This week the Anglican Communion called on the Episcopal Church (the American wing of Anglicanism) to stop concecrating same-sex unions and to cease consecrating gay bishops. The Anglican Communion has given the Episcopal Church the deadline of September 30th 2007 to agree. What is not entirely clear is what the consequences are if the Episcopal leadership does not comply. It would seem that the Anglicans could completely sever ties with the Episcopalians which would lead to court battles over property and finances.
It is truly a sad time for Episcopalians. This is a church that has been at the forefront of social issues for decades. It is a church that has been an tireless advocate for civil rights. It is dedicated to eradicating poverty and supports living wages for all. It is one of the first churches to ordain women and in 2006 elected Katharine Jefferts Schori the first Presiding Bishop of the church.
That the Episcopal Church has such a history of progressive policies makes this divide such a shame. Some U.S. parishes have broken away and are under leadership of other Anglican Churches and I fear there is more of that to come. If the consequences of the Episcopal Church continuing to bless same sex unions and continuing to be a supporter of gay rights is the disassociation with the larger Anglican Communion then, as sad as that would be, it is worth it. The Episcopal Church needs to continue to be a beacon of progressiveness for people of faith. There is so much talk of the religious right that one might think that to be religious you must be socially conservative. The Episcopal Church must show the world that one can be progressive and a person of faith at the same time. Even if there is a high price to pay.
One of the easiest and most common criticisms of Islam has to do with the issue of multiple wives. Critics see the issue as one example of the inferiority of women in Islam. It brings to mind images of harems and women being used only for sex and procreation. This is, of course, an image that exists primarily in the minds of monogamous men. The issue here is really one of context. When examining any religious text, it is important, even necessary, to look at the context in which that text was written.
Sura 4:3 states And if you be fearful that you will not be able to do justice to the orphans, you may marry two or three or four women whom you choose. But if you fear that you might not be able to do justice to them, then marry only one wife, or marry those who have fallen in your possession.
This seems to state that men can marry up to four wives as long as they treat each wife in a just manner. But what about context? In pre-Islamic Arabia (prior to the 7th century) men could marry as many women as they liked. There were no rules with respect to the treatment of one’s wife, and women had no right to divorce, however men could divorce at their pleasure. When Muhammad received this particular revelation it was very forward thinking. It limits the number of wives a man can have, and stipulates they must be treated equally. From our 21st century, western perspective we might see the idea of four wives as degrading the role of women, but from a 7th century Arabian perspective this was quite a progressive act. Later suras give women the right to divorce, own property etc. I’ll discuss those in later posts.
The above sura also mentions orphans. Why? Seventh century Arabia was a pretty violent place. Banditry was commonplace and there were battles between Muslims and non-Muslims (there were political and economic reasons for these conflicts that I will discuss in the future). The point is that the men who died in battle often left behind widows and children with no means of support. It was common and even expected that the survivors would take responsibility for the families of their fallen comrades. This means marry their wives and daughters. Many of Muhammad’s wives were the widows of those slain in battle.
One last thing. Sura 4:129 states You are never able to be fair and just as between women, even if it is your ardent desire. Sura 4:3 states that one can have mulitple wives only if they are treated equally, and sura 4:129 states that no one can treat women equally. Many Islamic scholars interpret this as an argument for monogamy. This is a verse often left out when people criticize Islam. Religious texts are often written to deal with an issue that is occurring in the present. Sura 4:3 was was intended to deal with the issue of widows and orphans as well as improve the status of women in Arabia. Sura 4:129 further improves the status of women and implies that monogamy is the preferred marriage arrangement.