family with mental illness, and understand that they do not always have full control over their actions. Their illness can render them "not themselves" in significant ways. We as a society are judged by how we treat the most vulnerable — the poor, the disabled, those with mental illness and intellectual disability. Jesus prayed from the cross, "Forgive them Father, for they know not what they do." Executing Panetti would go against Christ's plea, for the implication of an execution is that we're willing to discard the life of the disabled rather than protect it.
The mental-health community has been very clear that Panetti suffers from a 30-year history of schizophrenia. He was hospitalized more than a dozen times for psychosis and delusions in the years leading up to his tragic crime. He represented himself at trial wearing a cowboy suit. Given his condition and questions about his competence, execution would serve no constructive purpose but would rather destroy the life of a vulnerable individual. We do not believe God would condone this act of execution.
Q: How much should mental illness weigh in the tension between justice and culpability?
A: That's a difficult question. Mental-health experts and criminologists would agree that it can be difficult to find the right balance between justice and culpability. Obviously, we can't throw up our hands and say that it is impossible to make these judgments, because it is important to hold people accountable for crimes that they commit. We have to keep grappling with this issue and making sure that, as science and our understanding of mental health advance, this knowledge continually informs our criminal justice system. In Panetti's case it is clear that with his long well-documented struggles with severe mental illness, execution would be an unjust response.
Q: If not execution, how should Panetti be punished for his heinous crime?
A: Imprisonment is punishment, and it is a more appropriate response to the crimes that Panetti committed. Texas can incarcerate him and keep society secure without having to resort to an execution. Obviously, with the crime he committed and his long history of mental illness, life imprisonment would be a just sentence.
Q: Generally, what's your view of the death penalty?
A: I have moral objections to the death penalty, knowing the fallibility of our justice system and my being completely pro-life. The death penalty is ultimately incompatible with promoting a culture that recognizes the sacredness of all human life. Our nation would like to claim God's protection, but yet if we do not protect those who are most vulnerable, or who may later be found to be innocent, that is a difficult claim to make. I understand why other moral people would disagree with me on this issue, but for me, the death penalty in general is unnecessary, not a deterrent, and does not promote a culture of life and hope.
Q: Are you and the other evangelical leaders who got involved in this case in a ticklish situation, given that Panetti insists Satan is using Texas to prevent him from preaching the Gospel on death row?
A: We will be criticized for our views, but God calls on us to boldly and unapologetically defend life, which is exactly what we are doing in this case. Regarding Panetti's relationship with God, I cannot judge — only God knows the depths of his heart. Certainly, when you read the Bible, you will see that God redeemed people — David, Moses, Paul — after they had committed awful crimes. The heart of the Gospel message is that no one is beyond redemption, and that basic truth applies to those on death row.
Pastor Saeed's Case Raised in Iran
'We Have Something In Common' -- Obama's Spiritual Adviser On Iran Trip
'We Have Something In Common' -- Obama's Spiritual Adviser On Iran Trip
Joel Hunter, a spiritual adviser to U.S. President Barack Obama, recently spent about a week discussing religious tolerance with officials in Iran, a country often singled out by rights groups for its intolerance toward its religious minorities.
Hunter, a senior pastor of Northland Church in Florida who led a delegation of U.S. religious leaders to the Islamic republic, says he was invited by Iranian religious leaders and scholars to attend a conference.
The conference titled "World Free of Violence and Extremism from the Perspective of Abrahamic Religions" was held in Tehran on May 25.
Hunter, who describes himself as someone who helps Obama get closer to God, says he will brief the U.S. President on his trip, which included a visit to the holy city of Qom.
Hunter's visit to Iran is likely to be castigated by hard-liners in the country as well as critics in the United States who oppose engagement efforts with an Islamic establishment that has been accused of serious human rights abuses.
A conservative Iranian website questioned the trip on June 2 and asked authorities whether it had been coordinated with the country's security and intelligence bodies.
"Is this trip part of the project to make 'America look good' by the pro-Western faction to send positive impulses to U.S. officials?" Jahannews.com asked.
Despite the criticism, Hunter says the trip was worth it.
"That's part of how we make progress, is that those of us who know we're going to be blamed by some of the hard-liners, for even having these conversations," he said. "We believe it's worth the risk because we're not going to make progress as countries or even as religious communities for not talking to one another."
Path To Peace
Hunter said he met with Iran's parliament speaker, advisers to Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei, officials of Iran's academy of science, Christian and Jewish leaders, and Grand Ayatollahs in Qom.
He added that religious extremism and violence as well as a faith-based path to peace were among the main topics he discussed with Iranian officials.
Asked whether he raised the issue of Iranian state pressure on religious minorities, including Christian converts, Hunter said those subjects were discussed in "sidebar conversations".
In his latest report, Ahmed Shaheed, the United Nations Special Rapporteur on the Situation of Human Rights in Iran, noted that religious minorities in the Islamic republic, including Baha'is and Christians, face violations entrenched in law and practice. Sufis are reportedly also coming under increasing pressure by the Iranian establishment and hard-line clerics who describe the Sufi interpretation of Islam as deviant.
"We didn't go over there to confront people on certain issues," said Hunter. "But...we have built enough of a relationship to address those specific conversations and we talked through those together, and what steps we could do to build a better environment."
Pastor Hunter also said that he was aware that his trip could be used for propaganda purposes by Iranian officials who often claim that all the country's citizens enjoy the same rights.
"Everybody will use our trip for propaganda purposes," he said. "It's the nature of the beast, that's what politics is."
Decreasing Tensions
Hunter said he believes religious leaders can play a role in decreasing tensions between the United States and Iran.
Washington broke its diplomatic ties with Iran following the 1979 revolution and the hostage-taking of U.S. diplomats in Tehran. In the past 35 years, the two countries have been at odds over a number of issues, including Iran's support for terrorism and its controversial nuclear program.
In recent weeks, Iran and the United States, as well as other world powers, have been engaged in talks aimed at finding a lasting solution to the crisis over Iran's sensitive nuclear work.
According to Hunter, certain areas, including religious violence and persecution, can only be solved through dialogue among religious leaders.
"We believe that we have something in common and out of the commonality of our religious communities, we can build the kind of relationship and trust that politics simply can't," he said. "Only through religious leadership or the exchange of religious leaders, we believe peace is going to be successfully built between our two countries."
In an email to RFE/RL, a State Department official said that the United States is aware of independent initiatives by various U.S. religious figures to foster interfaith dialogue with Iranian religious scholars.
"We commend such efforts to promote interfaith tolerance and religious freedom, a foreign policy priority for the Department," the official said.
The official added that Washington was also aware that a small delegation of U.S. Catholics visited Iran in March, entirely independent of the U.S. government.
The new evangelicals: A return to the original agenda of Christ
I am one of those evangelicals who, in Professor Marcia Pally’s words, have “left the right.” As a former President-elect of the Christian Coalition of America, I resigned that position and all other positions that would box me into ideologies that were becoming insidiously narrow and negative. As a 64-year-old pastor, I may not yet be representative of my generation or profession in my political openness, but I am one of a growing number of white evangelicals who are making biblically-based decisions on an issue-by-issue basis, in a wider circle of conversations than ever. We are put off by the “hardening of the categories” that is stifling not only intellectually, but also spiritually. Part of this transition is cultural. As Professor Pally pointed out, it is not only a generational shift that naturally declares independence from traditional religious reactions (especially paternalistic ones). The transition is for others a distancing from the institutionalism of the church and the inelasticity of a movement that began as personally charitable but has become dogmatically xenophobic.
The greater part of this change, however, is a generic return to the original agenda of Christ. As the world becomes more complex and less predictable, we are seeing a “back to basics” trend. It is an expansion beyond a preoccupation with the more recent monitoring of sexual matters, to a more ‘whole life’ helpfulness. It is the turn from accusation to compassion, and it is much in keeping with the priorities and example of Jesus. His focus on helping the most vulnerable is also our concern. Thus more and more evangelicals are expanding the definition of pro-life. They are including in a pro-life framework concern with poverty, environmental pollution, AIDS treatment, and more. And issues like abortion are being expanded from focusing on only “in utero” concerns—increasing numbers of evangelicals now see prevention of unwanted pregnancy and support for needy expectant mothers as pro-life.
More evangelicals simply want to live our lives according to our spiritual values—unselfishness, other-centeredness, non-presumptuousness—so that when people see “our good works, they will give glory to our Father in heaven.”
Lastly, practically all sustainable change is relationally based. In an increasingly connected world, an increasing number of evangelicals are developing a broader range of relationships, both interfaith and inter-lifestyle. These make us think twice before we declare those who have different values as adversaries. As we “love our neighbor,” we want to cooperate in ways that express our own values while allowing others to express their own.
Professor Pally has established a masterful and nuanced summary of the change in the evangelical political voice. I hope that we will continue the dialogue.
FIND THIS ARTICLE AT: http://blogs.ssrc.org/tif/2013/01/16/a-return-to-the-original-agenda-of-christ/
Huffington Post: Who Speaks for Christianity and Islam?
Who Speaks for Christianity and Islam?
Posted: 09/21/2012 4:52 pm
We can tell you who does NOT speak for Christianity or Islam: the radicals who are getting all the media attention.
In both Christianity and Islam, freedoms of speech and expression are cherished rights, however, a small fraction of extremists on both sides are abusing these rights and pretending to speak on behalf of billions of peaceful Christians and Muslims. The tendency to mischaracterize a religion other than your own is nothing new. The desire to defend one's faith and respond to insults is certainly understandable. But let us all take a moment to put this in perspective: Who is launching the attacks?
Recently, a demeaning and degrading hate film, produced by a radical Christian in California and promoted by a fundamentalist Christian leader in Florida, resulted in radical Muslims rioting in several countries. The Christian extremists intended to outrage Muslims worldwide, and to get the Muslim extremists to respond violently. They blame each other, but they are two faces of the same coin.
We have both been in the office of Rev. Terry Jones, on different occasions, to try to dissuade him from actions that would place Americans, especially those serving in our Armed Forces, in danger. We have failed for a simple reason: He loves the attention and he believes he is fighting evil. His tiny congregation loves the idea that believers like them are the only ones true to Christ and courageous enough to defend the faith against enemies. Like other fundamentalists of any faith, he speaks with disdain when talking about other churches let alone Islam. When we visited him, instead of carrying a Bible around the office, Rev. Jones and his assistant pastor carried guns.
We do not know any respected Christian leader or denomination who would promote or even tolerate a despicable video denigrating the leader of another religion. Out of the billions of Christians on this earth, only a very few would approve of such slander. The question is, how many will speak out against it?
We both have talked to Muslims, encouraging them to peace and dialogue. Compared to the of the millions that demonstrated for more democratic reforms in the "Arab Spring" movement across the Middle East, how many have been involved in these violent reactions to the film? Only thousands, in some cases hundreds, demonstrated angrily and only a fraction of those were violent.
Everyone likes to blame the media for focusing on the loud voices of the radicals, but some of the responsibility must rest on the majority of religious leaders who are silent during these times, the ones who would speak up for peace and respect of others but they do not take the initiative. Maybe if more of us spoke up, we could drown out the radical provocations and the radical responses with voices of reason, civility and thoughtfulness.
As a Christian leader, I, Pastor Joel Hunter, rebuke the Coptic Christian who made such a disgusting video. I know many Coptic Christians in Egypt and other countries who would be sick about this kind of attack on the Prophet of Islam. I will be part of the voices that will drown out future attempts to incite the clash of religions and civilizations.
As a Muslim leader, I, Imam Muhammad Musri, strongly condemn the cowardly criminal attacks against the U.S. Consulate in Benghazi, Libya, and other U.S. Embassies around the world. My prayers and condolences go out to the families and loved ones of Ambassador Christopher Stevens and his colleagues, who were killed in these senseless criminal acts. I strongly condemn the radical mob that carried out the attacks, and I stand up with the vast majority of Muslims who are peaceful against the extremists who keep trying to hijack our faith. Islam is peace, and under no circumstances is any kind of violence ever justified in response to such provocations.
While many religious leaders find it difficult to reach out across the religious divide, we are proud to say we have been best friends for nearly 20 years. We have advocated for many issues of compassion and justice and health together. We have worked together to reduce nuclear arms, pollution, eliminate torture, minimize poverty and other important issues. How
many will stand with us to speak out and outlast the voices of degradation when it comes to other religions? We are each strong advocates for our own scriptures and understandings of God, but we do not build our communities by tearing others down.
By Dr. Joel C. Hunter and Imam Muhammad Musri
We can tell you who does NOT speak for Christianity or Islam: the radicals who are getting all the media attention.
In both Christianity and Islam, freedoms of speech and expression are cherished rights, however, a small fraction of extremists on both sides are abusing these rights and pretending to speak on behalf of billions of peaceful Christians and Muslims. The tendency to mischaracterize a religion other than your own is nothing new. The desire to defend one's faith and respond to insults is certainly understandable. But let us all take a moment to put this in perspective: Who is launching the attacks?
Recently, a demeaning and degrading hate film, produced by a radical Christian in California and promoted by a fundamentalist Christian leader in Florida, resulted in radical Muslims rioting in several countries. The Christian extremists intended to outrage Muslims worldwide, and to get the Muslim extremists to respond violently. They blame each other, but they are two faces of the same coin.
We have both been in the office of Rev. Terry Jones, on different occasions, to try to dissuade him from actions that would place Americans, especially those serving in our Armed Forces, in danger. We have failed for a simple reason: He loves the attention and he believes he is fighting evil. His tiny congregation loves the idea that believers like them are the only ones true to Christ and courageous enough to defend the faith against enemies. Like other fundamentalists of any faith, he speaks with disdain when talking about other churches let alone Islam. When we visited him, instead of carrying a Bible around the office, Rev. Jones and his assistant pastor carried guns.
We do not know any respected Christian leader or denomination who would promote or even tolerate a despicable video denigrating the leader of another religion. Out of the billions of Christians on this earth, only a very few would approve of such slander. The question is, how many will speak out against it?
We both have talked to Muslims, encouraging them to peace and dialogue. Compared to the of the millions that demonstrated for more democratic reforms in the "Arab Spring" movement across the Middle East, how many have been involved in these violent reactions to the film? Only thousands, in some cases hundreds, demonstrated angrily and only a fraction of those were violent.
Everyone likes to blame the media for focusing on the loud voices of the radicals, but some of the responsibility must rest on the majority of religious leaders who are silent during these times, the ones who would speak up for peace and respect of others but they do not take the initiative. Maybe if more of us spoke up, we could drown out the radical provocations and the radical responses with voices of reason, civility and thoughtfulness.
As a Christian leader, I, Pastor Joel Hunter, rebuke the Coptic Christian who made such a disgusting video. I know many Coptic Christians in Egypt and other countries who would be sick about this kind of attack on the Prophet of Islam. I will be part of the voices that will drown out future attempts to incite the clash of religions and civilizations.
As a Muslim leader, I, Imam Muhammad Musri, strongly condemn the cowardly criminal attacks against the U.S. Consulate in Benghazi, Libya, and other U.S. Embassies around the world. My prayers and condolences go out to the families and loved ones of Ambassador Christopher Stevens and his colleagues, who were killed in these senseless criminal acts. I strongly condemn the radical mob that carried out the attacks, and I stand up with the vast majority of Muslims who are peaceful against the extremists who keep trying to hijack our faith. Islam is peace, and under no circumstances is any kind of violence ever justified in response to such provocations.
While many religious leaders find it difficult to reach out across the religious divide, we are proud to say we have been best friends for nearly 20 years. We have advocated for many issues of compassion and justice and health together. We have worked together to reduce nuclear arms, pollution, eliminate torture, minimize poverty and other important issues. How many will stand with us to speak out and outlast the voices of degradation when it comes to other religions? We are each strong advocates for our own scriptures and understandings of God, but we do not build our communities by tearing others down.
