From Atlas Shrugs
By Robert Spencer
The
highest-profile convert to Roman Catholicism in recent memory, Magdi Cristiano
Allam, has left the Catholic Church.
Allam,
who was baptized in the Vatican by Pope Benedict XVI on Easter day 2008,
explained that what “more than any other factor drove me away from the Church”
was the “legitimization of Islam as the true religion of Allah as the one true
God, Muhammad as a true prophet, the Koran as a sacred text, and of mosques as
places of worship.”
Allam
declared that contrary to all that, he was “convinced” that Islam was an “inherently
violent ideology,” and that he was “even more convinced that Europe will
eventually submit to Islam.”
Perhaps
if the Church he joined in 2008 had been more resolute in standing for the
defense of Judeo-Christian values and civilization, he would not have such a
dark vision of the future. But there’s the rub: the determination to seek
accommodation with Islam at all costs, even as Muslims persecute Christians
with increasing ferocity all over the globe, is near-universal in the Catholic
Church.
Everywhere
Catholic prelates, even at the highest levels, pursue a “dialogue” with Muslim
leaders, whose responses to that dialogue always solely involve not genuine
discussion of matters of concern, but thinly veiled criticism of Christianity
and calls to accept Islam. Those prelates are almost universally punctilious
about avoiding ever saying anything remotely critical or challenging to their
aggressive, expansionist partner in this “dialogue,” although that partner is
convinced of his own superiority and of the inevitability of the removal of all
obstacles to his will.
And
as if to illustrate the reasonableness of Allam’s frustration, Matthew Schmitz
of First
Things, one of the leading Catholic publications in the United States, took
the opportunity of his apostasy not to engage in any introspection about the
Church’s resolutely irenic clinging to the 1960s-era model of “dialogue” even
as it is confronted around the world with an increasingly violent and
supremacist Islam, but to excoriate Allam, a former Muslim, for his
misunderstanding of Islam: “In retrospect, Allam’s disappointment seems
inevitable. If we mistake Islam for a mere ideology of violence, we risk
mistaking Christianity as merely an ideology that allows us to oppose that
violence. Yet Christ did not come to this earth or found his church to oppose
Islam but to propose the gospel. Not to eclipse the moon, but to reveal the
Son.”
Magdi
Allam knows far better than Matthew Schmitz, who has previously written an
apologia for Islamic law, glossing over its elements that mandate the
subjugation of women, the oppression of non-Muslims, and its denial of the
freedom of speech and the freedom of conscience, that Islam is not “a mere
ideology of violence.” But whatever else it is, it is also clearly exactly
that: an ideology of violence (cf. Qur’an 2:190-193; 4:89; 8:39; 8:60; 9:5;
9:29; 47:4, etc.). Schmitz thinks that Allam’s recognition of that fact, and
frustration with the Catholic Church’s general failure to grasp its
implications, disqualifies him as an analyst of the Islamic jihad threat: “Benedict’s
pontificate has come to an end; in time Islam will, too. Neither event should
affect whether or not one affirms Christian truth or chooses to be in communion
with the bishop of Rome. That Allam so grievously fails to understand this
aspect of Christian truth ought to warn us against the judgment of Islam he
shares with many other anti-Islam advocates.”
I
don’t know Magdi Allam personally and don’t know anything beyond his published
statements about why he has left the Catholic Church. I am not going to leave
the Catholic Church over its failure to defend those powerless Christians who
are facing ever more violent persecution from Muslims worldwide, as I am aware
that the Church is made up entirely of imperfect, sinful people. I also know,
with all due respect to those to whom respect is due, that the charism of
infallibility is nowhere taught as inhering in bishops’ or even popes’
prudential judgments about how to deal with the threat of jihad and Islamic
supremacism.
I
share Magdi Allam’s frustration over that failure of the Church to address that
persecution in any meaningful way. I share his outrage over statements like
that of Bishop Robert McManus of Worcester, Massachusetts, who barred me from
speaking at a Catholic conference over concerns that “Mr. Spencer’s talk about
extreme, militant Islamists and the atrocities that they have perpetrated
globally might undercut the positive achievements that we Catholics have
attained in our inter-religious dialogue with devout Muslims.” Why would a talk
about “extreme, militant Islamists and the atrocities that they have
perpetrated globally” undercut dialogue with Muslims who profess to reject
those atrocities and the interpretation of Islam that underlies and justifies
them? If they reject the jihadists’ understanding of Islam, why wouldn’t they
welcome and applaud an honest discussion of that understanding of Islam, which
presumably they oppose as much as I do?
And
that is the problem with all this spurious “dialogue.” Muslim Brotherhood
theorist Sayyid Qutb explained: “The chasm between Islam and Jahiliyyah [the
society of unbelievers] is great, and a bridge is not to be built across it so
that the people on the two sides may mix with each other, but only so that the
people of Jahiliyyah may come over to Islam.” That’s what “interfaith dialogue”
is for Islamic supremacists: a vehicle for proselytizing.
Magdi
Allam is right, and righteous, to be appalled at Catholic leaders’ failure to
understand that, and – despite all their rhetoric about identifying with the
downtrodden -- to “speak truth to power” and “give voice to the voiceless” in any
sense beyond rhetoric. I am sorry that he has left the Church, and hope that the
bland complacency and excusing of Islam-inspired atrocities of Catholics like
Matthew Schmitz will soon give way to a recognition that what Magdi Allam sees
so clearly is indeed a real and immense threat, and that his prophetic voice
must be heeded, before all is lost – which could be quite a bit sooner than
anyone thinks.
Robert Spencer is the director of Jihad Watch and author of the
New York Times bestsellers The
Politically Incorrect Guide to Islam (and the Crusades) and The
Truth About Muhammad. His latest book, Not Peace But A Sword:
The Great Chasm Between Christianity and Islam, is now available.
No comments:
Post a Comment