Reverend Jacques Hamel, killed by the assailants

Every death is a tragedy, and death is made worse if it occurred by unjust human hands. The greatest such tragedies in the world are occurring in Syria right now, where hundreds of thousands of Syrians have been killed and those that survive are caught between a mass-murdering Syrian army aided by foreign powers, a ‘collateral damage’ causing aerial bombardment campaign by Western forces, and a murderous terror group ruled by former-Saddam officers and Iraqi Baathists.

However, these tragedies notwithstanding, the Quran teaches us that to kill the life of one innocent person, is the same as if all humanity were killed. While I am not able to daily mark and protest against the unjust killing of every person in the world, my past experience with Christians, churches and their ceremonies, means that this horrific killing is especially felt by myself, and I’d like to use this opportunity to impart a small lesson.

While we should deplore the loss of civilian life killed in the recent attacks in Nice and Manbij, we should also remark that the attack on the Church is simply disgusting. Whether it turns out that it was done by an Atheist who hated religion, or a so-called ‘Muslim’, there is simply no possible justification to target an innocent priest in his own church, peacefully administering to his own services.

As Muslims, we are proud of our history under Islamic rule protecting and respecting Christians and the oldest Churches on earth, from intolerance and destruction (usually at the hands of other Christian sects in medieval times).

Furthermore, the Catholic church, of which this priest is part of, has common purpose with Muslims in resisting the tide of Secularism (and Liberalism). In this day and age, Muslims and Christians hold common purpose and do acts of good, and fight against global injustice. There is even ahadith (traditions of the Prophet), where Muslims and Christians will join forces to fight the Dajjal [1].

Currently, at the time of writing, there is no reports as to the motives of the attackers, or whether or not they are Muslim. However, if the attackers are identified as having ‘Muslim’ backgrounds, Muslims should see no need to explain the obvious, namely that Islam is against such killing. A comment we should all make – right now- it that the killing is disgusting and horrific to Muslims.

Similarly, if ISIS or an ISIS inspired loner (usually irreligious with mental problems) is behind the Church attack, there is no need to apologetically mention the Muslim community or Islam. Mentioning the Muslim community or Islam unintentionally incriminates it and all of us in the minds of the one being ‘apologised to’. A Catholic Mexican doesn’t apologise for the actions of a drug cartel or mafia, despite its gang members being Catholic (and possibly devout by Western standards). But if after every shooting, killing or beheading by mafia gangsters, Mexicans came out and said ‘we Catholics condemn this, and like to remind people that Catholicism condemns this’ – people listening to this again and again will still psychologically connect the two. And before any remarks ‘but gangsters don’t say they’re doing this in the name of their religion’ – please research ‘narco saints’ [2]. Gangsters have special patron saints, which are corruptions of Catholic doctrine, they use to justify their activities – which is exactly what the Iraqi Baathists of ISIS do.

It should go without saying that the Muslim community condemns such a crime, because the crime is heinous in the eyes of Islam. What should also be remembered, is that it wasn’t initiated by, or endorsed by the Muslim community.

If ISIS can kill Sunni Islamic scholars, Islamic political activists, Islamic anti-Assad rebels and Sunni civilians, then there is no need to explain why they would kill anyone else. Why should Muslims apologise for the actions of a group that would kill them too?

We might as well apologise to Atheists for the actions of the Spanish Inquisition because they claim they did it for Theism (despite the fact that they sought out and killed Muslims).

People should also refrain from calling ISIS the ‘Khawarij’. Anyone who has studied the historical Khawarij knows that that is giving ISIS far too much credit than they deserve (which is nothing). It would be like comparing Mexican drug cartel wars against the mexican government, to the crusades! Both involve Catholics, but that’s where the analogy ends. The Khawarij of history only attacked Muslims and didn’t attack non-Muslims. The Prophet Muhammed (saaw) prophesied that this would be one of their signatures. The Khawarij were schismatics who fought against the Islamic Caliphate and some Khawarij even believed Muslims didn’t need a Caliph. ISIS’s leaders are just former Saddam officers and secular Iraqi Baathists, who cynically use Islamic labelling (like Saddam did) to attract the vulnerable, the weak-willed and the social misfit to their self-interested cause to regain power.

So let us condemn forcefully the brutal killings of our Christian cousins, but don’t make the mistake of bringing Islam into this, or letting anyone else do so, whether they’re news reporters, politicians or the sick criminals themselves.

[1] Yes, I do know that a squabble is prophesied to happen after the Dajjal is defeated by the two allied armies, but that has got nothing to do with civilians.

[2] http://www.houstonpress.com/news/santa-muerte-know-your-narco-saints-6595551

Categories: NEWS COMMENTARY, Uncategorized, WRITINGS