The conflict surrounding the Orthodox church in Ukraine has moved irrevocably beyond the purely intra-ecclesiastical agenda. Experts, political scientists, and journalists have plunged headlong into the subtleties of canon law, the history of intra-Orthodox relations and discussions of the psychological profiles of the church hierarchs. As a rule, they consider the situation in a rather limited political context, assessing its consequences either for Russia–Ukraine relations or for Russia’s relations with the West.
At the same time, the problem of autocephaly of the Ukrainian Orthodox Church is far broader than the question of the future of Orthodoxy in a particular country or its relations with its neighbours. It would seem that a more extensive analysis of the current processes is possible using the approaches employed in the modern theory of international relations, which acknowledges the existence in global politics of denominational actors with their own objectives and principles . Such a post-secular take will make it possible to delineate the interests of secular and religious actors and assess the balance of power on the political and religious map of the world (that overlap, but rarely coincide).
Orthodox Centres of Power in Global Politics
In recent history, the Roman Catholic Church has long been the only significant religious actor of in the international arena. Historically, the Holy See was sufficiently independent of secular authorities, and had the structure and resources that allowed it to harbour global ambitions. In the 20th century, the Lateran Accords made it possible for the Roman Catholic Church to retain its secular extra-territorial authority. In terms of “religious economy,” the Roman Catholic Church, as the world’s largest denomination, was bound to perceive itself on a global scale, which it does, seeing all countries and continents as its “religious market.” Other religious movements lacked either the requisite strength of numbers or a requisite structure acting on behalf of its followers, or were subordinated to secular authorities, which made it impossible for them to entertain similar ambitions. This applies to autocephalous Orthodox Churches that either viewed themselves as regional actors or simply struggled for survival.
The first window of opportunity for the emergence of independent Orthodox centres of power appeared with the fall of the Russian and Ottoman Empires, the two states in which virtually all the world’s Orthodox population was concentrated. The Patriarchate of Constantinople immediately seized the opportunity afforded by the weakening of control over the religious sphere and attempted to use its status as the “first among equals” to take the leading positions in the family of Orthodox Churches. In 1922, Patriarch Meletius II of Alexandria declared Phanar’s right to govern the parishes of the so-called diaspora (that is, the parishes outside the territories of local Churches), and in 1923, he attempted to hold and chair a “Pan-Orthodox Congress.” Moreover, same year, taking advantage of the difficult situation of the Russian Orthodox Church (ROC), Meletius II hastened to spread his influence on its territory as well. He took the Orthodox population of Estonia and Finland under the governance of the Patriarchate of Constantinople and also interfered in the affairs of the Church in Poland. The ROC’s independence at the time was so fleeting that the growing demands of the Phanariotes encountered virtually no resistance.
As the USSR grew stronger and the Soviet Empire emerged, the opportunities of independent Orthodoxy were shrinking and finally collapsed when the world split into two global ideological camps. Orthodoxy found itself in the part which did not presuppose any independent ecclesiastical institutions. It should be noted that the provisional “restitution” of the ROC’s canonical territories which took place as the USSR moved West, was the result of the secular authorities, not the ecclesiastical authorities, realizing their interests.
The situation changed radically with the collapse of the USSR. About 185 million Orthodox Christians, over 90 per cent of their total number, lived in the countries of the former socialist bloc (primarily Russia, Ukraine, Romania, Serbia, Bulgaria, Belarus, Georgia, Moldova and Kazakhstan). For the first time in modern history, large Orthodox communities that emerged on the ruins of the Soviet Empire had their own ecclesiastic bodies independent of the secular authorities. The actual, rather than the nominal separation of church and state (which in the post-Soviet and post-Imperial reality mostly meant that the state would not interfere in the affairs of the Church) allowed the ecclesiastical hierarchy to reconsider the significance and purposes of the institutions they headed. As soon as they became accustomed to the new situation of religious freedom, as soon as this part of the “market” that previously had been excluded from the global religious economy was opened, the struggle to define roles, boundaries and common goals intensified within Orthodoxy.
The process of shaping a new system of international ecclesiastical relations was launched in the Orthodox world. The word “new” here essentially means “first.” The Orthodoxy did not have its “Westphal” capable of serving as the starting point for defining common canonical rules and stable canonical boundaries. Unlike the Roman Catholic Church, where intra-ecclesiastical relations are regulated by a codified and regularly updated canonical law system enhanced by the efficiency of its hierarchical organization, Orthodox Churches do not have a uniform canonical law for intra-Orthodox relations. The most recent Ecumenical Council took place in 787, and the most Local Council, whose provisions were included in the Orthodox Canon Law, concluded in 880. The majority of key documents on church governance date to the 4th century. Such distance in time inevitably creates room for various readings and interpretations. Local Churches regularly accuse each other of misinterpreting a particular rule to fit their interests. The lack of more modern documents that are recognized by all churches is largely due to the above-mentioned limited international agency of Orthodox Churches.
The “great powers” of the Orthodox world – Constantinople and Moscow – took shape during this process. Of all the Churches, they are the only ones with sufficient resources (although they are of different nature), hierarchs of the requisite mindset and, mostly importantly, with the desire to fight for the right to format the “Orthodox factor” in global politics. As for the Ecumenical Patriarchate, its principal and essentially only resource is the “symbolic capital” of its “first among equals” status. The ambitions of the Phanariotes are determined by the conditions of their survival: without the Pan-Orthodox status and inclusion into the global “religious market,” the ecumene of the Ecumenical Patriarchate will dwindle to 3000 Istanbul parishioners, which even the western media never fail to mention. The Patriarchs of Constantinople cannot afford the role of leaders of a national church, the role most Orthodox leaders assume, because they do not have a national church.
Moscow’s stance is based on an entirely different logic. Even without Ukraine, the ROC’s parishioners account for over a half of all Orthodox believers. The Russian Orthodox Church also inherited from the Russian and Soviet empires the largest and most well-developed infrastructure and an established system of relations with today’s Russian authorities: these are resources that other churches lack. The idea of Moscow as the “Third Rome,” as the holy keeper and defender of global Orthodoxy, is inheritance that the ROC received from its “symphony with the state.” This self-perception of both church hierarchs and large proportion of parishioners, multiplied by their numbers, prompts the Moscow Patriarchate to define its global strategy.
“Phanarian Papism” vs. “Council Confederation”
The differences between the models that Moscow and Phanar offer to the rest of Orthodoxy turned out to be fundamentally opposite. Based on the nature of its resources, the Patriarchate of Constantinople banked on unifying the Orthodox world along the lines of the Catholic model, striving to transform its primacy of honour into unquestionable primacy. The course Meletius II set in the early 20th century was continued by his successors in the late 20th century. Thus, one of Constantinople’s first acts following the collapse of the USSR was to establish ecclesiastical bodies in Estonia parallel to those of the ROC. For obvious reasons, other Orthodox Churches gave Phanar’s ambitions the cold shoulder. It should be noted, however, that Constantinople made a rather effective use of its “symbolic capital” outside Orthodoxy proper, converting it into recognition of the Patriarch as the spiritual leader in the eyes of the West. Such was the purpose of the frequent meetings that the Patriarchs of Constantinople held with Popes, the inclusion of environmental issues on the agenda and the other tactical moves aimed at establishing themselves in the role of Orthodoxy’s principal speaker in the western media space.
The model proposed by the Russian Orthodox Church can be provisionally termed a “council confederation” model. The ROC strove to enshrine the existing areas of canonical influence and set clear rules of the game based on making decisions at councils following the principle of a consolidated position. The ROC probably counted on retaining the leading role through its qualitative and quantitative superiority over other churches. At the same time, the Moscow Patriarchate demonstrated certain flexibility: internal mobilization of resources and centralization of power go hand in hand with the readiness to grant broad autonomy to individual parts, and conservative rhetoric in Russia coexisted perfectly within the framework of establishing contacts with Catholics and Anglicans.
Ukraine as the Point of Collapse
The problem of the autocephaly of the Ukrainian church would have never grown to its current scale had it been solely a matter of the independence of Ukrainian Orthodoxy. A competitive environment formed in Ukraine that made it possible for various religious organizations to co-exist in the country regardless of anyone’s recognition. Canonical law does not affect issues of property or worship. Those of Ukrainian Orthodox hierarchs who wanted absolute independence from the Russian Orthodox Church could opt for non-canonical bodies. A significant number of bishops would still prefer to remain part of a larger community with another scale of interests. This desire can hardly be explained by some external pressure, more likely, it is testimony to their similar views on the role and strategy of the Russian Orthodox Church. Ultimately, it should be kept in mind that Ukrainian hierarchs account for nearly a third of Russian Orthodox bishops, and nearly a third of delegates at the 2009 Council that elected Patriarch Kirill of Moscow were Ukrainian citizens.
The current actions of the Patriarchate of Constantinople are based on its own interests, which could only be implemented in today’s international situation. The increasing struggle between the ROC and Phanar took its final shape in 2016 with the collapse of the Pan-Orthodox Council that had been in the works since 1961; for the Orthodox world, it would have become the Eighth Ecumenical Council. With the refusal of the Russian Orthodox Church and several other Churches to attend the Council, the issue of determining a universally acceptable system of international ecclesiastical relations was driven into a virtual impasse. The opportunity to determine the map of the Orthodox ecclesiastical world through negotiations was missed. The further logic of the process demanded a conflict that would serve as a catalyst for the public uncovering of contradictions and setting down the real balance of power.
The conflict surrounding Orthodoxy in Ukraine proved to be just such a catalyst. The Patriarchate of Constantinople used a local coincidence of its interests with those of the Ukrainian authorities and the geopolitical situation to move to the active stage of the conflict. Phanar declared the territory outside Russia that was of great importance for the ROC to be its canonical demesne. Additionally, by lifting the anathema from the leaders of Ukraine’s schismatic churches, Phanar practically confirmed its vision of itself as the final judicial body of the Orthodox world. It does not matter whether the Ecumenical Patriarchate will grant autocephaly to a specific religious body in Ukraine or whether it will look for ways to formally subsume the Ukrainian Church. In any case, its key objective is to remove this territory from the area of Moscow’s influence and to stake out its own presence there thereby enshrining the new balance of power.
A Schism or Disintegration?
The conflict between Moscow and Constantinople has reached a new level. Its further development will determine the future of the world Orthodoxy and affect, at the very least, the position of Christianity in Europe, where some 257 million Catholics and about 200.5 million Orthodox Christians live. If the contradictions between the principal centres of power are not resolved, then the risk it that Orthodoxy may cease to exist in its current form. Without the Russian Orthodox Church, the Orthodox world loses any qualitative significance. And without the “symbolic power” of the rest of the Orthodox world, the Moscow Patriarchate is no more than Russia’s national religion, which may sit well with some politicians and hierarchs, but contradicts the internal logic of the Church and Christian universalism.
The current situation encapsulates the failure of both the Phanar and Moscow models, and their revitalization appears unlikely. Subsequently, events may follow one of two principal scenarios. The first scenario will be determined by the disintegration of the family of Orthodox Churches. Granting autocephaly to the Ukrainian church sets a decisive precedent for triggering the atomization of Orthodoxy. The protestant principle of “one state, one church” will deal a blow not only to the ROC, but also to other Orthodox churches, including the Patriarchate of Constantinople. The scale of disintegration will increase through the collapse of the unified legitimation system and, consequently, through the multiplication of Orthodox sects and the increased personal ambitions of individual bishops who would want autocephaly for themselves or at least autonomy within their states. Ukraine will be the first on the list; ultimate canonical confusion there will create all the requisite conditions for an explosive growth of the number of self-proclaimed patriarchs. Atomization will entail marginalization and relegation to the periphery of the religious world map. Emasculating and adapting the Church doctrine to the new realities, essentially an Orthodox “Reformation” and the end of universal Orthodoxy and the Diptych as its symbol will be the final chord in this scenario.
The second scenario is slightly less dramatic. The conflict between Phanar and the ROC will end with Orthodox Churches splitting into two camps with centres in Moscow and Istanbul. Other Orthodox Churches will try to remain neutral, but the Patriarchates of Constantinople and Moscow will force them to pick a side. Orthodoxy will be plunged in its most deep-running split since the Great Schism. Long-term, neither party is likely to win. The schism will either evolve into disintegration, or return to the starting point of the 1990s. The struggle between the two camps will effectively remove Orthodox Churches from global religious politics; the Roman Catholic Church will boost its standing in global Christianity and ardent Protestant denominations will be far more visible on the religious map than Orthodoxy.
Under both scenarios, a way out of the crisis is possible if new charismatic leaders emerge who are capable of offering new integration points for the Orthodox world. Ethnic or country affiliations will have no special significance; what is going to be of far greater importance is the ability to sweep along the believers who are tired of the canonical confusion, militant rhetoric and the feeling of conflict. One could suppose that the project of “Orthodox reboot” will go beyond the boundaries of the current Orthodox borders. Both Ancient Eastern churches (often counted when calculating the total number of Orthodox churches) and individual non-Orthodox Churches (such as the Armenian Church or the Anglican Church) may also be involved.
Under any scenario, the current situation decreases the level of autonomy of Orthodox Churches while increasing their dependence on secular authorities as their potential sponsors or allies in the struggle against the opposing camp. Given the experience of church–state relations within Orthodoxy, the religious sphere is under threat of politicization, while the influence the Church has on political processes will shrink. Globally, it entails the dwindling of “religious multipolarity” as a factor in maintaining the political multipolarity.
- 1. See, for instance, Wilson E. After Secularism: Rethinking Religion in Global Politics. New York: Palgrave Macmillan, 2014, 222 pp.
First published in our partner RIAC
How modernity and globalization influenced the message and expansion of Islam
Islam – societal and cultural changes
In order to understand how cultural and societal changes influence any religion, we must first know the definition of religion. Religion is a relation with God which human beings regard as sacred, divine, spiritual, holy and worthy of respect. It consists of the ways to deal with different concerns of human life. Religious influences are rooted in all aspects of human life. Religions evolve and change with time. Religions consist of ideas, values, practices and stories that are embedded in culture and are not separable. It is not possible to understand a religion without its cultural dimensions How Islam has adapted cultural and societal changes as it has spread throughout the globe is an interesting and complex phenomenon.
Islam traveled in many ways through different regions. The history of Islam is full of events that led to Islam’s spread across the globe. Sometimes it was transferred through military conquests, it was also carried through trade caravans that travelled over vast distances or through the missionaries. When Islamic ideas came into contact with new societies, they evolved in unique ways and took on diverse forms. That’s why these societies have multiple different interpretations of Islam. The spread of Islam across different regions involved some prominent factors such as inter-marriages, trade, influencers etc . Spreading of Islam is a complex phenomenon and to say that it travelled merely through sword is not justified. Muslim culture developed from the ninth century to the twelfth century, and crystallized into what we currently know as Islam. The military expansion of the early centuries facilitated the spread of Islam in name only and it was later that Islam spread in true meaning, as a number of citizens started converting to Islam. Expansion of Islamic culture was carried out by missionaries and political convoys, it also expanded through trade. Group of travelers (caravans) used camels to transport goods and themselves across different regions, they played the most important role in the spread of Islam. These caravans helped in expanding Islamic civilization and culture by connecting different provinces (with the Islamic empires) which were far apart. Merchants carried out trades across different regions. These trades were equally influential in expanding culture and created a sense of multiculturalism or internationalism. These new cultural relationships led to the transfer of technology, science and other forms of culture. This was the start of globalization. But at that time it was just known by multiple names like multiculturalism or internationalism. Cultural globalization is a multidimensional process which leads to different impacts and consequences and makes possible the coexistence of different values with Islamic symbols , values and discourses. Islamic culture does not consist of merely a group of a combination of rituals rather it is a complete way of life prescribed by the Quran.
“The human history is the graveyard of great cultures that the disastrous end of them has been due to this matter that they couldn’t present a planned, rational and volitional reaction against the challenges.” -Erich Fromm
When Islam encountered globalization:
During the time of prophet Muhammad (SAW) there wasn’t much expansion of Islam to other parts of the world. Only a small group of people went to Abissynia during the early days of Islam for the purpose of seeking shelter. The actual age of Islamic globalization has begun when in Medina the Prophet (SAW) founded an Islamic State in 622. From that time, Islam started to spread around the globe. The teachings of the Qur’an and the prophet (SAW) inspired the Muslims not only to learn but also to illumine their souls by knowledge. Despite mastering modern information and technical skills, Muslims had an open mind in understanding all that’s good and helpful . They were willing to grasp knowledge and ideas from the Persians, Indians and Greeks in order to enrich their civilization. They had a welcoming attitude towards the changing world.
In assessing the Muslim time of globalization, one could come to realize that the growth of Islam and its civilization to overseas territories took place because of its dynamic nature as disclosed by God. The Book of Islam conveyed messages associated with faith and additionally recommended Muslims to gather know-how of science and equip themselves with modern knowledge. When Muslims took Islam to overseas lands there has been no compulsion for human beings to comply with Islam. Many western scholars made the claims that Islam became unfold on the factor of the sword which are groundless. Islam was promoted with stunning preaching and desirable examples proven through the Prophet (SAW) and early Muslims at some stage in their age of globalization.(‘N e w s l e t t e r 1 0 Muslim Responses to Globalization’, 2002)
Globalization has begun without being acknowledged by a huge area of the Islamic Ummah. Since the tsunamis of globalization began to contact the shores of the Islamic nations, but it shouldn’t affect the faith of Muslims and Islamic lifestyle. As it has been comprehended from the former conversation that globalization is irreversible and The Muslims, inevitably, have no choice but to prepare and protect themselves. Realizing that Malaysia needs to do something Former Prime Minister Mahathir stated in one of the His addresses on the issue of globalization to the Islamic Ummah:
“Muslim countries and Muslim government have a duty to ensure that globalization will not result in the marginalization of their countries as happened with the Industrial Revolution and Industrial Age. We cannot afford it this time. If once again we miss this opportunity to keep pace with the radical and rapid advances now being made with technology and the sciences, and the changes they cause to the world’s perceptions of things, the new ideas and concepts in human and international relations; if we miss all these and fail to handle them, then we will not only be marginalized, but be dominated and hegemonised permanently”
Mahatir’s statement is a reminder to the Muslims not to Ignore the events and progress that take place, and stay away In the fields of Information Technology, Multimedia, e-Study, e-commerce, etc If Muslims choose to remain isolated in this era of globalization then Muslims will be one who will be left alone and loser in comparison with the rest of the world. A sensible thing for the Muslims to do is to be active in mastering and utilizing the new technology for a good purpose that could deliver progress, development and economic benefits to themselves and to the rest of mankind. Now if one looks at the modern period, as far as politics and government go, Muslims have absorbed a great deal from the West, especially in relation to democracy, human rights, democratic forms of governance. There’s been as great deal of absorption on the part of Muslims from the West. Any Muslim society today including those which have remained closed and cloistered cannot ignore the force of democracy and the wave of modernity and globalization.
Globalization, modernity and Islam
Through its name, the idea of globalization is very much clear. The word global provides the central idea, it mainly comprises economy, society, culture and politics. People from different countries with different cultural backgrounds are connected through globalization, they make a homogenous culture and thus become globalised. Globalization has made the world interconnected, such that local events may come to have global consequences. Now we proceed to how globalization and modernity which is a very intensified phenomenon, influenced the message of Islam. (m.miasami, no date) As it has been mentioned in a research article the relationship between Islam and globalization has been subjected to considerable speculation and sarcastic discussion. The belief that Islam opposes globalization has been the essence of the debate. Islam calls for adequate responses to the constant challenges posed by the fluctuating time and space factors and for the prospect of their comprehension and implementation to be revitalized and revamped from within in order to combat the possible shortcomings of the Muslim mind and the cultural and civilizational degeneration of Islamic societies This article emphasizes that the current debate of Islam and globalization is more focused on westernization than globalization. It has been argued that the tension is due to the westernization process rather than globalization. Since the mere terminology surrounding the debate has created considerable misunderstanding, the terms of reference need to be defined properly. Globalization is a very intense phenomenon which involves worldwide exchange of goods, people and ideas. Globalization has captured growing intensity of worldwide interconnectedness. Globalization has been a part of human life since its inception. This refers to the inherent human nature and the propensity of man to be a social animal. It is, in fact the propensity with which god has created human beings to exchange his resources with others in order to get better chances at life. Though globalization is related to the idea of comparative advantage, free trade and open economy , its origins can be traced back to long before such ideas came to life. To establish a more detailed view of the so called ‘Islam-Globalization’ controversy, it is important to differentiate between the globalization cycle in its original context and other comparatively more recent mechanisms, such as westernization that are veiled as globalization and yet are so distinct.
Globalization aims to narrow the gaps that separate the various communities. This is achieved by sharing advantages of cultural , social, science and political governance in all facets of life. That is, they share knowledge, they recognize the principles and codes of ethics of one another, and they establish a common ground. Westernization, by contrast, does not consider such an understanding or building of such a common ground as worthwhile enterprises. Globalization is a mechanism in which the entire planet is like a global town. Globalization is a dynamic process which has different effects on various religions around the world. It breaks the cultural barriers and spread different ideologies and values around the globe. Westernization, on the other side, appears to be a one-way path, implying that in the name of globalization, one country seeks to conquer and influence other areas. In addition, while globalization takes place through the free will of various communities, Westernization is characteristically imposed on other regions. Having explained the distinction between globalization and westernization, the discussion regarding Islam-globalization can be more adequately measured. Islam is not, in its original context, anti-globalization (or modernity, deemed a by-product of globalization), but Muslims also have a concern with Westernization. While there is criticism of Westernization of culture, modernization is accepted as a timely phenomenon.(Achmad and Hamzani, 2016)
Modernity in its political and social forms refers to increasingly specializing isolation from religion in societal institutions such as political systems, law, economic management and education. Unlike social life in the pre-modern period, these roles are conducted in modernity, free from the overarching influence of religion. In this viewpoint, religious fundamentalism-in the sense of a return to a purist past-is a issue in all its complexity and cultural hybridity created by the interaction between modernity and the Muslim ummah.
Modernity is a process in which society becomes modern. It implies social mobility , industrialization, trade. Modernization has been accelerated and accentuated with globalization in the past two decades. Islam, like all other religions, has felt and reacted to the effects of and responded to the impingement of modernity in Muslim society, the multiple forces of modern intellectual, scientific and socio-political life. There’s hardly a facet of Muslim society ‘s life that has been left untouched. Contrary to common belief, the bulk of the ideas of justice, equality prescribed by Islam are in accordance with those inherent in the modernization process. Islam has always promoted ideas such as peaceful coexistence, the acceptance of other religions, democratic governance and women’s rights. Indeed, Islam and modernization need not be at odds with one another. Muslims need not have any excessive aversion to Islamic tradition since Islam has never been a cause of any chapters of darkness or ignorance in Muslim history. Islamic culture was without dark ages. Such a thing would be an anomaly for mankind as Islam is in a religion of supreme light, reality, and guidance. Islam, on the contrary, was the root cause of all goodness which emerged in Islamic civilization and benefitted not only Muslims but also non-Muslims. (Kohler and Krueger, 1952)
Islam is both traditional and modern, as the universal and final revelation to mankind. While it speaks of the infinity, permanence and inviolability of its divinely prescribed truth, and thus of continued compliance with and following its authorities, as well as of the valuation and conformity with the legacies and traditions spawned by such dynamic historical processes, Islam also calls for appropriate responses to the constant challenges posed by the fluctuating time and space.
According to an article, (Bicer, 2013)Islamic responses to the globalization phase are very complex. Islamic understanding, social circumstances and interaction with modernity are the reasons for this. Discrete experiences form independent Islamist thoughts, expectations, critiques, strategies, and their modern or non-modern commitments. Where political , economic or cultural deprivation slowly impedes the fulfillment of desires without pressure or inequality, Muslims may follow a committed, private and a political Islamism consistent with western rationalization, also entangled with it. Muslims should take a personal, general, cooperative, and systematic approach and strive toward a compromised modern Islamic public sphere. Globalization should be acknowledged for providing a suitable arena for exchange of ideas and thoughts.
Globalization in the light of Quran
Globalization is socially, historically and politically powerful, and is prevalent in the world. Whatever the dominant political and cultural influence geographically, the ideology takes priority over others. In our times the U.S. is the world’s dominant power. American culture is the power house worldwide. The Qur’an says the balance of power passes to other hands, “We bring these days to men by turns, and that Allah may know those who believe and take witnesses from among you. And Allah loveth not those that do wrong” (Qur’an 3/140). This verse means, “Allah has turned those glories around, Some days are in favour of people and some are against them”. In this Qur’anic verse, the word dawla (mubadala) means going back and forth. That exchange of primacy among cultures has some causes hidden. We must accept globalization as a reality in principle. It is a power cycle and can change thereby from person to person, community to community, State to State, continent to continent. Globalization is in essence neutral rather than demonic nor divine. It shifts the role of client, and room utilized. There are, therefore, many articles about globalization, for and against religion.
Religious and cultural values have been affected by the influence of globalization’s dominance. Globalization is seen as a cause of religious diversity and its threat to traditional values. It is also seen as a polarization factor defining religious identity and its internal practice. Evaluating the substance of religious scriptures and religious history challenges us with this underlined reality that Islam is a global faith and has sought to become globalized through its historical context. Islam has also addressed the question of globalization and the development of a global culture and democracy. To prove that topic, we can state the following Quranic verses.
Many verses of Quran have spoken about the globalization of Islam and lack of its limitation to definite place or time directly or indirectly. Also, they have narrated and characterized the global view of Islam.:
- «قل يا ايها الناس اني رسول الله اليكم جميعاً»
Say: O people! surely I am the Messenger of God to you all.
- «يا ايها الناس اعبدوا ربكم الذي خلقكم و الذين من قبلكم لعلكم تتقون»
O men! serve your Lord who created you and those before you so that you
may guard against evil.
- «ان الله اصطفي آدم و نوحاً و ال ابراهيم و ال عمران علي العالمين»
“Surely God chose Adam and Nuh and the descendants of Ibrahim and the
descandents of Imran above the nation.
- «هو الذي ارسل رسوله بالهدي و دين الحق ليظهره علي الدين كله.
“He it is who sent His messenger with guidance and the religion of truth, that
he might cause it to prevail over all religions, though the polytheists may be
- «وعد الله الذين آمنوا منكم وعملو صالحات ليستخلفنكم في الارض كما استخلف الذين من قبلهم و ليمكنن لهم دينهم الذي ارتضي لهم و ليبد لنهم من بعد خوفهم امنا.
“God has promised to those of you who believe and do good that He will most certainly make them rulers in the earth as He made rulers those before them, and that He will most certainly establish for them their religion which He has chosen for them, and that He will most certainly, after their fear, give them security in exchange; they shall serve Me, not associating aught with me; and whoever is ungrateful after this, these it is who are the transgressors.”
- «يا ايها الذين آمنوا ادخلوا في السلم كافه و لاتتبعوا خطوات الشيطان»
“O you who believe! enter into submission one and all and do not follow the footsteps of shaitan; surely he is your open enemy “
It has been pointed in above verses that Holy Prophet of Islam (Peace be Upon Him) has announced His Quranic message, the divine revelation, with the characteristic of eternity for all human beings. Also, the aforesaid verses imply the world’s inclusion of Islam legal system and this matter that the mission of the Holy Prophet (peace be upon Him) is global and for all human beings.
Islam is not in conflict with the issue of globalization and modernity, but the features of globalization, from the Islamic point of view, are distinct from the present idiomatic element. Reviewing the quality of religious texts and religious history presents us with this obvious reality that religion of Islam is a global religion and in its historical experience has always sought to become worldwide. Islam has always addressed the question of globalization, liberal culture system and global governance. We believe that Islam has broad-based and national thought and theoretical principles that, if extracted and clarified in the modern language, can be as a shining lamp before the present human way. Of course, other holy books, such as the New and Old Testaments, claim to present this principle, but the comparison of Islam’s foundation of thought with other holy religions proves that Islam and the Quran are unquestionably superior. So we can conclude that whatever is described as the globalization phase today is not in line with Islam ‘s view given the presence of similarity and parallels such as the elimination of geographical borders, but it is apparent that Islam does not oppose globalization and render Islam global, but the characteristics of globalization vary from today’s idiomatic features.
From this point of view, globalization should be seen as a possibility for the growth and advancement of human good principles, as it has transformed communicative technologies and enabled citizens across the world with swift and unified connectivity. According to this approach, globalization is an appropriate opportunity to develop the exalted Islamic instructions and is a ground for the fulfillment of the global government of Islam, as promised in the verses of the Glorious Qur’an.
As a result, it can be said that while Western and especially America dominated communicative technologies, the growth and development of these technologies , particularly internet and satellite, created an atmosphere that this situation can be used well. It is also easy for the active addressees of the media to accept the exalted messages of Islamic religion which are in harmony with human instincts that the dust of negligence has been touched on their pure human nature, and this matter requires the conscience and acuity of Islamic world thinkers that they can better use this condition and prove this principle that Islam is in agreement with globalization.
Achmad, D. and Hamzani, U. (2016) ‘Globalization in the Perspective of Islam and Economic Experts’, Procedia – Social and Behavioral Sciences, 219, pp. 41–46. doi: 10.1016/j.sbspro.2016.04.030.
Bicer, R. (2013) ‘Globalization in the Context of Islamic Theology’, The Journal of Rotterdam Islamic and Social Sciences, 3(1), pp. 1–12. doi: 10.2478/jriss-2013-0001.
Kohler, W. and Krueger, F. (1952) ‘T H E Impact of the German Immigration on T H E’, 2(May), pp. 207–229.
m.miasami (no date) ‘Islam and Globalization’, fountain magazine.
‘N e w s l e t t e r 1 0 Muslim Responses to Globalization’ (2002) Religion, (July).
The future of Orthodox shrine in Gifhorn
St.Nicholas’ Orthodox Church in Gifhorn (Germany) – a copy of the ‘gem’ of the Russian wooden architecture of the 18th century – has for a long time heard none of the divine liturgy chants or the ringing of the bells after the service. The reason for this is the decision by a private sponsor, who at the end of the 20th century granted the financial resources and the territory to rebuild this magnificent church, to sell it to the Russian Orthodox community for a hefty sum. What caused the problem is the breathtaking beauty of the architectural marvel.
It was the beauty of the wooden Transfiguration Church, created by Russian architects in 1756, that encouraged German entrepreneur and ethnography lover Horst Wrobel to replicate it in Germany. The copy in question was built in 1995 in Lower Saxony, near the town of Gifhorn in Wrobel’s private estate where he set up a museum of old mills on the riverbank. The beautiful church fits in perfectly well with the picturesque landscape. Its original, the above-mentioned Transfiguration Church, which used to be located in one of the villages of the Vladimir Region (about 200 km from Moscow), burned down seemingly beyond repair in a fire caused by a strike of lightning in the 19th century. In the 20th century it was rebuilt on the basis of the original designs, but this time, on the territory of the wooden architecture museum in Suzdal.
It was in Suzdal that Horst Wrobel saw the breathtaking beauty and exquisite elegance of the Orthodox shrine. With the help of old drafts he had a copy of the church built in his estate and dedicated it to St.Nicholas the Miracle Worker. In autumn 1995 His Holiness Patriarch Alexey II, while on a visit to Germany, paid a visit to Horst’s museum of mills and the church on the territory of the museum. In a solemn ceremony the Wrobel family presented His Holiness Patriarch Alexey II with St.Nicholas’ Church. According to Father Superior Archpriest Gennady (Budko), the gift certificate was not of legal but of symbolic nature:
The symbolic document of 24.11.1995 points out that «50 years after the end of the Second World War this church serves as a bridge across our nations, from person to person, and from heart to heart. Let this House of God become a symbol of reconciliation for all German and Russian Christians for ever». Having consecrated the church Patriarch Alexey II addressed those present: «The church’s beauty is reminiscent of a cathedral. I would be happy to take the church to Russia, but it stays here as a fifth church of the Russian Orthodox Diocese in Berlin and Germany. A visit to Gifhorn crowns my visit to Germany».
According to Father Gennady, in 25 years that the church has been in Lower Saxony the owner of the building has signaled no intention to legalize the gift to the Russian Orthodox Church. In 25 years the church has seen six superiors, has formed a community of 120 people, and requires appropriate maintenance and renovation. Given the conditions imposed by the owner the parishioners have to hold services on the rented premises of a Catholic church or on the premises of other Christian organizations. Why? – Entry to the museum is not free, for parishioners it costs 30 euros a year. The superior together with parishioners have to leave the church right after service for absence of life-support facilities – water supply, kitchen, recreational area (benches – tables). But this is not the main thing that worries the church community led by Father Gennady. «Our parish consists of missionaries and wanderers, – Father Gennady says. – If the new owners come, the road to the church will become inaccessible, for the museum is skirted by a trench with water and a bridge which is lifted most of the day. This is the only way to the church. The incumbent owner is set on selling the church». This is the price the fifth church of the Russian Orthodox Diocese pays for its beauty, once inspired by God. A poet says,
«…what is beauty and why is it worshipped by people?
– Is it a vessel with a vacuum,
or is it a fire twinkling in the vessel»?
St.Nicholas’ Church with its spectacular beauty and impressive history is waiting for prayers and chants to the glory of God, glimmering icon-lamps. Put on stake is money and faith. Either the church will be bought (at best by the Russian Orthodox Church), or the prayer will work a miracle and the church will be gratuitously handed over to the Russian Orthodox Diocese in Germany. The parishioners believe in a miracle and continue to pray about the future of the church.
From our partner International Affairs
Islam, Science and Time: Is science compatible with religion?
Logically, time is present at every particle as a moment and eventually the very same moment is present at the whole, limitless space like a singular unit of totality. It means that there remains no gap, difference, or distance between time’s state of rest and its omnipresence. Typically, the time shown by clocks across countries at a given singular moment can be different and thus divisible (due to geological distances). However, the given singular moment of the time remains the same everywhere. This implies that time is indivisible, immortal and eternal. There is no past, present and future of the time. In fact, these are particular events and their happenings that cause past, present, and future phases of the space. Thus, it is space not the time that passes through the phases of past, present, and future.
The ages of nonentity (nothingness) turned into the past reign of the space when the first event of the big bang took place and subsequently started the new structure of the universe upon the surface of space. Thus, the existing design of the universe at the face of space is running as the present reign of the structure. If there exist both past and present reigns of space, there must also be its future. This future reign cannot be denied as it is the eternal fate to come either through a big crunch or through the heavenly bugle of doomsday.
The imaginative sort of time-space structure should compel the writer and his readers alike to conclude that the time-space combination and its structural phases of universe came into being under some mindful scheme of an Almighty Authority, Who created and controls the whole vista. While He let some universe open and visual so that it can be learnt and discovered, He hid the rest which cannot be discovered or disclosed. “But for whom”? What was that generic class or character that the Almighty had in His mind to bring forth after the initial preparations would complete. Of course and undoubtedly, this generic class and character was of human beings for whom the Almighty Authority of Allah was preparing the ground of His schematic system that could either be learnt visually or believed conscientiously.
That is why human beings see the time-space relativity as two different realities. Time is hidden and a non-visual reality, while the space and structure of the universes are naked, visual realities that humans can learn through their wit or wisdom. However, human wit or wisdom is limited. For example, the supreme avenue of heaven—i.e., the vista of censored realities such as Allah Almighty Himself, death-revealing, angels, Eden and hell—is beyond human’s knowledge. Thus, where the wit and wisdom ends, the belief or faith starts. Human wit or wisdom lie in the scientific view and faith and belief lie in religious view.
Stephen Hawking says, “So long as the universe had a beginning, we could suppose it had a creator. But if the universe is really completely self-contained, having no boundary or edge, it would have neither beginning nor end; it would simply be. What place, then, for a creator?” When a religious leader Saint Augustine was asked “What did God do before he created the universe”? He replied that “time was a property of the universe that God created, and that time did not exist before the beginning of the universe”. Immanuel Kant opined in his thesis that “if the universe did not have a beginning, then there would be an infinite period of time before any event, which he considered absurd. The argument for his antithesis was that if the universe had a beginning, there would be an infinite period of time before it, so why should the universe begin at any particular time?” Here, Hawking denies the concept of time before the beginning of the universe which he considered an unspoken assumption of Kant’s thesis and anti-thesis. According to Hubble’s observations, “there was a time, called the big bang, when the universe was infinitesimally small and infinitely dense…. One may argue that time had a beginning at the big bang, in the sense that earlier times would not be defined”. Hubble explained that “wherever you look, distant galaxies are moving rapidly away from us. In other words when the objects were all at exactly the same place and when, therefore, the density of the universe was infinite”. All of these scientific views (Stephan Hawkings. “A brief history of time) endorse that the mutual relativity of the time-space was spread out endlessly before and even after the beginning of the universe and its systemized structure. Thanks to scientists for providing a time-space basis to start with the Quranic view.
Quranic Ethical Identification
Human phrase of time-space has two words and the Quranic phrase of “Al Hayyul Qayum” (Quran chap 2, verse 255) also has two words. The first word is for Allah’s life defined as “Ever-Living”. Allah’s life means Allah’s time to live along. Hence, Allah’s life transmitted or translated into the time. Allah’s life is immortal, eternal, unending, indivisible and turned primarily into the time being. Allah’s life has been transferred as the singular unity of time over the whole and unending space, once for all and forever. In other words, Allah’s life or Allah’s self-being is the time-being—i.e., absolute digital constant of reference. The second word for Him is: “The Sustainer of all other Existences”. For sustenance of something, housing or existing space is required. Thus, and when Allah is the sustainer of all other existences, He created the boundless vastness of the space to provide housing or staying place. “The City of Allah” during the time-space entity was a “Arsh-e-Mualla” (owner of the throne). There the angels were carrying His throne with his Arsh-e-Mualla and some others around it praying for those to come in future with their true beliefs. (Quran chap 40, verse 7,15) The universe, then came into being so as that: “He, it is who gives life and causes death; and when He decrees a matter, He, but says to it “Be” and “it becomes”. (Quran chap 40, verse 68)
There was no Sun when the Earth was formed in “four days” and seven skies in “two days”. If there had been no sun when the Earth was formed, the scale of time was certainly not the measurement of time with respect to the sun. Those six days may not be the same six days that are measured with respect to Earth’s spinning around its axis today, nor the time calculated for a year’s span of time with respect to Earth’s revolution around the sun. The relative time is unknown for numbering these six days in total (Chap 41, verses 9-12). Time is eternal. After that the “lowest sky was adorned by lamps (and stars)”. Again, the future of the space is informed as: “Then watch (or wait) for the day when the sky will bring a visible smoke! Covering the people; this is a painful torment” (chap 44 verse 10,11). When someone could see no event of change occurring before him, he felt as if the time was passing through the same moment. Cave-fellows of the “Kahf” slept for “309 years” but found these years just like a day (or even less) after getting up from their sleep (Chap 18 verse 19,25). Similarly, a person in the good books of God became alive after 100 years of his death, he found it “a day or less than that” (chap 2, verse 259)
Thus, it is concluded that Time-Space and its systemized structure of universe or universes is not self-contained. Almighty Allah is its creator and the controlling authority, Who has left some realities as naked while others as hidden so that the former may be visualized by humans to the extent of their use of wit and wisdom and the latter with their faith and belief. Time represents the same moment for all. It is not a naked reality as observed in our time clocks or estimated by the Sun.
Digital transformation in Brazil could reinforce economic recovery from COVID-19 crisis
Brazil has made significant progress in improving Internet access, digital security and regulation, yet more needs to be done to...
Israel, the Middle East and Joe Biden
How will a Biden Administration change American policies on Iran, the Palestinians and Israel’s tightening relationships with Arab states? Some...
Nuclear Weapons and Coercive Diplomacy- Book Review
In Nuclear Weapons and Coercive Diplomacy, Todd S. Sechser and Matthew Fuhrmann create both a thorough qualitative and meticulous quantitative...
Global transformation of the electricity sector requires greater efforts to ensure security of supply
The electricity sector, which plays a large and growing role in energy systems around the world, is undergoing its most...
World Bank Group Sanctions Two Chinese Engineering Companies for 18 months
The World Bank Group today announced the 18-month sanctions of China National Electric Engineering Company Limited (“CNEEC”) and its wholly...
Used vehicles get a second life in Africa – but at what cost?
John Mwangi’s 22-year-old car is his lifeline. His run-down Toyota saloon not only ferries him around the streets of the...
World Bank Announces ‘Mission Billion Challenge’ Winners
Leaders from around the world—including H.M. Queen Máxima of the Netherlands in her capacity as UNSGSA, the President of Estonia,...
Science & Technology2 days ago
Rachel Lyons: Shaping the future of humanity in space
Defense3 days ago
Who Needs A Proxy War In The Caucasus?
Southeast Asia3 days ago
US Secretary of State Pompeo set to boost Indonesian religious reform efforts
Reports2 days ago
Smart Manufacturing Ecosystems: A Catalyst for Digital Transformation?
Economy2 days ago
Financial Bubbles in the Coronavirus Era
Americas2 days ago
Prospects for U.S.-China Relations in the Biden Era
Development2 days ago
World Bank, BRAC Join Hands to Improve Road Safety in Bangladesh
Finance2 days ago
Socially Responsible, Low-Carbon Capitalism Can Ensure ‘Job-Full’ Recovery From COVID-19