Page 1

Interfaith and Extremism: IS, Mosul, Gaza

by Frank aufmann, !uly "#, $#1%
There are intensely anti-human, anti-God forces in current news. Human horror is
being perpetrated in the name of religion.
For this reason, this essay departs from the systematic explanation of efective
interfaith activism in this series. This is a time of emergency, and lives are at
stae.The world is failing efectively to respond to the !slamic "tate #!"$ controlling
much of %estern "yria and &orth and 'entral !ra(, and the escalation of violent
aggression arising out of Ga)a. *s villains in both spheres de+ne their aggression
and inhumane acts expressly as religious behavior, the (uestion of
interreligious relations are brought to the fore #regardless of all other legitimate
arenas of response afoot including diplomatic, military, economic and so forth$.
,n -uly ./, the 0rasmus blog of The 0conomist #on 1eligion and 2ublic 2olicy$,
carried the piece The 3atican and !slam, 4essages of light and dar, asing aloud
if dialogue between the 'atholic church and !slam really is possible, despite the
publication of a 3atican statement calling for the two faiths to wor together to
ease human sufering, especially in war )ones, from the 2onti+cal 'ouncil for
Page $
Interfaith and Extremism: IS, Mosul, Gaza
by Frank aufmann, !uly "#, $#1%
!nter-religious 5ialogue co-signed by 'ardinal -ean-6ouis Tauran. Tauran said,
7!nspired by our shared values...we are called on to wor together for 8ustice,
peace, and respect for the rights and dignity of every person.
7The article 8uxtaposes this 3atican statement with that of 2atriarch 6ouis 1aphael
! "ao who spoe with the information service *sianews.it as the last remaining
'hristians prepared to 9ee 4osul, in response to threats from the city:s new
masters. He said 7no dialogue was possible7 with these ultra-!slamist forces,
particularly as they have declared 7between us there is only the sword.7 The
essay goes on to note the signi+cance of the "ao statement because the
patriarch has a big personal stae in upholding the principle that 'hristians and
4uslims can co-exist, and he has always argued that case.
0very time the statement is made that dialogue not possible with someone who
understands their actions stem from religious convictions, it poses a deep and
fundamental challenge to all interfaith activists, all interfaith activity, and all
peace seeers. The frightening truth is that dialogue is either efective, or it is not.
!t is possible or it is not. !f there is even one form of religious belief that is
impervious and invulnerable to interfaith investment, then the entire edi+ce of
genuine peace seeing dissolves. This all the more the case when such a
statement comes from a great and important religious +gure who himself was a
champion of harmonious interfaith relations.
;ut a facile re8ection of this despairing doubt in peace eforts is not su<cient. The
doubt must be embraced as legitimate, and as a real #if haunting$ (uestion. !s
dialogue possible with religious believers or not= !s dialogue possible with
someone who understands God and faith to call for raping people in front of their
families= 'rucifying people= Forcing innocent teens and older women to
undergo genital mutilation = Genocide= !s dialogue possible with people who
believe God and the dictates of their faith re(uire the physical annihilation of a
neighboring people= 0ven if doing so might necessitate deaths of innocent
children and families supposed to be under their care= !f the answer is no, in such
cases, dialogue is not possible, then tragically the answer must extend through to
the entire vision and enterprise of peace seeing sans violence and force.
The way to insist that interfaith dialogue, and non-force, non-violence con9ict
resolution is possible, even with such demons as are in the news these days,
comes from the fact of two elements of a rare+ed and dangerous sector of radical
peace seeing. .. The little nown or little re9ected upon part of the interfaith
world called intrafaith relations, and >. * doctrine ain to the notion of ?
degrees of separation.
2rior to the wor of the 'ouncil for the %orld 1eligions in ./@A, the concept of
intrafaith was largely unnown, and surely never practiced in any systematic way
except in 'hristianity. !ntrafaith is dialogue among people of diferent sects or
Page "
Interfaith and Extremism: IS, Mosul, Gaza
by Frank aufmann, !uly "#, $#1%
denominations, but inside the same ma8or, world religion. !n 'hristianity, the
efort is nown as 'hristian 0cumenism. !t has its origins in -esus: prayer from -ohn
.BC>> - >D. ;ut other world faiths never had this ideal as overtly pursued, and
essential at the core of their spirituality. That denominations inside a given world
tradition harmoni)e is extremely important in pursuits related to religion and
peace. !t is a ey re(uisite that is sorely overlooed in this time of great fondness
for interfaith meetings. !n many ways intrafaith harmony is the far harder hori)on
of peace-maing and harmony seeing, even more than inT01faith activity.
1elated to this important world of intrafaith is the popular notion of ? degrees of
separation.
"ix degrees of separation is the theory that everyone and everything is six or
fewer steps away, by way of introduction, from any other person in the world, so
that a chain of 7a friend of a friend7 statements can be made to connect any two
people in a maximum of six steps. !t was originally set out by Frigyes Earinthy and
populari)ed by a play written by -ohn Guare.
%hen stretched to apply to the pressing and serious need for peace,
reconciliation, the end of con9ict, and the dissolution of barbarism in the name of
religion, it could be made to say, that a heinous, villainous +gure lie *bu ;ar al-
;aghdadi should be 8ust ? degrees of separation from his exact counterpart, a
person *" intensely committed to positive human welfare, e(uality, and love.
*nother way to loo at this is to tae note of the reality that each of us has
someone to 8ust to the left of us, and someone 8ust to the right of us. For example,
! have a friend who thins 8ust lie me, but every so often says something so
conservative that it maes me cringe. ! am surprised. ! do a double tae. 6iewise
! have another friend who thins 8ust lie me, 8ust to the left of me. 0very so
often shell say something ", liberal, !m dumbfounded, %H*T= *re you
serious=
To carry this notion to believers lie ;aghdadi, lots of Taliban types, and other
7religious7 perpetrators of violence and oppression, let:s set up the example that !
sell drugs to little ids in school yards. 0ven if ! were so vile a person, still ! will
have a friend 8ust to the left of me and one 8ust to the right. ,n the right, is my
more extreme friend, Hey, 8ust ill her. ;ut shes a grandma, ! shudder.
"o= %hat good is she anyway. To my left is my softer slightly less demonic
drug dealing friend. "he says with the pistol shaing in her hand, ! cant do
that, hell be maimed for life. ! say, 'mon, its only his nee for cryin
out loud. -ust shoot him. *nd so it goes, life is lie that. There is always one to
the left, and one to the right.
Page %
Interfaith and Extremism: IS, Mosul, Gaza
by Frank aufmann, !uly "#, $#1%
This corollary to the ? degrees reality, is what plays into the lives of deeply
invested peace-seeers. This is where genuine life and death devotion to the
hardest edges of peace and dialogue transpire.
!n cases of religious extremism, it almost is never the case that interfaith is an
option. These violent criminals who believe themselves to be following a religion,
almost always are too deeply entrenched in the most extreme and closed
perversions of their faith. &o 'hristian or -ew would ever have access to a so-
called 4uslim at so far reaching an extreme. The only person who could access
and modify the demonic believer would have to come from inside the same
world tradition as the extremist. !n this case #lie the !"$ the religious views
happen to be a perversion of !slam. Thus the debate, the discussion, the dialogue,
and the conversation about properly interpreting 4uslim teachings has to come
from other 4uslim believers. ,ther religions can try to engage 4r. *l ;aghdadi if
they lie, but honestly are very unliely to get much of a hearing. The fact of the
matter is that 4r. ;aghdadi believes he understands 4uslim teaching, and the
fact of the matter is that there is someone 8ust to the left of him, and someone
8ust to his right.
%hen someone tries to excuse non-action in the face of such horror by saying,
you 8ust cant tal to someone lie that, ! re8ect this. ! call the statement
false, and an excuse for inaction in the face of need. ! myself have spoen to
people lie this. To get there, one wals on a ra)ors edge at di))ying heights
along ? degrees of separation. !t is a life and death commitment. 5ialogue is
possible.