Talk Islam

thabet 10:17 pm on April 13, 2010
Tags: history ( 151 ), Islam ( 451 ), muslims ( 433 ), political philosophy ( 10 ), politics ( 979 ), religion ( 521 ), saudi arabia ( 187 ), state ( 201 )   

• 

  razib, murtad fitri 2:46 am on April 14, 2010 Permalink

  d00d, you’re sssooo european!

  • 

    thabet 10:35 am on April 14, 2010 Permalink

    Europeans don’t think so =).

• 

  cbarwa 10:34 am on April 14, 2010 Permalink

  Wow, last time I heard the term ‘Ultramontanism’ was in A-level history! From what I remember though the theological arguements soon took a backseat to a struggle for influence between the French monarchy and the Habsburg backers of the Roman papacy.

• 

  Lawrence of Arabia 9:01 pm on April 14, 2010 Permalink

  Ultramontanism: First, who/what would be functioning as “Pope” in this scenario? And in the 19th-20th c., ultramontanism was strongly correlated, politically, with the idea that the state needed a strong, if not absolute, executive. Viz., Carl Schmitt’s Political Theology; or the defiant claims of the Pope concerning his own infallibility in the face of a growing republican opposition to the Papal States (in fact, the revolutionaries ran him out of Rome, effectively bringing an end to Vatican I). Both the political and religious sphere are founded on acts of power, represented by the exceptional Pope/Executive. So this model, if it could find a popish figure, would seem to envision a strengthening of authority to both ulema and some sort of theologically underwritten crown.

  The Tractarians were a catholicizing rebellion again Low Church trends both within the Anglican communion and amongst the Non-conformists (Protestants). They represented the extensive recovery of broad swaths of the tradition that Protestants had dismissed as pagan accretions to Christianity. The effect was largely pluralizing in its influence (though one ought not underestimate its defense of hierarchy and anti-egalitarianism), and resulted in the legalization of Catholicism in Britain (and the subsequent conversion of prominent figures like Newman). It continues on in figures like John Milbank’s Red Tory movement, affectionately known as Radical Orthodoxy.
  So, within Islam, would this represent something like a reaction against the salafi constriction of Islam: re-embracing the saints, mysticism and various forms of religious aestheticism? And would that result in the acceptance of a certain pluralism that was still tied to a recognition of the need for guides or hierarchs that can lead the average layperson (both politically and religiously)?

  And forget “European”…only a Brit would ask about an Islamic Tractarian Movement!

  • 

    thabet 10:30 pm on April 16, 2010 Permalink

    I put this up knowing you would be reading!

    I agree the UM ‘model’ is probably weak (perhaps too European!). The closest to a ‘popish’ figure would be a post-Ummayad/Abbassid caliph — a religious authority who was supported by a powerful (‘secular’) sultan.

    So, within Islam, would this represent something like a reaction against the salafi constriction of Islam: re-embracing the saints, mysticism and various forms of religious aestheticism? And would that result in the acceptance of a certain pluralism that was still tied to a recognition of the need for guides or hierarchs that can lead the average layperson (both politically and religiously)?

    Yes, I agree it would. Some (western-based) traditionalist Sunnis look a lot like Red Tories, and I am sure that Red Tories would have some respect for this sort of traditionalist Islam.

• 

  aziz 6:56 am on April 15, 2010 Permalink

  the problem though is that Saudi Arabia already has integrated itself as a religious authority, as has any state that declares itself to be an “Islamic State”. If muslims are going to agitate for removal of government authority from religion, then we have to let go of the idea of an Islamic State – and a Caliphate. Until we do, then we are opening the door to state regulation and definition of religion, by definition.

  I may not be understanding Tractarianism properly. Wouldn’t the Salafis be anti-Tractarian? They are the ones who are pruning Islam of its accreted “pagan” influences like the Protestants were. Tractarian-equivalent muslims would be opposed. right?

  • 

    Lawrence of Arabia 9:47 am on April 15, 2010 Permalink

    yes

  • 

    thabet 10:36 pm on April 16, 2010 Permalink

    I think this sort of tightly integrated religion + state approach leads to this sort of agitation…

• 

  aziz 7:02 am on April 15, 2010 Permalink

  also – note that the same thing is going on even in nominally “secular” states like Egypt. This is a good example:

  Al-Azhar has for centuries been famous for producing learned Sunni jurists and preachers. Today, however, the seminary, like the vast majority of religious institutions in the country, has been subjugated to government control, a key example of which was Mubarak’s selection of Al-Tayyib—a member of the president’s National Democratic Party—reiterating the regime’s line against the Muslim Brotherhood, Egypt’s most influential opposition group.