In the wake of more federal executions scheduled in coming weeks, US Bishops have renewed their call on the Administration “to act as a witness to the dignity of all human life”.
Executions, which had been suspended in the Country for seventeen years, resumed on July 14, after the Supreme Court cleared the way in an unsigned order released the on same day. Since then, eight offenders have been executed by the Federal Government. The last execution took place on Thursday November 19 and two more are to come in December.
In a statement issued yesterday, Archbishop Paul S. Coakley of Oklahoma City, chairman of the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops’ (USCCB) Committee on Domestic Justice and Human Development, and Archbishop Joseph F. Naumann of Kansas City in Kansas, chairman of the USCCB Committee on Pro-Life Activities, appealed again to stop the executions.
“We are now on pace for ten federal executions in 2020, more than double the previous record of four in 1938”, the statement pointed out. “The death penalty is not necessary to protect society. It is not necessary to hold people accountable for grave crimes. The decision not to execute someone, even someone who has done something terrible, is not ‘soft on crime’; rather, it is strong on the dignity of life”, the two Archbishops added quoting the recent encyclical, “Fratelli Tutti”, in which Pope Francis reiterated “the firm rejection” by the Church of capital punishment (no. 269).
Finally, the statement referred to all documents published this year by US bishops on the death penalty and the recent resumption of federal executions:.
The European Union (EU) and Germany are supporting Senegal’s fight against the coronavirus pandemic by mobilising €112 million from the EU and €100 million from Germany’s global emergency programme for COVID-19. The funding is part of the overall ‘Team Europe’ envelope intended to support our partners’ efforts to face the coronavirus crisis.
The funding will help support the Senegalese government’s Economic and Social Resilience Programme, particularly economic aid measures for businesses and social assistance for the people of Senegal.
European Commissioner for International Partnerships, Jutta Urpilainen, said: ‘This support, which is on an unprecedented scale, illustrates the strength of the European Union’s commitment to supporting Senegal. I am proud of this joint Team Europe effort to optimise the impact of social measures to help the most vulnerable and to support economic actors. By ensuring management transparency, the Senegalese authorities can count on us to strengthen the country’s resilience.’
Germany’s Federal Minister for Economic Cooperation and Development, Gerd Müller, said: ‘We stand shoulder to shoulder with Senegal, our partner country for reform. Coronavirus is wiping out a great deal of the progress made: almost half of the population is unemployed. Senegal’s economy will experience a dramatic recession. By providing immediate support and bridging loans, we are helping to maintain production and safeguard tens of thousands of jobs, as businesses switch over to producing items such as protective masks and medical equipment.’
Background
The European Union is a leading and longstanding partner of Senegal. EU aid to Senegal for 2014-2020 totals around €1 billion, which includes €347 million from the bilateral envelope and €199.2 million from the EU Emergency Trust Fund for Africa.
The EU is supporting the Senegalese government’s priorities of promoting sustainable and inclusive growth and involving the private sector in job creation, in particular for young people. It is also supporting green and sustainable development in Senegal, as well as governance and stability, including migration management.
Germany has been a close partner of Senegal since the country gained independence. In 2019, the two countries entered into a partnership to encourage reforms. Germany is supporting the implementation of reforms in Senegal in the area of good governance and the fight against corruption, for which additional funding is set aside. In return, the Senegalese government has undertaken to make measurable progress.
As part of its Marshall Plan with Africa, Germany has entered into partnerships with six countries to encourage reforms. The aim of cooperation with countries implementing reforms is to improve the business climate, boost the private sector and create jobs. The goal is to increase local investment.
This new funding will be made available to Senegal as a financial contribution to its Economic and Social Resilience Programme (PRES), the aim of which is to address the economic and social crisis triggered by COVID-19. Across the globe, the coronavirus crisis has led to dramatic food shortages and economic crisis, with developing and emerging countries being particularly affected.
To address the economic and social repercussions, the Senegalese government is receiving support so that it can continue to maintain basic public services, such as social protection and food security, as well as support for the private sector, which in turn helps safeguard jobs. Micro, small and medium-sized enterprises (MSMEs) in the informal sector are being particularly affected by the coronavirus crisis and the decline in economic growth.
Since March, many businesses have been forced to scale back their operations or stop them completely. MSMEs are the backbone of the private sector in Senegal. They account for 99.8% of the 400 000 businesses in Senegal and employ 89% of the working population. This makes them a driving force for economic and social development in Senegal.
As the live-streamed event got started from the Italian town of Assisi on Friday, organizers expressed surprise over how the event’s first day had generated over 48,000 views on YouTube.
Some 2,000 young economists and entrepreneurs were signed up as direct participants.
The first session of “The Economy of Francesco” explored several social aspects of the global economy and how they could be improved, while seeking inspiration from St. Francis of Assisi.
A conference entitled “Generativity, Relational Good, and Civil Economy” opened with Professor Mauro Magatti, a sociologist and economist at Catholic University of the Sacred Heart in Milan, Italy.
Prof. Magatti said the current economic system is based on productivity and the person’s status as a consumer, rather than as a human being.
He urged younger generations to move away from this standard toward the creation of economic indicators which take into account the idea of “generativity”. An economy with this expanded parameter would also care about what is produced and its effects on all of humanity.
Transition to open economy
Prof. Magatti said this requires four transitions: A formative transition which helps people grow; an organizational transition which can recognize people’s abilities and ideas without constraining them; a communitarian transition—known in the Church as the principle of subsidiarity—to create open communities that seek out future paths; an environmental transition which links up generations and all Creation.
“A generative economy reopens a future which had seemed closed,” he concluded.
Finding meaning
Another speaker, Leonardo Becchetti, an economist at Rome’s Tor Vergata University, expanded on this idea, focusing on its effects on political economy.
A “generative economy”, he said, means moving beyond a two-pronged approach to economics, whose center is the market and institutions, to one which also pays attention to “active citizenship of voting with our pocketbook” and “responsible business activity”. He said such a shift would allow an individual to find meaning within the economic system.
“Generativity,” said Prof. Becchetti, “is the best way to create meaning in individual life and make it flourish.”
For profit’s sake
The keynote speaker for the event’s second day was Muhammad Yunus, a Bangladeshi economist and social entrepreneur.
The 2006 Nobel Peace Prize laureate developed the idea of microfinance, which gives low-income individuals access to small business loans to pursue their dreams.
Speaking to participants in The Economy of Francesco, Prof. Yunus said the goal of microfinance is “not to make money for yourself but to solve people’s problems.”
In the same vein, he offered several criticisms of the global economic system. He said the Covid-19 pandemic has thrust its main defect into the limelight: maximizing profits for those on the top.
“We have built a world where 1 percent of the population owns 99 percent of all wealth,” he said.
Pain of the poor
Prof. Yunus pointed out that with the onset of the pandemic those people who barely earned a living were suddenly thrust into poverty from their perch on the margin.
“They became poor; they don’t have any food; they don’t have any income. That’s almost half the population of the entire world.”
Prof. Yunus said many people yearn to return to a pre-pandemic world.
“Why would we want to return?” he asked the young economists, entrepreneurs, and changemakers participating in The Economy of Francesco.
A concrete, Ugandan example
The second day of the event concluded with a snapshot of a social ministry in Uganda, as an example of a caring economy based on solidarity.
The “Rescue Women Foundation” seeks to restore hope to sexually abused teenage mothers through microfinance.
Miriam Kiwumulo Kyalimpa, the founder and director of the foundation, said the organization helps women by granting small loans to kickstart their business ideas.
Since many women are unable to take on such risks alone, they are encouraged to form groups and work together to lift themselves out of poverty and destitution.
“We want to teach them how to work,” she said. “They have the capacity. All they need is a source of capital.”
In the past ten years, the number of forcibly displaced people has nearly doubled. In 2019, the number of people
forced to flee (inside and beyond the borders) grew to 79.5 million – the highest ever recorded. Refugee situations
continue to increase in scope, scale and complexity, whereas durable solutions provided to refugees are at levels that fall well below needs.
The Three-Year Strategy on Resettlement and Complementary Pathways translates the Global Compact on Refugees (GCR) into a global plan for action to build the structures to increase the number of resettlement and complementary pathways places. It also seeks to expand the number of engaged countries and improve the availability and predictability of third country solutions for refugees. The Strategy foresees resettlement of one million refugees and admission of two million through complementary pathways by 2028. More specifically, the Strategy calls for an incremental increase of 10,000 resettlement admissions per year. The global resettlement admissions target was set at 70,000 refugees for 2020 and at 80,000 for 2021. It will be reaching 150,000 refugees by 2028.
The COVID-19 pandemic had a serious impact with border closure and travel restrictions and placed a significant obstacle in securing third country solutions for refugees in 2020. The pandemic’s toll on European countries has been significant. Despite the major challenges caused by COVID-19, EU Member States remained engaged with UNHCR to find ways to keep resettlement programmes running: scores of refugees with emergency protection needs have been able to depart for resettlement; and innovative modalities have been adopted to maintain resettlement processing. UNHCR welcomes the support and assistance provided by EU Member States and local communities to refugees.
With the resumptions of travel and admissions since June 2020, UNHCR stands ready to support States in their efforts. UNHCR is very pleased to see several arrivals to EU countries, including from the Niger Emergency Transit Mechanisms and calls on countries to assist and expedite departures in order to continue evacuations from Libya.
UNHCR welcomes the Pact on Migration and Asylum and looks forward to working with Member States and the EU. The Pact is a foundation for growing resettlement and complementary pathways in 2021 and beyond in reflection of the goals of the Three-Year Strategy on Resettlement and Complementary Pathways.
On a recent country visit to Albania, Dr Hans Henri P. Kluge, WHO Regional Director for Europe, signed a 2-year agreement to work together on key health issues, and met decision-makers and health workers on the COVID-19 frontline.
Following a press briefing, both Dr Kluge and Albania’s Minister of Health and Social Protection, Ms Ogerta Manastirliu, signed a new biennial collaborative agreement (BCA), setting out areas where WHO and the Albanian government can make efforts to improve the health and well-being of the population. This agreement includes: coverage of health services; maternal, child and reproductive health; tackling both communicable and noncommunicable diseases; health financing; and emergency preparedness and response, including COVID-19.
In a statement to the press, Dr Kluge said: “I encourage all efforts made towards delivering universal health coverage, including a focus on a primary health care system that is accessible, affordable and equitable. The European Programme of Work [EPW] places particular attention on 4 flagship initiatives: mental health, digitization, behavioural insights and immunization. It is encouraging to see these reflected in the strategic efforts of the Government of Albania.
“Today’s signing of our Biennial Collaborative Agreement 2021 with the Ministry of Health and Social Protection of Albania is another positive step in our close work together to deliver on the commitments of the EPW, across Albania and across the WHO European Region.”
Contributing to the European Programme of Work – “United Action for Better Health”, which was agreed by European Region Member States in September 2020, this agreement seeks to strengthen the country’s National Health Strategy in line with WHO’s triple billion health goals: more people benefitting from universal health coverage, more people better protected from health emergencies and more people enjoying better health and well-being.
The signing of the BCA followed a meeting between Ms Manastirliu and Dr Kluge where they discussed the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic response, the country’s National Health Policy, health financing and the new primary health care strategy.
Dr Kluge commended the Government of Albania and health-care authorities for their response to COVID-19. Following the structural mechanisms put in place since January, in order to deal with the growing challenges brought by the virus, the strategy prepared for the autumn and coming winter is another positive step in the pandemic response.
As COVID-19 cases surge, Dr Kluge explained that it is vital that with WHO/Europe’s solidarity, the Albanian government continues strengthening testing and contact tracing capacity across the country, with robust case management.
Dr Kluge stressed: “like everywhere in Europe, we must redouble our efforts once again”.
Despite the challenges, Dr Kluge told the people of Albania that they are not alone. “WHO/Europe remains a steadfast partner amid this pandemic and we look forward to sustaining our close collaboration and commitment to leave no one behind.”
National Health Policy and COVID-19 response
In a meeting with Prime Minister Edi Rama, Dr Kluge spoke about the COVID-19 response and the National Health Policy, while also offering support following an earthquake last year which caused damage in the country.
Dr Kluge welcomed the proposal to increase the health budget significantly compared to 2020, while encouraging increased public investment in the health system. Universal Health Coverage (UHC) has been placed at the centre of the country’s National Health Policy – increasing UHC is a central part of “United Action for Better Health”.
In a meeting with President Ilir Meta, Dr Kluge highlighted the ongoing response to COVID-19. This offered the chance to explain the work being undertaken by WHO, as well as recognizing the efforts made by the government in protecting the health system from being overburdened earlier this year, while also preparing for future increases in COVID-19 patients.
Furthermore, Dr Kluge expressed his appreciation to Albania for participation in the Solidarity trial and COVAX facility, working towards global, equitable access to potential COVID-19 vaccines.
Health-care workers
During the country visit, Dr Kluge visited a hospital caring for COVID-19 patients, expressing his admiration for the courage and determination of health-care workers.
“I would like to thank you for the great job that you are doing, but I would also like to thank your families because they suffer as well when you are working day and night. We have to fight the pandemic in the hospitals, but also at home, in the communities and at the primary health centres,” said Dr Kluge.
The Regional Director also thanked the health-care workers of the infectious disease department at Mother Theresa University Hospital Centre for being part of the Solidarity trial, pointing out that it is 1 of 500 hospitals worldwide which are participating in the trial. Dr Kluge emphasized that it is important to share knowledge, not only for Albania but for the whole world.
Albania has seen a scaling up of 4 health facilities as treatment centres for COVID-19, as well as increasing the salaries of health professionals who have been treating patients with the disease.
Partnerships for health
Working together with partners is an important part of delivering on the EPW.
A highlight of the visit was the meeting with the European Union (EU) Ambassador to Albania, Luigi Soreca. Common ground on strengthening health systems, stronger engagement in the Balkans, and support to the EU accession process of Albania was discussed.
During the visit, Dr Kluge also met with United Nations Resident Coordinator, Fiona McCluney, discussing joint efforts on COVID-19, elevating health on the political agenda and further strategies to support the Ministry of Health and Social Protection in Albania.
The visit also offered the opportunity to meet with the Tirana-hub of the Global Shapers network. The Global Shapers are a community of socially driven young people from across the globe who have been working with WHO/Europe to monitor rumours, address myths and share evidence-based information on COVID-19.
During this meeting, Dr Kluge highlighted the importance of young people as partners in helping stop the spread of COVID-19, including motivating peers. The need for including and listening to young people, particularly on matters of global health which directly affect them, is crucial to strengthening the work of WHO/Europe.
The law meant to tackle political Islamism in France should not target religion
The resurgence in attacks by radical Islamists in France, home to Europe’s largest Muslim population, has rekindled fierce debates about Islam, secularism, and discrimination. The deplorable assassinations in October 2020 of Samuel Paty, a teacher, and three Catholics in the Basilica of Nice have accelerated the political will of the authorities to adopt a law meant to tackle some of the root causes of Islamist terrorism.
The proposed law announced in October by the President of the Republic and the Minister of the Interior was often titled ‘law on separatisms’, in the plural, while other times it is in the singular form. This was not a mistake, an inaccuracy or a hesitation about spelling or grammar. It reflected the current uncertainty of whether to take the risk of identifying the problem as a religious one and to exclusively target one religion: Islam.
According to the French authorities, a specific group of Muslims are said to separate themselves from the historical majority of society and from its values in a dangerous manner, for example by rejecting scientific truths such as the evolution theory or by contesting the Holocaust.
To avoid the accusation of Islamophobia and concerns about religious discrimination, the government planned to include other religious groups, especially ones labelled ‘sectes’, to instrumentalize them as an alibi of its good faith. All the while, authorities would continue ignoring some very closed Jewish communities. The inherent flaw with this approach is that the security threat is considered religious in nature, which it is not.
A few days ago, the French authorities made the draft law and its new title public. It has changed entirely and is now the “Draft Law Strengthening Republican Principles”. Its scope is much wider than what had been announced, but it still targets separatism. The Council of State has begun examining it.
The source of the problem that France is attempting to solve is a political ideology: radical Islamism. It is not Islam.
Radical Islamism’s objective is to impose a theocratic governance in Muslim minds whether they are in Muslim majority countries or not. This is accomplished by instilling its ideology in Muslim families, parents, and children, even before school education.
The enemy to combat is not a religion or some religions and their disciples, but a political project. If the French authorities persist in singling out an entire religious community as a threat, they will make the work of radical Islamism all the easier.
Therefore, the law should not target Islam as a religion, but should instead tackle political Islamism, in particular Salafism and its organisations such as the Muslim Brotherhood and its satellite associations.
In line with this objective, about 50 suspicious mosques have been closed since the appointment of Gerald Darmanin as Minister of the Interior in July 2020. However, closing ‘suspicious’ mosques is not a solution and is in fact counterproductive. Such a restrictive measure angers the Muslims who are deprived of their right to collective worship, which is a violation of the international standards on freedom of religion or belief. It’s not ‘mosques’ that disseminate extremist ideas, but rather the individuals in leadership roles in some mosques who instrumentalise religious teachings for political purposes. Certain imams and preachers, who have been identified by the authorities for a very long time, behave as political militants instead of providing faith-building to their communities. The draft law must combat them, not the religious community they belong to.
The draft law sets the fight against radical Islamism at the religious level when it should only be carried out at the ideological and political one instead. Other religious or spiritual communities and other categories of believers have nothing to do with this political militant activism and should not be targeted.
The French government’s plan is to present the draft law to the Council of Ministers after it has been finalized on the basis of the remarks of the Council of State. The choice of the date of 9 December 2020 will coincide with the anniversary of the 9 December 1905 Law which regulates the relations between state and religions in France.
All religions should feel concerned by this law. Indeed, several vague concepts in the draft law such as ‘behaviours threatening human dignity’ and ‘psychological pressures’ may open the door to many abuses in the implementation of the law on other religious groups as well.
Moreover, an article of this law provides that if any member of a group is considered to have acted in violation of a point of the law, it will allow the ban of the whole association by the Council of Ministers.
It is to be hoped that the Council of State will keep in mind the guidelines of the OSCE/ ODIHR about freedom of religion or belief and the Venice Commission recommendations and will contest these questionable provisions.
From the launch of a new centre for health emergency preparedness; the establishment of a scientific advisory board to help identify policy priorities during pandemics; and the formation of a regional tripartite joint secretariat to coordinate One Health action against antimicrobial resistance (AMR); to preparing for COVID-19 vaccine deployment and availability; and restructuring WHO/Europe, progress is being made on all fronts to deliver the European Programme of Work (EPW) – “United Action for Better Health”.
At a meeting of the Standing Committee of the Regional Committee (SCRC), WHO/Europe’s governance board, on 18 November 2020, Dr Hans Henri P. Kluge, WHO Regional Director for Europe, detailed the wide range of activities undertaken by WHO/Europe since the EPW was adopted by Member States in September 2020.
Key among these developments are:
operationalization of the WHO European Centre for Preparedness for Humanitarian and Health Emergencies in Istanbul, Turkey, which serves as the regional centre for emergency preparedness and provides technical expertise to improve capacity-building and operationalize selected International Health Regulations (2005) core capacity areas;
detailed discussions during the second meeting of the Pan-European Commission on Health and Sustainable Development, which is to provide policy recommendations on health and care systems, building on experiences during the COVID-19 pandemic; thematic working groups have been set up so that commissioners can explore specific areas such as the economic outlook, innovation and digital transformation, and the role of science in policy-making; a scientific advisory board has also been established to support the Commission’s work;
establishing a regional tripartite joint secretariat together with the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO) and the World Organisation for Animal Health (OIE) to coordinate One Health action against AMR across the WHO European Region;
preparation for COVID-19 vaccination deployment and availability, including discussions with the European Commission, the introduction of an online platform to monitor national-level preparedness, and guidance on the prioritization of population groups to receive the COVID-19 vaccine in the Region;
finalizing a comprehensive restructuring of WHO/Europe, with a comprehensive functional review of all divisions, following the appointment of a new Executive Council.
After the Regional Director’s overview of the activities of WHO/Europe, and an update on the COVID-19 situation in the Region by the Regional Emergency Director, Dr Dorit Nitzan, members of the SCRC reviewed the initial draft programme for next year’s session of the WHO Regional Committee for Europe. They also considered the tasks of committee subgroups that will work in the areas of WHO/Europe governance, work at country level and financing.
New York Gov. Andrew Cuomo and Bishop Nicholas DiMarzio of Brooklyn, N.Y., are seen in this composite photo. (CNS composite/Shannon Stapleton, Reuters, and Gregory A. Shemitz)
ALBANY, N.Y. — <a href="https://www.governor.ny.gov/news/governor-cuomo-announces-restaurants-bars-other-sla-licensed-entities-must-close-person-service" rel="nofollow">New York Gov. Andrew Cuomo’s order</a> limiting the size of a congregation for in-person services at Catholic churches and other houses of worship does not target religious gatherings on “the basis of their beliefs,” but is based on “the documented fact of their COVID-19 super-spreader potential.”
This is the argument New York Attorney General Letitia James, representing Cuomo, laid out in the state’s response to the Brooklyn Diocese’s Nov. 12 filing with the U.S. Supreme Court seeking an injunction against the governor’s order.
The diocese is challenging Cuomo’s order on religious freedom grounds. The state of New York filed its response by the Nov. 18 deadline set by the court.
The diocese said the order’s provisions “violate the free exercise clause” of the First Amendment by limiting “in-person ‘house of worship’ attendance to 10 or 25 people” but allowing “numerous secular businesses to operate without any capacity restrictions.”
“There is nothing more important than the safety of our parishioners. That is why we have worked diligently to implement strict COVID-19 safety rules that go above and beyond state requirements,” Brooklyn Bishop Nicholas DiMarzio said in an October statement, after Cuomo issued his executive order.
When he issued his order Oct. 6, James said, Cuomo “went to great pains” to say it was not aimed at religion and was “about mass gatherings. One of the prime places of mass gatherings are houses of worship.”
“The diocese’s interest in holding indoor religious gatherings of potentially hundreds of people … does not outweigh the need to prevent” the spread of COVID-19 in already severely affected areas, said James, who told the Supreme Court the diocese’s application for a writ of injunction “should be denied.”
On Nov. 16, Agudath Israel of America, an umbrella organization that represents affiliated Orthodox Jewish congregations across the U.S., and two Orthodox congregations in New York City filed an emergency application with the high court for an injunction to stop Cuomo’s order. The state had to file a response by Nov. 20.
In the meantime, the Brooklyn Diocese announced Nov. 18 that its 69 Catholic schools and academies in Brooklyn and Queens, the two New York boroughs that make up the diocese, will continue in-person learning.
The announcement came in response to Mayor Bill de Blasio’s decision to close New York City public schools indefinitely starting Nov. 19.
“I am frustrated that the mayor’s announcement was made as Catholic schools and academies throughout Brooklyn and Queens were dismissing our students” for the day, said Thomas Chadzutko, diocesan superintendent of Catholic schools. “I want to make it clear to parents, teachers, staff and students that the mayor’s announcement only pertains to New York City public schools, and our schools will be open tomorrow (Nov. 19).”
He added, “We have worked tirelessly to ensure that our school community remains safe for everyone, and we will continue to ensure strict compliance with all health and safety protocols.”
At the moment it is a perception which will later be studied with the instruments of social science. In the meantime, with a global virus that holds the world under a veil of uncertainty, one thing is evident, “conflict is worsening everywhere”. This is the opinion held by one of the experts called by Pope Francis as a member of the Vatican Covid-19 Commission. Dan Plesch, director of the Centre for International Studies & Diplomacy at SOAS at the University of London, highlights the risk that the pandemic could trigger a “global war”. “A literal fight for the vaccine of survival in our communities”, he says, “must be prevented” and neither “is not the time to be making and providing weapons”. Rather, Dan Plesch states, “global society can save itself from terrible misery and enjoy safety and happiness by absorbing the contribution of Pope Francis’s Commission”.
You are part of the Vatican COVID 19 Commission, Pope Francis’ response mechanism to an unprecedented virus. What do you personally hope to learn from this experience? In what way do you think society as a whole can be inspired by the work of the Commission?
R. – I have absorbed wisdom and compassion from other Commission members. Global Society can save itself from terrible misery and enjoy safety and happiness by absorbing the contribution of Pope Francis’s Commission.
Pope Francis asked the COVID 19 Commission to prepare the future instead of prepare for it. What should be the role of the Catholic Church as an institution in this endeavor?
R. – Humanity is under a combination of threats accelerated by the impact of the virus, our very existence is in immediate peril therefore all dimensions of the Catholic Church must before all else work on these concrete and spiritual actions. Now is not the time to be making and providing weapons in an already collapsing international system.
What personal lessons (if any) have you derived from the experience of the pandemic? What concrete changes do you hope to see after this crisis both personally and globally?
R. – Personally, I have grown closer to my immediate family and friends freed from the treadmill of commuting.
Five years ago, a well-known American entrepreneur the new enemy could be invisible. Can an invisible virus provoke a war?
R. – Tensions, competition, hatred of foreigners, scape goats, incompetent leaderships all are made worse by the virus, if we escape unscathed we will be very fortunate.
The coronavirus crisis has brought not only individual but also national selfish attitudes. This type of nationalism sparks dangerous feelings of anger towards others, even if they too have a nationalist bent. History is unfortunately full of such examples that have led to conflicts. Does this risk exist today?
R. – Yes, we have a little time. The “volcanic” impact of the virus is still underway and the “tsunami” of social catastrophy is coming and must be robustly prepared for.
Inequalities are enormous. Take, for example, access to healthcare in various countries across the globe. Does the hypothesis of a vaccine that is not accessible to everyone entail the risk of conflict?
R. – A literal fight for the vaccine of survival in our communities must be prevented. The poor must be at the front of the queue.
Regarding those who today suffer from hunger: how willing are they to fight for access to healthcare? In various African countries, people say they prefer Covid to hunger. Could the combination of the two, pandemic and hunger, be a dangerous spark?
R. – There is a terrible choice that is unnecessary. The selfishness of the wealthy is a theft.
What parts of the world are at greater risk of war breaking out because of Covid? in the rich and divided north, or the poor and hungry south?
R. – Conflict is worsening everywhere, a slide to global war is too hard to think about for too many.
Pope Francis and Antonio Guterres, the Secretary-General of the UN, have launched a ceasefire appeal wherever there are conflicts in the world, in order to foster the fight against the coronavirus. Why have these appeals not been heeded?
R. – The short-sighted power interests continue as usual, and the wealthy feel immune to the distress influencing the lives of the many.
Several times, even well before the pandemic, Pope Francis has often spoken of a “third world war fought piecemeal”. So, in your opinion, should we fear another worldwide conflict provoked by an invisible virus, or has one already effectively begun that we should be dedicating ourselves to extinguishing?
Haroon Moghul has contributed essays to a half dozen major news outlets, written three books, served on the Advisory Committee on Cultural Engagement at the Metropolitan Museum of Art in NYC, and helped establish the Islamic Center at NYU. Impressive. But Moghul would say, “My bio makes me seem like I do a lot of things, but I really just sit on Zoom calls all day. Although that’s everyone nowadays.”
On one of Moghul’s most recent Zoom calls, he was joined by some twenty-odd Etown students and faculty for a conversation hosted by the Bowers Writers House. He wished to discuss something old.
Moghul made a name for himself when he landed in the unenviable niche as a spokesman for Islam — right after 9/11. Appearing on news shows to help calm the waters during a disastrous time for Muslims in America, the pundit’s mental and spiritual states underwent great strain. Of being in the public eye in the capacity he was, Moghul would “not recommend it.”
To cope with pressure and prejudice, Moghul sought relief through writing. His book, a tongue-in-cheek memoir called “How to Be a Muslim,” was in some ways an exercise of self-healing. Moghul discussed this work at the Bowers Writers House six years ago.
Not catching a break, Moghul’s book tour coincided with another all-eyes-on-the-Muslims event, the 2016 election. Without missing a beat, the writer began to pen a second book to unwind from the stressful scrutiny of selling the first. This volume, titled “The Future of Islam is in Your Hands,” works to introduce Islam to a mainstream audience.
Moghul’s presentation at the Bowers House focused on a single chapter which summarizes a story from the Quran for a modern audience. The author found great comfort in this narrative during the low points of his spiritual journey. While he hoped to do the story justice, he noted this was the first time he hadtested his material on a public audience. And so, the guinea pigs listened to the tale.
Moghul explained that before our world began, a jinn named Iblis was one of God’s most pious servants. So holy was Iblis that he prayed to live forever so that he could live to pray forever. But then God created Adam. Iblis became jealous when God selected Adam to become his representative on Earth. Iblis exacted revenge and planned to convince God that Adam could not be his representative. From here, the story follows about the same beats as its biblical version with Iblis assuming the form of the snake in the Garden of Eden.
The principle difference is in God’s reaction. As opposed to the original sin idea — that humanity is sullied forever because their distant ancestors ate an apple — the God of Islam takes a more forgiving approach. While he still casts Adam and Eve out of paradise and onto Earth, he forgives them. He admires that they took the initiative to admit their mistake and beg for forgiveness. In trying to prove Adam could not be God’s representative, Iblis proved the opposite.
This, says Moghul, is the difference between man and the devil. Man can admit his wrongdoing and grow. The devil cannot. Moghul takes this story to heart. He believes nobody is perfect but that we are capable of improving ourselves and others — to become better citizens, better Muslims, or just better human beings.
This was an enlightening lecture. That Allah was more forgiving with Adam than the Christian God was something that passed by many. It probably passed by most Americans in the last two decades where our dialogue of the whole religion has been consumed with raving terrorists and stereotyping fear-mongers. Moghul says the intent of his career has been to inject some calmer ideas into a conversation that has become “shrill and harsh.”
Moghul’s event, a wonderful example of theological storytelling, also points to the under-appreciated role of the Bowers Writers House. This little building on the far, far end of campus (you have to walk across a field to get there) hosts scholars from any and every discipline. The director of the house, Dr. Jesse Waters, says his job locating and talking with such a vast array of interesting people, makes him, “the luckiest guy on the planet.”
Dr. Leigh Shannon Haley-Mize, interim director of the Center for Global Understanding and Peacemaking, enjoyed Moghul’s lecture and is grateful to Waters for booking the writer.As Etown reorganizes to focus on interdisciplinary work, Shannon Haley-Mize believes the highly generalist Bowers Writers House has “great potential” to bring departments together. She looks forward to collaborating with Waters in the future. With any luck, perhaps this partnership between departments can help bring a little of Moghul’s quest for self-improvement to the College.
