Belloc on Islam (2)

In his book The Great Heresies Hilaire Belloc explains that Islam spread because the social conditions were right.

Both in the world of Hither Asia and in the Graeco-Roman world of the Mediterranean, but especially in the latter, society had fallen, much as our society has today, into a tangle wherein the bulk of men were disappointed and angry and seeking for a solution to the whole group of social strains. There was indebtedness everywhere; the power of money and consequent usury. There was slavery everywhere. Society reposed upon it, as ours reposes upon wage slavery today. There was weariness and discontent with theological debate, which, for all its intensity, had grown out of touch with the masses. There lay upon the freemen, already tortured with debt, a heavy burden of imperial taxation; and there was the irritant of existing central government interfering with men’s lives; there was the tyranny of the lawyers and their charges.

To all this, Islam came as a vast relief and a solution of strain. The slave who admitted that Mohammed was the prophet of God and that the new teaching had, therefore, divine authority, ceased to be a slave. The slave who adopted Islam was henceforward free. The debtor who “accepted” was rid of his debts. Usury was forbidden. The small farmer was relieved not only of his debts but of his crushing taxation. Above all, justice could be had without buying it from lawyers... All this in theory. The practice was not nearly so complete. Many a convert remained a debtor, many were still slaves. But wherever Islam conquered there was a new spirit of freedom and relaxation.
It was the combination of all these things, the attractive simplicity of the doctrine, the sweeping away of clerical and imperial discipline, the huge immediate practical advantage of freedom for the slave and riddance of anxiety for the debtor, the crowning advantage of free justice under few and simple new laws easily understood— that formed the driving force behind the astonishing Mohammedan social victory. The courts were everywhere accessible to all without payment and giving verdicts which all could understand.

But there was another— and it is the most important cause. The fiscal cause: the overwhelming wealth of the early Mohammedan Caliphate. The merchant and the tiller of the land, the owner of property and the negotiator, were everywhere relieved by the Mohammedan conquest; for a mass of usury was swept away, as was an intricate system of taxation which had become clogged, ruining the taxpayer without corresponding results for the government.

The success of Mohammedanism had not been due to its offering something more satisfactory in the way of philosophy and morals, but, as I have said, to the opportunity it afforded of freedom to the slave and debtor, and an extreme simplicity which pleased the unintelligent masses.

Many Christians in America are scared of a take over by Islam. They assume that it will succeed by force. What they do not understand, is that if society continues in its current direction, Islam might be welcomed by people who have forgotten Christianity. Many of the conditions that Belloc described, already exist in the Western world.

• Justice is very expensive and only available to the wealthy.
• Many people are in bondage to debt.
• The precariat are slaves to zero-hour uncertain contracts.
• Taxation is excessive for everyone.
• Theological arguments seem distracting and pointless.
• Many Christians in America are more committed to military force and the right to bear arms than to the the incarnation and the Trinity.

The gospel has been ineffective against these things. Unless there is serious change, Islam might be welcomed in America, as it was in its early days in the Middle East.

Belloc on Islam

Although born in France, Hilaire Belloc was was a prolific writer in England during the early twentieth century. His Catholic faith had a strong impact on his works. One of his most important works was the The Great Heresies, published in 1938. One of the heresies that he discusses is Islam. His unique perspective was seeing Islam as a Christian heresy.

Mohammedanism was a heresy: that is the essential point to grasp before going any further. It began as a heresy, not as a new religion. It was not a pagan contrast with the Church; it was not an alien enemy. It was a perversion of Christian doctrine. Its vitality and endurance soon gave it the appearance of a new religion, but those who were contemporary with its rise saw it for what it was— not a denial, but an adaptation and a misuse, of the Christian thing.

Belloc suggests that Islam teaches the main Christian doctrines in an oversimplified form.

The very foundation of his teaching was that prime Christine doctrine, the unity and omnipotence of God. The attributes of God he also took over in the main from Christine doctrine: the personal nature, the all-goodness, the timelessness, the providence of God, His creative power as the origin of all things, and His sustenance of all things by His power alone. The world of good spirits and angels and of evil spirits in rebellion against God was a part of the teaching, with a chief evil spirit, such as Christendom had recognized. Mohammed preached with insistence that prime Christian doctrine, on the human side— the immortality of the soul and its responsibility for actions in this life, coupled with the consequent doctrine of punishment and reward after death.

He gave to Our Lord the highest reverence. On the day of judgment, it was Our Lord, according to Mohammed, who would be the judge of mankind, not he, Mohammed. But the central point where this new heresy struck home with a mortal blow against Christian tradition was a full denial of the Incarnation. Mohammed did not merely take the first steps toward that denial, as the Arians and their followers had done; he advanced a clear affirmation, full and complete, against the whole doctrine of an incarnate God. He taught that Our Lord was the greatest of all the prophets, but still only a prophet: a man like other men. He eliminated the Trinity altogether.

Mohammed never dealt with the inconsistencies that this produced.

Mohammed’s teaching never developed among the mass of his followers, or in his own mind, a detailed theology. Simplicity was the note of the whole affair. But the resemblance to Christianity was one of the reasons for its success.

Belloc’s Prophecy

Most people in the West assume that the struggle between Islam and Christianity is one that has to be won by force.

Joe Sobran explained in an article about the Catholic polemicist Hilaire Belloc written in 2001 why that is not so. In his book called The Great Heresies, written at time when Islam seemed backward and irrelevant, Belloc predicted that it would one day challenge the West again. He believed that a great Islamic revival, even in the twentieth century, was altogether possible.

Belloc saw Islam not as an alien religion, but in its origins as a Christian heresy, adopting and adapting certain Christian doctrines (monotheism, the immortality of the soul, final judgment) and rejecting others (original sin, the Incarnation and divinity of Christ, the sacraments). Its simple, rational creed had a powerful appeal to Arabs who had known only the arbitrary gods of grim pagan religions. It swept the Arab world, then made converts — and conquests — far beyond Arabia.

Christians had good reason to fear Islam… but because Islam has little attraction for Christians, the West has generally failed to grasp its appeal for others, its profound and permanent hold on the minds of believers...

Islam is a simple religion, easily understood by ordinary people. Its commandments are rigorous but few. When it conquered, its subjugated people often felt more liberated than enslaved, because it often replaced burdensome old bureaucratic governments with relatively undemanding regimes — and low taxes. As long as its authority was respected, Islamic rule was comparatively libertarian. It offered millions relief from their traditional oppression; for example, no Muslim could be a slave.

Belloc distinguishes sharply between Islam and such barbarous conquerors as the Mongol hordes of Genghis Khan. The Mongols were purely destructive; they were known for slaughtering whole cities and making huge pyramids of severed heads. Such savagery was alien to the Muslims. Where they conquered, daily life usually went on much as before and culture thrived.

Man, especially irreligious man, is apt to equate power and progress. Many of those who say America is “the greatest country on earth” really mean only that America has fantastic military might, capable of annihilating any other country — and some of them, at the moment, are in the mood to do some annihilating. To the pious Muslim this attitude seems crass and barbaric. He may conclude from it that the decadent West understands only one thing: force.

And would he be far wrong? Belloc admitted that the idea of a new Muslim challenge to the West seemed “fantastic,” but only because the West was “blinded” by “the immediate past.” Taking a longer view, he saw Islam, though inferior in material power, as having a great advantage: its religious faith was still strong, while the West was losing its religion and consequently its morale. He thought it entirely possible that Islam would catch up technologically, while he doubted that the West would undergo a spiritual revival.

Joseph Sobran noted back in 2001 that the West is still strong, but it is dying. Islam is still weak, but it is growing.

Most Christians learn about Islam from the ugly caricature that is presented on Western television news, so they do not understand it's appeal in many parts of the world. This is unfortunate, because you cannot beat something that you do not understand.