From the Barnabas Fund via ReligionJournal, with thanks to EPG and RB:
Some 3,000 Christians in the UK are in danger because they have chosen to convert from Islam. Some are being actively harassed and persecuted, but many church leaders seem more interested in defending their attackers than in standing up for the rights of the converts.Nissar Hussain, a Christian from Bradford, has suffered three years of harassment, amounting effectively to persecution, from the local Muslims in his neighbourhood. His car has been torched and rammed, bricks have been thrown through his window on many occasions, there have been threats to burn his house down, and other threats. Mr Hussain and his wife were originally Muslims, and this is the reason for the treatment they are getting.
Though this may seem shocking, it should not be a surprise. From its inception, Islam has rigorously sought to prevent its adherents from choosing any other faith. Such apostates are regarded as traitors and - according to shari'a (Islamic law) - should be executed....
These converts face not only the possibility of hostility and aggression from individuals within the Muslim community in Britain, but also some are asylum-seekers who have fled much graver dangers in their countries of origin. If such individuals are refused asylum and sent home, they could face imprisonment, torture or death.
A number of senior British Muslims have recently acknowledged the injustice of the Islamic apostasy law and the serious breach of human rights and religious liberty which it entails, both in theory and in practice in the modern world.
Christian Leaders Must Speak Out
It is essential that Christian leaders in the UK should affirm the rights of those who have converted to Christianity from Islam. Sadly such converts can often be marginalized by those to whom they turn for help. Having been rejected by their own community, they find that the Christian community fails to take their situation seriously. Three years ago, when Mr Hussain was first attacked, most church leaders who heard of his situation did nothing. As further attacks occurred, they still seemed barely interested. Now that the plight of the Hussain family has hit the national press, church leaders seem to be chiefly concerned to absolve from blame the perpetrators of these crimes. Even some in Bradford itself have sought to deny the link with Islam and have attributed this sustained and vicious campaign to the pranks of youngsters.
For Christian leadership to downplay the sufferings of converts is a betrayal of those who have risked everything for Christ. But if British Christian leaders were to stand up for converts, it could even bring about change within Islam itself.
Perhaps. But I won't be holding my breath.
In Flannery O'Connor's "Wise Blood" Hazel Motes preaches for his own church,the "Church of Jesus Christ without Jesus." How many Anglican clergymen in England today no longer believe in Christianity, and have instead adopted, first a kind of general third-worldism that has metamorphosed into something else and caused them, in so many cases, to become Defenders of the Faith, that Faith being not
Christianity, in which they no longer believe (but the clerical collar provides a living, and what could they do instead?), but rather -- Islam.
One looks forward to a revival of Angliganism with people such as Patrick Sookhdeo (a Christian originally from Pakistan), and not from the likes of the sinister Rev. Stephen Sizer of Virginia Water, the man whose main purpose in life seems to be severing the connection between Old and New Testament (the heresy of Marcionism) all for the greater good of bashing Zionists and promoting the Muslim agenda.
And if the Rev. Stephen Sizer has his way, and Israel disappears, just how easy will it be for his flock to visit the Holy Land? But he's not thinking about that.
Hugh,
I believe you are referring to Haze Motes' "the church of truth without Jesus Christ Crucified," which he also referred to as the "Church Without Christ." It was Onnie Jay Holy, the poseur who tried to steal Haze's thunder (and nascent flock), who established "the Holy Church of Christ Without Christ."
The most memorable exchange came between Haze and the lady from whom he rented a room:
He said he was a preacher.
"What church?"
He said the Church Without Christ.
"Protestant?" she asked suspiciously, "or something foreign?"
He said no mam, it was Protestant.
Finally, why is "Wise Blood" not available on home DVD? Millions are clamoring.
Yrs
Robert
Thank you, Hugh and Robert, for your exchange on Flannery O'Connor. I wonder what she would say about the state of Christianity today and the dark shadows of Islam? It is outrageous that converts from Islam cannot count on church leaders to support them and protect them in their new and freely chosen faith. Islam remains a religion without exit visas. What is so hard to understand about that fact, especially by the clergy? Although most were brainwashed in theological schools with politically correct doctrines, it seems that human experiences after seminary would open some eyes and minds to the truth of Islam.
Absolute bastards. Just as christian leaders didn't stand up for the Jews during Nazi Germany, they won't stand up for apostates from Islam either.
And then when all this is over, they will then say, please forgive us. Never, arseholes.
I guess those British Christian leaders are too busy writing fatwas against Israel. Maybe afterward....
Forgive me...the sound you hear is a gnashing of teeth and a scream of frustration.....
Poem by German priest Martin Niemöller (written in 1946)
First they came for the communists, and I did not speak out - because I was not a communist;
Then they came for the socialists, and I did not speak out - because I was not a socialist;
Then they came for the trade unionists, and I did not speak out - because I was not a trade unionist;
Then they came for the Jews, and I did not speak out - because I was not a Jew;
Then they came for me - and there was no one left to speak out for me.
As my girl says --being a christian herself--there are christians and then there are those who just wear the name. Those priests are about as christian as hitler was.
I first discovered the work of Patrick and Mrs Sookhdeo from a flyer at my own Parish church. I saw a young man reading the March prayer sheet, with thoughtful interest on the train only this morning. This case was not featured this month (although the Armonious family were, proof if any were needed that a religious motive was a reasonable avenue to follow)although I think it was in February or January.
hugh
Dr Patrick Sookhdeo is not
pakistani,but writes some good articles
Television Creates Terrorists
Dr Patrick Sookhdeo
Spectator
Potential suicide bombers among British Muslims are getting most of their news from Asian satellite TV.
The West is in danger of losing a crucial propaganda war.
Driving through the streets of Baghdad last week, I was struck by the number of satellite dishes for sale everywhere. After years in which the appliances were banned by Saddam, freedom is sprouting all over the skyline. There is still an almost total absence of local media, so that Iraqis know nothing of what is going on in their own country except by rumour. But those who can afford a dish are eagerly beginning to learn about the world. They can get the BBC, CNN and even the Fox Channel; though these are not, alas, the only ones they are watching. Unless we are careful, we are about to lose a crucial propaganda war.
I myself flicked through the channels on the rather antiquated television set in my room at the Baghdad Sheraton and found broadcasts from Abu Dhabi and from Iran. I watched footage of ayatollahs in southern Iraq and images of the Palestinians suffering at the hands of the Israelis. I sat there captivated by the repeated, stylised pictures: a boy throwing stones at an Israeli tank; the Israelis moving in and shooting; the bulldozing of Palestinian homes. Then there was the Arabic-language news from the Qatar-based Al-Jazeera and from its new Dubai-based rival, Al-Arabiya. If Hezbollah’s channel is not yet bringing Iraqis its regular shots of black-clad marching soldiers of Allah, it cannot be long.
What we too often fail to grasp is that these and similar channels are also on offer in the UK, and are widely watched. Whatever we may think of the merits of Western television, we must accept that, in many Muslim minds, it is tainted, in Britain as much as in Iraq. They may see the odd black or Asian newscaster; but every time an expert opinion is canvassed, the face of that expert is white. Like it or not, there is a prejudice that our channels are just propaganda for whites, or even under Zionist control. I speak as an Asian, the son of Muslim parents from India and Pakistan. I may be an Anglican priest, but a large proportion of my immediate family support bin Laden, and I hope I speak with some authority.
We cannot shirk the influence of television in trying to answer the question that arose recently: how two decent, middle-class young men of the Muslim faith, regarded as moderates by those who knew them, could leave the shores of Britain, travel to Israel with the intention of becoming martyrs, and in the process kill and injure many people whom they had never met and who had done them no wrong.
To most non-Muslim Britons it seems incomprehensible as well as abhorrent. For mainstream Muslim spokesmen, it is a denial of authentic Islam, which they claim condemns violence and the taking of innocent life. For Muslim radicals, however, there is clear justification in that Jews are held to be enemies of Islam. For the Muslim majority in Britain, who knows?
No one knows either how many other potential suicide bombers there are among the British Muslim community. Tens? Hundreds? Thousands? It is certain, however, that whatever motivated Asif Mohammed Hanif and Omar Khan Sharif, they are not the only Muslims in Britain to feel that way.
Suicide bombers act in concert with others who share their values and ideologies, shaping and reinforcing each other’s attitudes. Passions are aroused, anger fuelled, and energies directed towards a given end. For this to happen an enemy must be created — a target for the hatred — who will later be crushed and destroyed.
For Hanif and Sharif, the cause was Palestine and the enemy was ‘the Jew’. Although these two appear to have been radicalised and groomed for martyrdom while visiting Damascus, the seeds of hatred could have been sown at home in Britain. Suleiman Chachia, chairman of the trustees of the mosque in Hounslow which was attended by Hanif, has pinpointed the role of television news in stirring up Muslim passions, even to the point of creating suicide bombers. ‘[Muslim] people are very much concerned about Palestine. We see the killings on television, and to us a Palestinian death and an Israeli death is the same. But why are the United Nations resolutions not applied to Israel? This is a burning issue that has to be settled. Otherwise there will be other young men like this. What I know about Asif Hanif is that his nature was not aggressive.’
In thousands of Asian British homes the choice of viewing is normally determined by the older generation, who in Asian culture make all decisions of any consequence in the home. These older family members, usually first- or second-generation immigrants, feel strong ties to their homeland. Their identity and their empathies lie there, not in Britain. They may find the English language difficult — some older women speak very little English despite having lived here for decades. Naturally they prefer to watch Pakistani and other Asian channels. Though the younger generation may like to watch British television when they are allowed to, most of what they hear and see in the home — even if unwillingly — emanates from Asia. It is these programmes which are discussed at meal times, or with friends, and thus attitudes are formed.
The national television station of Pakistan plays an important role in creating opinion among Asian Muslims in Britain. Launched in 1964 with the motive of enabling the government to communicate with the largely illiterate masses, it is still very much controlled by the Pakistani government. News and other programmes from Pakistan television are broadcast on the satellite channels Prime TV and ARY, which are watched by many British Asians. This programming deliberately creates and nurtures an image of ‘the enemy’, which is communicated to viewers every day, as described by I.A. Rehman, director of the Pakistan Human Rights Commission, in his 2001 paper ‘Enemy Images on Pakistan Television’.
The principal enemy, as presented by Pakistan television, is India, with virtually every news bulletin focusing on the Kashmir issue. The enemy image is communicated by means of crude stereotypes that are almost caricatures — the cowardly, devious Indians versus the courageous, upright Pakistanis. The secondary enemy are the colonial masters who ruled south Asia for two humiliating centuries, i.e. Britain. The same message is conveyed in films. These creations are not just singing, dancing and romance; many also contain much violence and often an anti-colonial, anti-British stance.
These issues are expanded by Pakistan television to embrace the whole Muslim cause. Britain is depicted as the enemy that extinguished the Muslim Mogul empire whose successor is considered to be Pakistan. Historical features examine the collapse of the Mogul empire, the attempted defence of the Turkish caliphate, the Pakistan movement, the origins of the Kashmir issue, etc. Even the Crusades and the expulsion of the Muslims from Spain in the 15th century are included in the general theme of the Christians versus the Muslim community worldwide.
This has further developed into what is now seen as a war against Islam and the development of an Islamic identity and consciousness. The enemy is portrayed in many different contemporary forms. In the Palestinian context, tyrannous enemy Jews are depicted oppressing Muslim brothers and sisters. In the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq and the war on terrorism, the enemy has become the USA, Britain and the West in general. In every war of secession where Muslims seek independence, in any area where Muslims are seen to suffer, in any place where Muslims are said to be oppressed, a new enemy image can be discovered.
There is little or no attempt to analyse causes or to be guided by reason rather than by emotion. The enemy has no personality or identity, but is completely dehumanised so as to be crushed like an ant under foot without compunction.
During the Iraq war, Al-Jazeera used the same method. Coalition troops were portrayed as inhuman enemy invaders, the camera lingering with apparent delight on coalition dead and gloating over prisoners of war. Long, drawn-out shots of wounded Iraqi children underlined the message that ‘the enemy has done this’ and is to be treated mercilessly in return.
One of the features of Islamic television is the video of the suicide bomber’s last prayers. Like the Western wedding video, this has some formulaic elements: the bomber will be seen at prayer; he will be dressed in white; there will be a message for his family; and then, once he has done his work, there will be the shots of brutal Israeli reprisals. Never do such channels call him and his kind suicide bombers; they are shahid, or martyrs. Nor is there any condemnation offered in the commentary.
It is but a small step from this kind of material to the training of terrorists and suicide bombers, a large part of which is concerned with increasing their hatred and rage towards the enemy. Al-Qa’eda training videos portray the injuries and sufferings of Muslims, especially children. Suicide bombers are never sent to reconnoitre their targets, for fear that they would be touched by compassion for those they are to kill.
While south Asians comprise the largest grouping within the British Muslim community, there is plenty of television for other Muslims also. Arabs can choose between news channels with varying stances. Al-Jazeera goes for comment and controversy, while Al-Arabiya aims to present the news straight and factually. So-called ‘music videos’ are often screened, glamorising the Palestinian conflict with slo-mo footage, or a montage of images shown to stirring music. Hezbollah’s programmes are similar, cleverly reinforcing in the viewer’s mind and heart the message of Palestinian suffering which must be avenged.
For Iranians in Britain, there is the Islamic Republic of Iran Broadcasting (Irib); most of its programmes are in Farsi but there is also one in Arabic, thus increasing its potential audience many-fold (to include for example the Shias of southern Iraq). The international version of Irib is slightly different from what is broadcast within Iran itself. Much of Irib’s airtime is devoted to Islamic teaching, upholding Islamic values and showing the corruption and immorality of the infidel West. Without actually urging Iranians to take up arms, the channel leaves no doubt as to who the villains are. Sermons at Friday noon prayers can be somewhat more explicit with, say, senior Islamic clerics exhorting Iranians to do what the Palestinians have done. An Iranian businessman in the UK told me that young Iranians in the West are fairly immune to this kind of propaganda as they basically prefer the freedoms of the West to the restrictions of the Islamic Republic of Iran. But what of the next generation, those who will have grown up here without even knowing life in Iran? They are likely to be seeking to return to their roots, based on their historical and religious identity. Will television teach them to despise the West and seek a solution in Islam?
Today’s emphasis on multiculturalism, which regards all histories, cultures and religions as equal within the British context, poses an increasingly serious problem. Modern multiculturalism defines ethnic identity very much in terms of its history and religion. Thus it encourages the rediscovery of historical background, culture and religion. The attitudes of Muslim young people born and bred in Britain are being shaped by influences from outside which affect their identity and their ultimate loyalties. Television is increasingly being used to reinforce this and to sell a message of repression and liberation. If they are taught to consider the land in which they live as the enemy, what future do we have?
Those who exploit the effect of the visual image on susceptible young people are well aware of how powerful it is, in that ‘seeing is believing’. While we may have laws governing what is shown on terrestrial television, there is no way to limit what is beamed in from elsewhere. Even here in leafy Wiltshire I could view all these programmes if I chose to subscribe. Prime TV costs only £10 a month. Free and unrestricted airwaves can communicate not only pornography and hedonistic materialism, but also religious radicalism. Ultimately the control will lie with those who hold the television remote-control in their hand — usually the older family members. How far will the average Muslim grandparent now take responsibility for that control?
If there is one step we should take urgently, it is to set up a Muslim station to broadcast sense and moderation to Iraq. One day, with any luck, that station will also be picked up in Britain.
Dr Patrick Sookhdeo is director of the Institute for the Study of Islam and Christianity.
We don't need "Christian church leaders" to stand up and help these people. We just need to reach down into our pockets and donate a few pence to Barnabus Fund, the Iranian Churches, or other Christian groups that support Christians of Muslim background.
The hell with the PeeCee church hierarchy!
Churches burned and priests assaulted in Bradford. Congregations stormed and attacked in Stockport, Synagogues and Jews attacked in London, Islamic only villages planned in the West Midlands. How much can we tolerate?
When the string snaps it will not just be the British who suffer but the innocent minorities. We can stop this, we should stop it because it is not just ex Muslims who are under attack but everyone.
http://s9.invisionfree.com/UBA_Forum/index.php
The United British Alliance. Once nation, many races. Please join and help us challenge the Jihadists face to face.
Advice for British friends riled about attacks on ex-Muslim Christians: mention incidents and write angry letters to your media asking why such things are not reported. Engough such respectful "harassment" of the complicit media might result in changes. Write to your MP's as well, telling them you're not so interested in new hate speech laws as enforcing the good, old-fashioned English Common Law provisions against assault, battery, muder, trespass, property damage, tort, and the rest.
As for the CofE, I have a sneaky suspicion that the bulk of British Muslims who are moving to Christianity are doing so by way of smaller, less "respectable" newer denominations; and if the C of E is their welcome mat, then it is probably in unfashionable parishes and dioceses that tend to be more evangelical or traditionalist.
OK Buddha, we'll just get the Muslims and leave everybody else in peace.
.........
My my, what have we here: a bunch of Americans going nuts about a bit of vandalism in Yorkshire whilst their troops are fighting to install an Islamist government in Iraq. What a strange world we live in.