Trumped up Religion

It is with hesitation that I write this article. Anytime someone tries to psychologize or explain the behavior or thought of another group of people, it is dangerous territory. Even historical explanations of contemporary events can be condescending. However, I feel like I am on solid enough ground to attempt an explanation of one interesting finding this election season.

According to polls, in five short years white evangelicals have flip-flopped on whether an elected official who commits an immoral act in their personal life can still behave ethically and fulfill their duties.

White evangelicals are, statistically speaking, more likely to vote for Trump. In a recent poll Trump leads Clinton 55% - 2% among likely white evangelical voters.

The obvious conclusion is the shift in the above graph benefits the 2016 Republican nominee more than the Democratic.

So how did we get to this situation? How did Republicans get such loyalty that they have changed their mind on the value of Presidential candidates personal morality so drastically in five years?

To tell the story we have to go into the history of religion and politics in America.

Kevin M. Kruse has documented a large portion of this history in his book One Nation Under God: How Corporate America Invented Christian America.

For the purposes of this post, he traces a trajectory from the 1930s to the Eisenhower administration till the 1970s of increasing ties between evangelicalism and conservative (Republican) economics.

But that is of course not the whole story. In 1973, the Supreme Court ruled that abortion was legal in all 50 states. Segregationists did use this to their advantage and racism was a catalyst, but the average evangelical cared more about the spike in legal abortions (at least eventually).

Morality, especially pro-life and pro-nuclear hetero-normative family values, became another corner stone of the development of conservatism.

No one was more instrumental in coalescing conserve values than Ronald Reagan, President from 1981-1989.

He spoke the language of the evangelicals better and more consistently than virtually any other President in American history. (Note: Possible exceptions, Eisenhower and Carter).

So much so that Falwell and Weyrich, the leaders of the conservative group the Moral Majority, declared in 1989 that the religious right is solidly in place.

The Republican party had solidly coalesced conservative economics, conservative morality, and conservative politics.

The failed campaigns by Pat Robertson and Mike Huckabee showed that America did not actually want a President who was from the religious right.

However, it took the formation of the The Tea Party in 2009 to expose cracks in the unity achieved during the Reagan era. The Tea Party was largely (but not exclusively) libertarian. They were subtly opposed to traditional Reaganesque conservative politics.

For example, Reagan was for amnesty; Trump is not. And Trump got Tea Party support partly because of his immigration policies.

Abortion is still a motivator for Trump supporters, especially as there is currently a Supreme Court seat empty. But personal morality was/is not a central concern for the Tea Party, nor as we see by the graph above is it for the average evangelical in 2016.

This was a relatively quick (and MAYBE unplanned) bait and switch from personal faith and morality a mix of libertarian and conservative policies.

Spotlight on Islam I: The Study Qu'ran Part I

I received a copy of the Qu'ran from Kashif at the Islamic Society of Boston. But for further study, I was recommended The Study Qu'ran. I have only attempted one other review of a primary religious text and that did not go well as I mentioned in the prelude to this series. (I will attempt to learn from my previous mistakes).

I feel more comfortable with the Qu'ran, mostly because I have been given very ample guidance; though any errors are my fault as I have had and continue to have very good instruction at The Islamic Society of Boston.

Hermeneutics:

The Qu'ran is the holy text for Muslims; however, like literally any text, we have to understand the context before we can understand the text itself. The ideas below are my presentation of many ideas presented in The Study Qu'ran.  

When we read a book we always come to it with a context. In our lives we have accumulated previous knowledge that effects our interpretation of any text. Sometimes the context hinders understanding. For instance, a complete unwillingness to question the context of my whiteness would make it difficult to understand a book like Zami: A New Spelling of My Name.  

Hermeneutics is a term that implies: understanding your context as it relates to the text or object of analysis, that interpretation comes from a context, and that a text engages with and changes your context. 'Hermeneutics' is often used in scholarly discussions of holy texts especially the Bible. 

Texts can be analyzed with multiple hermeneutics (methods of interpretation). 

For instance, using the hermeneutic of intellectual history, Sense and Sensibility can be interpreted as a fictional representation of the struggle between Enlightenment and Romanticism. Alternatively using a different hermeneutic, such as social history, you could interpret Austen's novel through and with the mores of pre-Victorian England. There are obviously other hermeneutics as well. 

In case you think I am comparing the Qu'ran to fiction (I'm not, but more on that later) non-fiction texts can be interpreted in multiple ways as well. Hegel can be read as an example of theodicy (an answer to the problem of evil; evil is necessary to progress into a better society) or Hegel could be read as an influence on Karl Marx. There are obviously other ways Hegel could be read as well.

All of these examples are in English or German (that is to say Western) and are largely not that . I ask you to be willing to open your context a bit more to understand the Qu'ran. 

Qu'ran as Word of God:

According to Muslims, the Qu'ran is the verbatim Word of God, revealed to Muhammed through the Archangel Gabriel. It was revealed in Arabic and changed the culture of the Arabic world. Even the language and words of the Qu'ran are considered a miracle and holy. 

For Muslims, visual representations are not allowed as they are idols, especially in comparison to the actual holiness of the Qu'ran and God, who is one, infinite and all encompassing.  

How does this compare to other religions? In Hinduism, visual representations are very important. In fact Hindus often encounter the Ramayana and the Mahabhrata through television and other visuals. In Islam the sounds and words of the text is important; images are hindrances and are idolatrous. 

Scene from the Bhagavad Gita part of the Mahabhrata. The god Krishna is counseling Arjuna.

Cultures that focus on language are going to have much different emphases in their preferred artistic expression. 

Calligraphy is a common art form, but painting is not; sculpture is very rare. And passages from the Qu'ran are often included as an ingredient of art. 

An Example of Islamic Calligraphy

Almost everyone who is raised Muslim will have at least part of the Qu'ran memorized. Recitation of the Qu'ran is an important part of the Islamic community. Proper recitation follows specific rules and there are professional reciters called Qari. Thus, hearing the Qu'ran is an important aspect of Islamic culture.  

Hermeneutics of The Study Qu'ran:

Many of the introductory essays of The Study Qu'ran cover similar territory with one addition. 

The lead editor of The Study Qu'ran sought out Muslim scholars of their holy text who all espouse a version of traditional Islamic hermeneutics (methods of interpretation), against fundamentalist and modernistic hermeneutics.  

According to these essays, fundamentalists interpret the Qu'ran very literally, often neglecting the context of the Qu'ran (i.e. when it was revealed, lessons from the hadith (the sayings of Muhammad), and the Sunnah (the actions, approvals, and other sayings of Muhammad). These are often used to give specifics to sometimes vague passages in the Qu'ran. 

Modernists avoid traditional hermeneutics by using methods from the contemporary era. For instance, some modernists interpret the Qu'ran through contemporary science. 

Thus, The Study Qu'ran is a commentary from a particular context as it asks us to be mindful of our own context; this is not hypocrisy, but rather awareness. When you create a text you create it from a context. The Study Qu'ran is directed both to the Western reader and to the Muslim. 

Thus, the commentaries that appear in The Study Qu'ran argue from and with traditional Islamic hermeneutics, while presenting the translated text of the Qu'ran. 

For the Western Reader:

This series is directed at the Western reader. First, if you are reading an English translation you are not reading the Qu'ran, just a translation of it. Again it's the actual Arabic words that matters, though many of the ideas are able to be translated into English. 

The editors take care to mention that they are considering the 'fields of meanings' of the Arabic and English words as they translate the Qu'ran. What makes the translation more difficult is that the Qu'ran is considered to be an infinitely deep text that encompasses everything.   

So how do you read a translation of the Qu'ran with commentaries (i.e The Study Qu'ran)? Well, there are multiple ways. 

It could be read straight through or by starting with the Surahs in the end. You could use one of these methods while reading the commentary. Finally, you could follow the internal citations of The Study Qu'ran to attempt to understand the Qu'ran as a whole or what it says on a particular topic. 

If you are familiar with the Bible you will notice a few differences in their shared stories. The essays in The Study Qu'ran argue that these discrepancies come from older oral traditions that continued to exist at the same time as the Bible.

Final thought:

Many holy books are actually a library. The Bible has various poems, wisdom literature, and legal pronouncements. The Bhagavad Gita, just one section of the Mahabhrata, has moral pronouncements, family rivalry culminating in a civil war, and metaphysics.  

Holy texts, in my opinion, are neither fiction nor non-fiction. They don't fit into modern classification schemes. They are poetry, reflections on the natural world, parables, a look into our past, for some, a guidance to our future, and more, all in one binding.