Sujet: Look Who's Reforming Now
De: tothesource
Date: 05 Oct 2005 18:16:04 -0700

October 5, 2005

Dear Concerned Citizen,

Dinesh D'Souza

Faced with the specter of Islamic radicalism and the terrorism it has spawned, many in the West have come to the conclusion that Islam needs a Reformation. This notion is based on the assumption that the Muslim world was left behind by modernity. As historian Bernard Lewis notes, the great events of Western civilization—the Renaissance, the Reformation, the Enlightenment, the Scientific Revolution—went largely unnoticed in the Islamic world. Isn’t it about time, Lewis and others say, for Islam to reform itself?

The only problem with this recommendation is that Islam is in the middle of a reformation. What is the rise of Islamic fundamentalism if not proof of the Islamic Reformation of the twentieth and twenty-first centuries? The term “fundamentalism” is, of course, misleading. In Christianity it refers to those who read the Bible literally, those who believe the Bible is the inerrant word of God. By this definition every Muslim is a “fundamentalist,” because every Muslim believes that the Quran is the unadulterated word of God delivered in the Arabic language to the Prophet Muhammad.

The erroneous “fundamentalist” label frequently results in Westerners positing false divisions in the Muslim world. For instance, our pundits and commentators frequently speak of the Islamic community as divided between “fundamentalists” and “liberals,” or between “fundamentalists” and “secularists.” But this is nonsense. Liberals and secularists are rare in the Muslim world. The few that do exist are politically irrelevant.

Nor is the important distinction in Islam between the Shia and the Sunni factions. The theological differences between these groups are virtually nonexistent. Islamic radicalism and terrorism have sprung out of both major strains. The Khomeini revolution arose out of Shia Islam, and today groups like Hizbollah are predominantly Shia. The Bin Laden movement, by contrast, comes out of Sunni Islam. The Iraqi insurgents are almost entirely Sunni Muslims.

The big story in the Muslim world is that for the past several decades a religious revival has been sweeping across the 22 or so countries of Islam, affecting the lives of nearly a billion Muslims. This revival is by no means confined to the Arab world. Its impact can be seen in Turkey, in India, in Malaysia, in Indonesia, and in North Africa.

Even Muslims in Western countries have become more religious, praying more regularly, celebrating Muslim feasts, adopting Islamic dress and diet, and defining themselves in private and public as “Muslims.”

Islamic “fundamentalism,” or more accurately the Islamist political movement, is a product of this religious revival. It arose out of, and to some degree in resistance to, traditional Islam. It has been gaining traction and strength for the past few decades. And the central argument of the Islamists is strikingly similar to that of the early Protestants. The Islamists argue that Islam has over the years become diluted and corrupted. True Islam stagnates, they argue, while Muslim leaders and Muslim clergy sell their souls to maintain their position and power. The Islamist solution is to call for a return to the original, seventh-century Islam that the Prophet Muhammad established.

Why then, some Western readers might wonder, do Islamists not follow the lead of the Protestants and proclaim “the priesthood of the individual believer”? Why is “separation of church and state” such an alien concept, resisted so fiercely by the Islamist leaders?

The answer to this question is very simple: in returning to their origins, Muslims are going back to a very different starting point than Christians did.

The term “Reformation” is derived from the term “reform.” The Catholic writer G.K. Chesterton once wrote that it is impossible to discuss “reform” without reference to “form.” Christianity was formed out of a different mold than Islam. Christianity from the beginning separated the realms of church and state. This was not an American invention. Christ himself instructed his disciples to render unto Caesar and to God their separate dues. This Christian teaching was reinforced by early Christian history. The early church was persecuted and harassed by the Roman empire. A Christian who was running away from a sword-wielding Roman soldier was not likely to confuse his religious beliefs with the institutions and practices of the Roman state.

By contrast, Islam from the outset united church and state. The prophet Muhammad, during his lifetime, was both a prophet and a Caesar. He established an Islamic society in which the sharia, or holy law, governed not only religious duties but also divorce, inheritance, interest rates, and the rules of warfare. The sharia is a comprehensive Islamic law that covers constitutional, civil and commercial matters in addition to spiritual or religious ones.

Many Islamic countries have adopted Western or secular codes over the years, leaving sharia to operate only in confined domains, such as family law, or they have abolished sharia altogether, as in Turkey. Obviously Muslim immigrants in Western countries cannot live under sharia; they live under secular laws. The Islamist goal is to reverse this trend, at least within predominantly Muslim countries. Consistent with history, Islam’s return to roots does not involve the priesthood of the individual believer but involves an attempt to restore the worldwide Muslim community ruled by the ordinances of Allah.

Westerners calling for an Islamic Reformation have gotten what they wished for, even if the shape of this reformation is not at all what they expected. There is no point deploring the Islamic awakening. It’s here, and it’s not going away. I’m not even sure that it’s a bad thing. It does, however, raise an entirely new set of political challenges. The big question facing us in America is how to deal with this invigorated Islam both at home and abroad. Our domestic harmony, our homeland security, as well as the success of our Middle East policy, and of the “war against terrorism,” all depend on how well we answer that question.

Responses to Anythingbuttery:

I found the letter to your editor from Sergeant H.H.B., in response to the "Anythingbuttery" article quite interesting. It rests on the supposition that Christians are reading a Roman bible. It seems to me that the bible was written by Jews, and from a Jewish perspective, not Romans with a Pagan perspective. We don't BELIEVE anything the Romans of the time believed - we believe what those Jews converted to Christ espoused. Also, most Christians I know aren't blaming the Jewish nation for Christ's death. We understand that the sins of the world are why He had to die and be born again. The "Anythingbuttery" article should have been unifying, as most religions - even Pagan - credit a higher being or creator as the maker of the universe. Instead, the sergeant prefers to single Christians out as deniers of a Pagan past, instead of preservers of a Christian and Jewish heritage. What an odd a rticle for the sergeant to attach his rhetoric. As to the article itself, I was quite impressed with its intelligent and straight-forward logic. It was blissfully free of dogma, and relied on clear and concise facts to back up its assertions. Well done. - K. B.

Send your letter to the editor to

Your Name Your Email
Friend's Name Friend's Email
Click for a Printer Friendly Version
We live complex lives. We strive to sort out priorities that sometimes conflict or seem incompatible. A moral framework is needed to help us understand the reality around us. Our Judeo-Christian heritage provides a framework to help us comprehend the choices we make and the conflicts that arise over them. It is not only the main source of our spiritual values, but also many of the secular values we depend on.

tothesource is a forum for integrating thinking and action within a moral framework that takes into account our contemporary situation. We will report the insights of cultural experts to the specific issues we face believing these sources will embolden people to greater faith and action.
We invite you to subscribe to our free email service
that features informed opinion on current cultural issues.
  Dinesh D'Souza
Dinesh D'Souza, the Rishwain Research Scholar at the Hoover Institution at Stanford University, served as senior domestic policy analyst in the White House in 1987-1988. He is the best-selling author of Illiberal Education, The End of Racism, Ronald Reagan, The Virtue of Prosperity, and What's So Great About America. He is the designated expert on current American culture for tothesource.
tothesource, P.O. Box 1292, Thousand Oaks, CA 91358
Phone: (805) 241-3138 | Fax: (805) 241-3158 |

This email was sent to If you feel you have received this in error or you do not wish to receive future articles from us, please reply with the word REMOVE in the subject line.