Movement 111

eviews: books
fO VJ E'V3
fundamentally flawed?
ls there a future for religious belief post 11 September 2OOI?
The agendum of lslam and the West has
litUe specifically to do with cunent relations
between lslam and Westem nations. Rather
it appears to me that this book, taking
advantage ofthe tenorism of 11 September,
seeks to argue that there is an extremely fine
line between doctrinal adherence to a
reli$on, and the violent perversion of that
reli$on that is blamed for the events such as
the destruction of the Wodd Trade Center.
I do not regard mysetf as a militant
fundamentalist. But I do hold to a particular
set of beliefs, many of which are upheld by
the institution of the Church, and I worship
Christ together with like-minded people on a
Sunday moming. Van de Weyer writes about
us, 'Since organized reli$on by its nature
tends to be bad, promoting bigotry and
contempt, it leaves people restless and
unfulfilled; and they try to assuage these
unhappy feelings through the acquisition of
goods and through expensive amusements.'
I'm not quite sure how to sensibly ref,rte this
claim, except by sayingthat in my experience
it is often those who subscribe to organised
religion who, rather than indulging in
expensive amusements, are capable of
unusual compassion in their sense for social
justice.
It is worth noting that I am not able to
locate a place where van de Weyer discusses
the role of faith. lnstead, calling the reader's
attention to the multitude of the world's
reli$ons and the vastness of the univerce, he
writes, 'So it seems inherently unlikely that
one reli$on is right, while all the others are
wrong ... Hence the doctrines of organized
Christianity and lslam have quite simply been
rendered absurd; indeed acceptance of
reli$ous dogma of any kind invotues intellectual
dishonesty.'Vfrth no fiaith, this argument
holds water. But with faith, with an
understanding (enhanced, by the way, by the
fact that I happen to be a theoretical
physicist) that the wodd is tundamentally
absurd, comprehending as C S Lewis does in
Merc Christiantty that the (hypothetical!)
corectness of one doctrine does not entirely
lslam and the West; a new political and reliSious order post September !7
Robert van de Weyer I O Books I t6.99
invalidate those doctrines claiming mutually
exclusive beliefr, and, supremely, agreeing
with Dietrich Bonhoeffer that only a suffering
God can help, I think it makes perfect sense
to adhere to the idea that Jesus is the Son of
God.
Nevertheless, van de Weyer is ceftainly
conect in asserting that many evils have
been committed in the name of religon. So
what should we do about trytng to prevent
this continuing in the f,rture? Van de Weyer
suggests the following: 'Our two greatest
spiritual challenges are to find rituals and
symbols that can uplift and transform people,
while requiring no formal belief on their part;
and to hand to popular control the places
where rituals are traditionally enacted, and
which themsefues are powerfirl and benign
symbols ... But we may tentatively suggest a
simple form that itsetf symbolizes ftee and
open reli$on: the figure O. This, of course,
stands for zero; and in ftee and open reli$on
there are no beliefs [sic].' This line of astion
is epitomised for me by the idea that synbols
can be both powerful and benign. Surely
symbols have power only if they bear some
relation to our perception of tnrth? ln which
case surely they are not benign, but rather
related to a world that experiences both
tragedy andjoy, both tenorism and compassion,
both war and peace? An enMronment of
ftee reli$on is about tolemnce of others'
beliefs rather than an intolerance of any
belief whatsoever. lbelievethatthere has not
been a more important or testing time for
inter-faith dialogue.
I have concentmted, perhaps overly so, on
the final section of lslam and the West
because the purpose of the first three
sections seems only to allow the presence of
the fourth section. ln these eadier parts of the
book, van de Weyer gives tlre reader a potted
history of relaUons between the Middle East
and the West sinc€ the year 6OO. lt's quite
entertaining, atthough I suspect that most
university readerc would appreciate rather
more documentary evidence for the history
than is presented. Unfortunately, the last 20
years are given relawely litUe attention. Van
de Weyer's argument for replacing the $obalisation
of goods and capital with the
$obalisation of people and knoWedge is
probably as progessive as his 'reli$ous
orde/, although I have to confess that I didn't
entirely undestand it.
To conclude, I think that lslam and the
West is a thought-provoking book, atthough I
would wam people to beware the title as a
description of the contents. I have no doubt
that Robert van de Weyer is a fascinating
man; it would certainly be an interesting
exercise to debate in person what we have
discussed remotelV!
4n.
RoddyVann
WanYid( Chrlsflan Focus
movementl25