In order to fully understand the proposed Ground Zero Mosque it
requires us to understand the meaning of understanding. There seems
to be a misunderstanding of understanding where it concerns Imam
Feisal Abdul Rauf, the Cordoba Initiative and the Park 51
project.
According to the Park 51 website:
Park51 will be a community center promoting tolerance and
understanding through three types of programs:
arts & culture, education and recreation.
The Cordoba Initiative
describes its programming in this manner:
The programs at Cordoba Initiative (CI) are designed to
cultivate multi-cultural and multi-faith
understanding across minds and borders. In the ten
years since our founding, the necessity to strengthen the bridge
between Islam and the West continues to prevail.
In a guest editorial that was published in the New
York Times on September 7, Rauf explains
the significance of the name Cordoba:
Our name, Cordoba, was inspired by the city in Spain where
Muslims, Christians and Jews co-existed in the Middle Ages during a
period of great cultural enrichment created by Muslims. Our
initiative is intended to cultivate understanding
among all religions and cultures.
During his September 13 address to the Council on Foreign
Relations, Rauf
returns to the theme of understanding:
But genuine understanding can only happen when
there is honesty, sincerity of motive, and an open heart. For when
issues are politicized or used as fodder for commentators on the
right or on the left, we just pour fuels on the flames of
misunderstanding.
Now for most Americans, understanding means mutual respect
and tolerance towards others whether as individuals or groups. But
understanding can also have another meaning. It is entirely
possible to achieve an understanding in the absence of mutual
respect and tolerance. If your child goes to school and the class
bully tells him that his lunch money is the price he must pay to
avoid being beaten up, then there is an understanding. It is
perhaps a painful understanding but it is an understanding
nonetheless. With this in mind let us examine what happened in
Cordoba, Spain more than 850 years ago.
In 1148, Cordoba was invaded and taken over by the
Almohades, a sect of Islamic fundamentalists. The Almohades gave
the Christians and Jews of Cordoba three choices.
They could convert
to Islam; they could leave Cordoba or they could be executed.
Amongst those who fled Cordoba was Moses
Maimonides, who in adulthood would become a world renowned
physician, philosopher and rabbi.
There was undeniably an understanding between the
Almohades and the Christians and Jews of Cordoba. But it was an
example of an understanding based not on mutual respect and
tolerance but rather an understanding based on conquest and
contempt of non-Muslims. Suffice it to say, when Feisal Abdul Rauf
cites twelfth century Cordoba as a model by which to “cultivate
understanding among all religions and cultures,” it neither
inspires confidence nor establishes trust. Just ask Christians in
Malaysia.
In January, Malay Muslims burned down Christian churches
after the Herald, a Catholic monthly newspaper, had the
temerity to correctly use the word “Allah” in reference to the
Christian God.
Enter Imam Feisal Abdul Rauf with editorial in hand. While
Rauf would acknowledge the use of the word Allah was correct in
both legal and theological terms he stated nonetheless that when
used by Christians, “it is socially provocative.” As Andy McCarthy
of National Review Online
put it recently, “You know what else might be ‘socially
provocative’? A giant mosque at Ground Zero.” Rauf went on to
write:
If you want to have influence with people in Malaysia, you must
find a way to convey your message without provoking this kind of
response.
If you want to reach the Malays, then use the Malay word for
God, which is Tuhan.
Rauf’s words are contemptuous of Christianity. His words can
also be described as sheer chutzpah. Yet I would also point out
that his words convey an understanding. Not only do you have a
Muslim Imam living in America telling Malaysian Christians how to
practice their religion, but he is also telling Malaysian
Christians to expect violence from Muslims if they dare to properly
observe their religion. The understanding here could not be
clearer.
When Rauf appeared on Larry King Live last week,
he told
guest host Soledad O’Brien that moving the site of the Ground Zero
Mosque would “strengthen the argument of the radicals
to recruit, their ability to recruit, and their increasing
aggression and violence against our country.” Once again, Rauf was
again conveying an understanding — either the Ground Zero Mosque
is built as planned or there will be violence against
America.
But so long as Rauf wants to spread understanding to us,
he must be prepared to understand a few things as well. Rauf must
understand that he will not make friends with Americans if he
insists that violence will be visited upon us if he does not get
his way. Rauf must understand that he cannot tell us on one hand
that “Islam categorically rejects the killing of innocent people”
and then on the other hand be unwilling to condemn Hamas for its
acts of terrorism including the
brutal murder of a pregnant Jewish woman in the West Bank last
month. Rauf
must understand that he cannot on the one hand tell us that he
loves America and then on the other hand tell us that America has
more Muslim blood on its hands than al Qaeda.
Please don’t let me be misunderstood. Imam Feisal Abdul
Rauf can build the Ground Zero Mosque. But just because you can do
something in America doesn’t mean you should. I hope he’ll
understand.
