On Islam [Hilaire Belloc]

There remains, apart from the old Paganism of Asia and Africa, another indirect supporter of Neo-Paganism: a supporter which indeed hates all Paganism but hates the Catholic Church much more: a factor of whose now increasing importance the masses of Europe are not yet aware: I mean Islam. Islam presents a totally different problem from that attached to `ny other religious body opposed to Catholicism. To understand it we must appreciate its origin, character and recent fate. Only then can we further appreciate its possible or probable future relations with enemies of the Catholic effort throughout the world.

How did Islam arise? It was not, as our popular historical textbooks would have it, a "new religion". It was a direct derivative from the Catholic Church. It was essentially, in its origin, a heresy: like Arianism or Albigensianism.

When the man who produced it - and it is more the creation of one man than any other false religion we know- was young, the whole of the world which he knew, the world speaking Greek in the eastern half and Latin in the Western- the only civilised world with which he and his people had come in contact - was Catholic. It was still, though in process of transformation, the Christian Roman Empire, stretching from the English Channel to the borders of his own desert.

The Arabs of whom he came and among whom he lived were Pagan; but such higher religious influence as could touch them, and as they came in contact with through commerce and raiding, was Catholic - with a certain admixture of Jewish communities. Catholicism had thus distinctly affected these few pagans living upon the fringes of the Empire.

Now what Mahomet did was this. He took over the principal doctrines of the Catholic Church - one personal God, Creator of all things; the immortality of the soul; an eternity of misery or blessedness - and no small part of Christian morals as well. All that was the atmosphere of the only civilisation which had influence upon him or his followers. But at the same time he attempted an extreme simplification.

Many another heresiarch has done this, throwing overboard such and such too profound doctrines, and appealing to the less intelligent by getting rid of mysteries through a crude denial of them. But Mahomet simplified much more than did, say, Pelagius or even Arius. He turned Our Lord into a mere prophet, though the greatest of the prophets; Our Lady - whom he greatly revered, and whom his followers still revere - he turned into no more than the mother of so great a prophet; he cut out the Eucharist altogether, and what was most difficult to follow in the matter of the Resurrection. He abolished all idea of priesthood: most important of all, he declared for social equality among all those who should be 'true believers' after his fashion.

With the energy of his personality behind that highly simplified, burning enthusiasm he first inflamed his own few desert folk, and they in turn proceeded to impose their new enthusiasm very rapidly over vast areas of what had been until then a Catholic civilisation; and their chief allies in this sweeping revolution were politically the doctrine of equality, and spiritually the doctrine of simplicity. Everybody troubled by the mysteries of Catholicism tended to join them; so did every slave or debtor who was oppressed by the complexity of a higher civilisaton.

The new enthusiasm charged under arms over about half of the Catholic world. There was a moment after it had started out on its conquest when it looked as though it was going to transform and degrade all our Christian culture. But our civilisation was saved at last, though half the Mediterranean was lost.

For centuries the struggle between Islam and the Catholic Church continued. It had varying fortunes, but for something like a thousand years the issue still remained doubtful. It was not till nearly the year 1700 that Christian culture seemed - for a time - to be definitely the master.

During the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries the Mahommedam world fell under a kind of palsy. It could not catch up with our rapidly advancing physical science. Its shipping and armament and all means of communication and administration went backwards while ours advanced.

At last, by the end of the nineteenth century, more than nine-tenths of the Mahommedan population of the world, from India and the Pacific to the Atlantic, had fallen under the government of nominally Christian nations, especially England and France.

We no longer regarded Islam as a rival to our own culture. We thought of its religion as a sort of fossilised thing about which we need not trouble. That was almost certainly a mistake. We shall almost certainly have to reckon with Islam in the near future. Perhaps if we lose our Faith it will rise.

For after this subjugation of the Islamic culture by the nominally Christian had already been achieved, the political conquerors of that culture began to notice two disquieting features about it. The first was that its spiritual foundation proved immovable; the second that its area of occupation did not recede, but on the contrary slowly expanded.

Islam would not look at any Christian missionary effort. The so-called Christian governments, in contact with it, it spiritually despised. The ardent and sincere Christian missionaries were received usually with courtesy, sometimes with fierce attack, but were never allowed to affect Islam. I think it true to say that Islam is the only spiritual force on earth which Catholicism has found an impregnable fortress. Its votaries are the one religious body conversions from which are insignificant.

This granite permanence is a most striking thing, and worthy of serious consideration by all those who meditate on the spiritual, and, consequently, the social, future of the world.

And what is true of the spiritual side of Islam is true of the geographical. Mahommedan rulers have had to give up Christian provinces formerly under their control: especially in the Balkans. But the area of Mahommedan practice has not shrunk.

All that wide belt from the islands of the Pacific to Morocco, and from Central Asia to the Sahara desert and south of it - not only remains intact but slightly expands. Islam is appreciably spreading its influence further and further into tropical Africa.

Now that state of affairs creates a very important subject of study for those who interest themselves in the future of religious influence upon mankind. The political control of Islam by Europe cannot continue indefinitely: it is already shaken. Meanwhile the spiritual independence of Islam - upon which everything depends - is as strong as, or stronger than ever.

What affinities or support does this threat of Islam promise to the new enemies of Catholic tradition? It will sound even more fantastic to suggest that Islam should have effect here than to suggest that Asiatic paganism should. Even those who are directly in contact with the great Mahommedan civilisation and who are impressed, as all such must be, by its strength and apparently invincible resistance to conversion, do not yet conceive of its having any direct effect upon Christendom. There are a few indeed who have envisaged something of the kind. . .

I will maintain that this very powerful, distorted simplification of Catholic doctrine- for that is what Mahommedanism is - may be of high effect in the near future upon Christendom; and that, acting as a competitive religion, it is not to be despised.

No considerable number of conversions to Islam from Christianity is probable. I do not say that such a movement would not be possible, for anything is possible in the near future, seeing the welter into which Christian civilisation has fallen. But I think it improbable, and even highly improbable, because Islam advances in herd or mob fashion. It does not proceed, as the Catholic religion does, by individual conversions, but by colonisation and group movement. But there are other effects which a great anti- Catholic force and the culture based upon it can have upon anti-Catholic forces within our own boundaries.

In the first place it can act by example. To every man attempting to defend the old Christian culture by prophesying disaster if its main tenets be abandoned, Islam can be presented as a practical answer.

"You say that monogamy is necessary to happy human life, and that the practice of polygamy, or of divorce - which is but a modified form of polygamy - is fatal to the state? You are proved wrong by the example of Islam."

Or again "You say that without priests and without sacraments and without all the apparatus of your religion, down to the use of visible images, religion may not survive? Islam is there to give you the lie. Its religion is intense, its spiritual life permanent. Yet it has constantly repudiated all these things. It is violently antisacramental; it has no priesthood; it wages fierce war on all symbols in the use of worship."

This example may, in the near future, be of great effect. Remember that our Christian civilisation is in peril of complete breakdown. An enemy would say that it was living upon its past; and certainly those who steadfastly hold its ancient Catholic doctrines stand today on guard as it were, in a state of siege. They are a minority both in power and in numbers. Upon such a state of affairs a steadfast, permanent, convinced simple philosophy and rule of life, intensely adhered to, and close at hand, may, now that the various sections of the world are so much interpenetrating one and the other, be of effect...

There is no reason why its recent inferiority in mechanical construction, whether military or civilian, should continue indefinitely. Even a slight accession of material power would make the further control of Islam by an alien culture difficult. A little more and there will cease that which our time has taken for granted, the physical domination of Islam by the disintegrated Christendom we know.

"I really liked the red wine part ... " I didn't. Sigh. Sorry to be a killjoy, but my father was an alcoholic, and inflicted so much suffering on us. The Catholic community was very tolerant of his drinking - they always are - and blamed us for not being "supportive" enough. I often wonder about the role of alcoholism in these sex scandals which have plagued the Church (and which are IMO, merely a reflection of wider social problems). There is a strong co-relation between substance abuse and sexual abuse, but I don't see anyone mentioning that. Probably, they want to appear "puritanical", like mentioning the link between deviancy (homosexuality) and sexual agression toward youths.

"but my father was an alcoholic"
I'm sorry you had to live through that. I don't think that was what Belloc was referencing. Jesus drank wine as did the Apostles. Jesus was accusd of being a drunk; so was the first Pope - see Peter at Pentecost telling the crowd it isnt even noon yet so how could they be drunk (my own standard is to not get drunk prior to lunch).
I think it true the European countries that Belloc referenced had a lower rate of alcoholism than does puritanical America with its either/or approach. Wine was a regular part of the Mediterranean life - still is - and The "Mediterranean Diet" calls for its wise use for "medical reasons." But, who wants to take the pleasure out of wine by saying "my doctor told me to drink 2 glases a day?"

The Bible both praises and cautions us about the use of wine. Nobody praises alcoholism or sin. Belloc certainly wasn't.
It is too often the case that one either abstains or gets drunk rather than being schooled in how to drink in moderation. I taught my kids at a young age how to drink. They always could have a drink at any time at any age and they went through High Schol without EVER drinking and driving or drinking to intoxication or drinking without us knowing it.
Temperance, in Catholicism, does not mean no alcohol.
It is the virtue that moderates the desire for pleasure. We are not Puritans nor are we Pagans. The wise use of wine IS a delight and Belloc is absolutely correct in sighting its healthy and happy use.

No considerable number of conversions to Islam from Christianity is probable...I think it improbable, and even highly improbable, because Islam advances in herd or mob fashion. It does not proceed, as the Catholic religion does, by individual conversions, but by colonisation and group movement.

I love Belloc for his astuteness, wit, and not infrequently, humor. But this essay stopped short of Central Asia. There is one country in the Far East that was herded into Catholicism by violent colonization. The cruelty of Spanish-Mexican colonizers was legendary, but the Philippines stood fast in its newly-found faith. ( The Philippines was an Islam-pagan country before Spain claimed it as colony.)

The irony of it is that nowadays Islam is making great headways into the main population centers and converting large groups of people into Islam. It's a question of economics. It's easier to become a migrant worker in Saudi and Kuwait if one converts into Islam, than - remain Christian and tries to immigrate into the U.S. or Canada or Spain. The economic situation is so bad that everybody it seems wants to leave the country for greener pastures.

But not to lose heart - a great majority of the people (80%) is still Catholic and more staunchly Catholic than ever before. Please pray for the Philippines.

Thanks for your kind reply on the alcohol question. I understand what you are saying, and I agree that wine drinking in Mediterranean nations appears to be a healthy part of the culture. My own antecedents were Irish, a culture with serious alcohol problems, handed on from one generation to the next. Every culture has its own problems, and its own virtues. I do not know why some nations (such as the Russians and the Irish) have so great a problem with alcohol. It may even be genetic. We are products of own enviroment, and, as a reaction to my childhood, I can't stand drinking. Even more, I can't stand the alcoholic lifestyle - the dependency, the abuse, the habit of falsehood. I think this may be the background to some of these clergy who have been disgraceful. Just my thoughts.

The first victims were six Franciscan friars and twenty of their converts, who were executed at Nagasaki on 5 February 1597.

Thanks, JMJ, for this post. The head of the Franciscans was San Pedro Bautista, OFM, who was the provincial general of the Franciscan mission in the Philippines. He is especially venerated in my hometown (Paete, Laguna, in the Philippines) because he laid out the map for the streets and set its boundaries.

There were at least three groups of Catholic martyrs persecuted in the Japan in the 15th century. The first group of martyrs as you described, was cannonized as "St. Paul Miki and companions" and given a feastday in the liturgical calendar as February 6.

The third (I think) group was composed of Dominican missionaries from Spain and France, along with Japanese native converts, and the Philippines' one (and so far, only) cannonized saint, San Lorenzo Ruiz, a married man, who served as sacristan. They were martyred between 1633 and 1637 at Nagasaki by decree of the emperor Tokugawa Yemitsu. San Lorenzo Ruiz and companions were cannonized - oh, maybe, 15 years ago by Pope JPII. Their feastday is September 28.

(See my personal page)

However, when Japan was re-opened to Western contacts 250 years later, it was found that a community of Japanese Christians had survived underground, without clergy, without Scriptures, with only very sketchy instructions in the doctrines of the faith, but with a firm commitment to Jesus as Lord.

This is a powerful witness to the depth and strength of faith implanted by the Franciscans in that community. Imagine ... 250 years WITHOUT clergy or communion.

This is a powerful witness to the depth and strength of faith implanted by the Franciscans in that community. Imagine ... 250 years WITHOUT clergy or communion.

Awesome how the Holy Spirit sustained them. I also read from (or probably heard in a sermon) by Fr. George Rutler that after 250 years, when western missionaries came upon this faithful group, the first questions they asked the missionaries were: (1) Are you in communion with the Pope? (2) Do you believe in the Real Presence of the Holy Eucharist? (3) Do you venerate the Blessed Virgin Mary? (4) Are your priests celibate?

If what Fr. Rutler says is true (and I have no reason not to think otherwise), then this particular group of Japanese faithful must indeed be demonstrating heroic faith! The seed of the blood of the martyrs have truly sprung out of arid land and bears much fruit.

I am thrilled to bits to see your personal page. You'll never know how much it delights me, a Secular Franciscan. ;)

Praised be You my Lord through our Sister, Mother Earth who sustains and governs us, producing varied fruits with coloured flowers and herbs.

And I am happy to read from your page the authentic verse in the "Canticle of the Sun" about "our Sister, Mother Earth," where St. Francis emphasized that the earth is "our sister" i.e., one of God's creations. Some liberals have all but erased the word "sister," thus selling out to radical environmentalists and feminist earth-worshippers who often misquote St. Francis for their own purposes.

Pax et bonum to you, too.

Our Lady of Piat, watch of the blessed children on the Phillipines and let us, here in America, emmulate their gentle piety!

Thank you, JMJ. Your prayer is sure to touch Our Savior's Heart.

Although Our Lady of Piat's apparition is not yet approved by the Bishops, I'm sure Our Blessed Mother is smiling at you for your great act of charity. I am not sure what "Piat" means, whether it's the name of the town where the reported apparition took place, or the name that the apparition herself revealed.

My guess is that "Piat" means "Fiat", referring to Mary's consent to become the Mother of God. Uh...the Philippine alphabet does contain the letters F and V, same with the "th" and "ch" sounds, so people just automatically say "p" in place of "f." Lol. Punny dat deyr kountri's neym istarts wid de f-sound. So, "Pilipins" instead of Philippines ;).

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.