Iraqis Claim Marines Are Pushing Christianity in Fallujah
by Jamal Naji and Leila Fadel for McClatchy Newspapers
FALLUJAH, Iraq - At the western entrance to the Iraqi city of Fallujah Tuesday, Muamar Anad handed his residence badge to the U.S. Marines guarding the city. They checked to be sure that he was a city resident, and when they were done, Anad said, a Marine slipped a coin out of his pocket and put it in his hand. Out of fear, he accepted it, Anad said. When he was inside the city, the college student said, he looked at one side of the coin. ‘Where will you spend eternity?’ it asked. He flipped it over, and on the other side it read, ‘For God so loved the world, that He gave His only begotten Son, that whoever believes in Him shall not perish, but have eternal life. John 3:16.’ “They are trying to convert us to Christianity,” said Anad, a Sunni Muslim like most residents of this city in Anbar province. At home, he told his story, and his relatives echoed their disapproval: They’d been given the coins, too, he said.
Fallujah, the scene of a bloody
“We say to the occupiers to stop this,” said Sheikh Mohammed Amin Abdel Hadi. “This can cause strife between the Iraqis and especially between Muslim and Christians . … Please stop these things and leave our homes because we are Muslims and we live in our homes in peace with other religions.” A spokesman said the
In interviews, residents of Fallujah repeated two words – ‘humiliation’ and ‘weakness’. “Because we are weak this is happening,” said a shop owner who gave his name as Abu Abdullah. “Passing Christianity this way is disrespectful.”
“The occupier is repeatedly trespassing on God and his religion,” said Omar Delli, 23. “Now the occupier is planting seeds of strife between the Muslims and Christians. We demand the government in Fallujah have a new demonstration to let the occupier know that these things are humiliating Islam and the Quran.” The controversy over the coins that Iraqis said some Marines are passing out comes on the heels of a tempest triggered by a
In Fallujah, Mohammed Jaber saw one of the coins and said he thought of the bullets lodged in the Quran, the torture of Iraqi men at the Abu Ghraib prison in 2004 and the rape of a 14-year-old girl and her murder and that of her family in Mahmoudiya. “Now we have this missionary way by these coins,” he said. “We feel the Muslims are weak and we hope that we will reach a point when we are strong to let them know what is wrong and what is right.”
[So….. Promoting Christianity at the point of a ‘sword’. Crusade anyone?]
8 comments:
You think handing out coins is equal to what happened during the crusades?
To what do you appeal to determine that the actions of the US soldiers (the tiny minority that have done this) is wrong?
Hi LB. Welcome back to the 'Dark Side'[laughs]
LB asked: You think handing out coins is equal to what happened during the crusades?
Nope. But it smacks of the same mentality - pushing religion at the point of a sword/gun. To say nothing of a western/christian army occupying arabic/muslim land etc..
LB asked: To what do you appeal to determine that the actions of the US soldiers (the tiny minority that have done this) is wrong?
Well, it's at the very least insensitive. It's also tantamount to cultural imperialism.
Also the western powers are supposedly in Iraq to bring democracy & stability to the country - after deposing a brutal dictator (as everyone seems to have forgotten the original reason for the invasion [WMD] and mostly ignore the real reason [oil]). I wasn't aware that part of the remit of the UN was the spread of Christianity.
It may indeed be a tiny minority that are distributing coins (or have been caught distributing coins) but someone had the idea, someone had them manufactured and someone paid for them. I'm also guessing that someone *authourised* all of the above.
I'm not surprised that the local Iraq population are afraid & annoyed by these sort of things. I certainly would be. It does nothing to win over the hearts & minds of the iraqi people and only pisses people off. It's stupid and inevitably counter-productive.
...pushing religion at the point of a sword/gun.
But that's not what's happening. The US does not have a "Christian" army. They are not in service of the Church. They are implementing purely political (and IMHO ill-conceived) objectives. What certain individuals do does not a nation's objective make.
...everyone seems to have forgotten the original reason for the invasion [WMD] and mostly ignore the real reason [oil]
I don't think too many people every really thought that Iraq was a threat WMD-wise, despite it being the official line of the White House. Remember the reports of the US government-commissioned weapons inspectors? However I think it's naive to think oil was the underlying reason. It may have been seen as a bonus to be able to develop friendly commercial ties with an oil-rich government. But by most authoritative accounts there were a variety of reasons and perhaps the most determinative were the most petty (machismo/revenge).
"I'm also guessing that someone *authourised* all of the above.
Unlikely. Yes, maybe some senior officers allowed, condoned, or even aided this little program, but the insinuation that the US government officially sanctioned it is pretty farfetched. The US government's a big ship with lots of squeaky parts.
So to answer my own question, there are two authorities to which one could appeal to determine that this behavior is wrong.
1. In the story itself it's mentioned that Rear Adm. Patrick Driscoll, said ...“Local commanders are investigating since the military prohibits proselytizing any religion, faith or practices." Beyond one officer's e-mail there is official policy of all branches of the US military prohibiting such action.
2. The Bible clearly gives the command to spread the Gospel to, and only to, the Church. The government has other important and God-ordained functions but it's mission does not include evangelization. Anti-religious types are all too familiar with the historic cases of governments overreaching their bounds. It doesn't work (and if it did it would still be wrong). Most intelligent Christians know that and they also know why. Nothing prohibits soldiers from sharing their faith as long as they do so independently of their role as representatives of the US government.
So that's why it's wrong.
Now could you make the same argument if the occupying army where from a Islamic government? Probably not. Islamic governments tend not to make any distinction between government and religion. Additionally, the Koran does not limit proselytizing to religious organizations. Everything in Islamic society is a religious organization. Nor could you find a prohibition against conversion by the sword. In fact, that's where that concept comes from.
I think the thing that is supposed to characterize Western democracies is the codified total separation of the governance of people from the mythologies by which they claim to live. It's what causes the great break from the monarchies and dictatorships which preceded this great experiment.
It's very difficult for us to get that point across to the country we have conquered and are occupying when we ourselves do not understand or honor the concept. Part of our difficulty in getting the Iraqis to have effective self-policing (as I understand it from talking with my brother the soldier who has been over there for two terms) is that the two groups cannot reconcile themselves to governing / being governed without reference to their sectarian convictions.
These soldiers' citing their religious book's guidance is precisely the problem for which they are facing IEDs and bullets daily. It's surely not the solution to the problem.
I think the thing that is supposed to characterize Western democracies is the codified total separation of the governance of people from the mythologies by which they claim to live.
Where is this "total separation" codified in the case of the USA?
What about the idea that the government should not interfere with the religious worship of it's citizens? What place does this idea have in the thought and history of Western democracies? Is this codified in any formal founding documents?
the two groups cannot reconcile themselves to governing / being governed without reference to their sectarian convictions
That problem is inherent in the Islamic religion.
These soldiers' citing their religious book's guidance is precisely the problem for which they are facing IEDs and bullets daily.
You mean American soldiers are being targeted and killed because they are (or claim to be) following Christian scripture? What's the basis for your assertion? I'd be extremely interested to read that The Gospel of Matthew is serving as the US combat field manual. If it is, then perhaps we should make atheism (or at least hard-core skepticism) a requirement of military service.
LB said: The US does not have a "Christian" army.
...and yet atheists are being hounded & bullied....
LB said: But by most authoritative accounts there were a variety of reasons and perhaps the most determinative were the most petty (machismo/revenge).
I agree that their were a variety of reasons for the stupid attack & invasion of Iraq. But I'm confident that oil was pretty high on the list.
LB said: Yes, maybe some senior officers allowed, condoned, or even aided this little program, but the insinuation that the US government officially sanctioned it is pretty farfetched.
That's not what I meant. Someone in the military - and I mean @ officer level - either turned a blind eye to the practice or actively endorsed it. Now that this practice has been discovered it should be stopped immediately & those responsible should be reprimanded.
LB said: The Bible clearly gives the command to spread the Gospel to, and only to, the Church.
Really? Then how do you explain those people who show up @ my door wanting to 'talk' about God? And what about those who go off into the world to spread His word amonst the Heathen?
LB said: Nothing prohibits soldiers from sharing their faith as long as they do so independently of their role as representatives of the US government.
Except that a soldier in uniform on active service *is* a representative of his/her government.
Oh, and just because the Bible says something is right or wrong doesn't necessarily make it so [laughs]
LB asked: What about the idea that the government should not interfere with the religious worship of it's citizens?
Personally I think that the State should have nothing at all to do with religion.
LB said: That problem is inherent in the Islamic religion.
It is easy to imagine Catholic & Protestant politicians refusing to co-operate with each other eg Northern Ireland. Same thing really.... just not as extreme.
...and yet atheists are being hounded & bullied....
I hadn't heard about this. I'm sorry. Maybe they should keep their atheism to themselves and do their atheistic stuff in the privacy of their own homes (unless the have kids) or in designated atheist sanctuaries and not push their personal beliefs in open society.
Really? Then how do you explain those people who show up @ my door...
I don't understand your question. Are they from the government? The Church has the mission to spread the gospel. (Church being properly defined as the worldwide body of believers.) The government does not.
Except that a soldier in uniform on active service *is* a representative of his/her government.
I agree. In that capacity they shouldn't act as gospel messenger.
It is easy to imagine Catholic & Protestant politicians refusing to co-operate with each other eg Northern Ireland.
It may be easy to imagine, but would not be easy support that position biblically. Not so in the Koran. There are, believe it or not, differences between religions.
LB said: I hadn't heard about this. I'm sorry.
It's been in the news a bit lately. I understand there's a court case either in progress or coming soon...
LB said: Maybe they should keep their atheism to themselves and do their atheistic stuff in the privacy of their own homes (unless the have kids) or in designated atheist sanctuaries and not push their personal beliefs in open society.
[grin] It's a bit difficult when your unit commander leads people in prayer and you don't join in - either that or be a hypocrite..
LB said: I don't understand your question.
You said earlier that: The Bible clearly gives the command to spread the Gospel to, and only to, the Church.
Erm... You may not have noticed but I'm not part of their church nor anyone else's. So why are they knocking on my door trying to sell me on the whole God thing?
LB said: The Church has the mission to spread the gospel. (Church being properly defined as the worldwide body of believers.) The government does not.
I don't believe that the government should be in the religion business. Then again I don't believe that religion should be any part of a secular state.
LB said: I agree. In that capacity they shouldn't act as gospel messenger.
Then what the soldiers were caught doing is wrong and should stop immediately.
LB said: It may be easy to imagine, but would not be easy support that position biblically. Not so in the Koran.
I have no idea - not having read either book. Their is, however, a historical precident of muslims, christians and jews living together in reasonably peaceful relations - in Moorish Spain.
LB said: There are, believe it or not, differences between religions.
Many I imagine - which is why they tend to disagree with each other on so many areas. Not to mention the disagreements *within* a particular brand of religion. How anyone rationally chooses between them is beyond me.
Post a Comment