Convene

Published by The National Herald, August 15, 2005

Should the Pope Convene a Pan-Religious Conclave?

After my recent article on Islamic terrorism, I received a letter from Professor T.P. Perros which, I think, deserves the attention of our readers. "I agree with your clear and forthright assessment of the religious dimension of terrorism, and with your suggestion that part of the strategy to combat it is for the Islamic religious leaders to isolate the terrorists. They should declare in crystal-clear terms it is wrong to believe that the surest way to secure a place in paradise is by killing innocent people. It was this comment which prompted me to write to you about an idea which I believe may have merit."

In a nutshell, Professor Perros’ suggestion is, what if Pope Benedict invites the heads of all major religions to meet in an unprecedented conclave to issue a unified statement that the only path to paradise is through benevolent deeds, and that killing innocent people is condemned by all faiths.

With more than 400 young men and women having been used as suicide bombers, so far, and with many more waiting for their turn, this suggestion, however unprecedented, should not be dismissed out of hand.

But there is one drawback: From a historical standpoint, the Pope is tied to the Crusades, which occurred almost one thousand years ago. The Moslems are not blameless either. They invaded and seized the Holy Lands, sacred to all Christians (and Jews), so both sides have their fair share of blame. Both sides should therefore seek mutual forgiveness and move onto the 21st Century.

Though a pan-religious conclave would be a major political step, one which should have been taken a long time ago, even the most moderate and reasonable Moslems would tell us that the ongoing plight of the Palestinians remains a poignant grievance for all Moslems. As long as this carcinoma remains untouched, Osama bin Laden and his ilk will have no problem recruiting volunteers for their suicide squads.

This conflict must be moved to a fair settlement. It can not be swept under the rug because it is no longer a minor, private war between millions of people over a few thousand square miles of land, which has no oil, gold, diamonds or uranium. This conflict is, and has been, a major supplier of fuel for the cause of the Islamic terrorists, and in reality, it was the one cause which started it all. New sources of fuel have been added to this fire, but the Israeli-Palestinian conflict remains the most emotional problem and exerts a tremendous influence on the Moslem mindset. If these two barriers – the Crusades and the Palestinian problem – are removed, the idea of a pan-religious conclave begins to make sense.

On CNN recently, three young men, who were arrested before they had a chance to blow themselves up, spoke to a filmmaker who is working on a documentary on Islamic terrorism. What the young men said would astonish those who downplay the religious dimension. They said that they were crushed by their failure to go to paradise as martyrs. They said that, in paradise, 72 virgins were waiting for them; that in paradise, they could drink wine and live forever in bliss. They added that their parents would have been proud and happy to know that their sons were in paradise, honored as martyrs. They said this with a level of conviction which was frightening in its sincerity.

These young men, and all those who have succeeded in blowing themselves0 up – many of them left videotapes with similar messages – did not make up these beliefs. Religious zealots who invoked Allah as the source of their claims planted these ideas in their minds. Worse, no mullah, imam, or ayatollah has ever come out to debunk these promises. Why, then, should any one expect that gullible young men and women would not succumb to this ideology? It is being continuously voiced in the Mosques, but also, and worse, in mandrassas (religious schools) from Morocco to Indonesia, and more vigorously from Saudi Arabia to Pakistan, and even in Great Britain or America.

Western leaders, with President Bush at the forefront, vow to fight terrorism. But they seldom admit that the terrorists do not need to do very much in order to meet their objectives:

When we have to take our shoes off at and go through airport security; when – after the London terror attacks on July 7 – people have to be searched before they board a train; when our public buildings and monuments resemble medieval castles – only moats we have yet to dig up; when tourists – a major source of revenue for some countries – are scared away, the terrorists have won another "battle." Then, they can take their time and strike again after a few months or a year, kill a few more people, and make us tighten our so-called "security measures" even further.

Even the grandiose plan to bring democracy to the Islamic world will find a formidable barrier in the mullahs and the ayatollahs. Their religion does not accept a democratic confluence of ideas. It rejects any question or criticism of its doctrines. In the West, we have been able to live free, while allowing religion to function as a moral force, not as a master. This is not the case in the Islamic world. Islam had no Martin Luther, no Jefferson, and no Voltaire.

For this reason, Professor Perros’ suggestion is most commendable, whatever obstacles it may face. Pope Benedict has a magnificent opportunity to accomplish a historic deed which could surpass in importance even the impact of his predecessor’s role in undermining the Soviet empire.

Imagine Christian, Moslem, Jewish, Hindu, Buddhist and Shinto religious leaders all under one roof, agreeing that the only road to paradise is through a life of good deeds and never through the killing of innocent people. And then have the religious leaders of Islam openly and absolutely reject the notion of martyrdom won by killing other innocent people. At the moment, it is hard to imagine such a magnificent victory of sanity. But should it not at least be tried?

Dr. Kousoulas is Professor Emeritus of Political Science at Howard University in Washington, DC. He is the author of several books, notably "The Life and Times of Constantine the Great (1999)," and numerous scholarly articles.



Volume 7 Number 33 - Tuesday, August 16th, 2005	A Publication of the ORTHODOX CHRISTIAN LAITY