Switzerland Bans Minarets

How will your church respond to the growing influence of Islam?

Nov 30th, 2009 | By Skye Jethani | Category: Church, Culture

The peaceful, neutrality-loving citizens of Switzerland voted last week to ban the construction of minarets in their country-a decision not welcomed by the country’s 400,000 Muslims. For those unfamiliar with Islamic architecture, minarets are the steeple-like towers attached to mosques from which the call to prayer is broadcast.The referendum was not a matter of preserving the alpine skyline, and some are saying it shouldn’t be interpreted as a restriction upon religious freedom either. Rather it’s the latest battlefront in Western Europe between advocates of traditional European culture and the recent influx of non-European immigrants.

While many leaders in Switzerland’s government and churches opposed the ban, the measure won with a significant 57.5 percent of the vote. This is from The Washington Post:

But backers of the measure said from the outset they were not seeking to prevent Muslims from practicing their religion. The goal, they explained, was to prevent what they described as the growing political impact of Switzerland’s Muslim minority, which they said is symbolized by minarets pointing into the sky; women wearing full veils; and observance of sharia, a Koran-based legal system.

“The minaret is the power symbol of political Islam and sharia law,” Walter Wobman, a People’s Party member of parliament, told the Reuters news agency at a rally near Bern, the federal capital.

Is the backlash in relatively liberal Switzerland a glimpse of what may soon happen in the US? I know there are segments within the church here that would support a ban on the construction of mosques or minarets as well as restraining the public display of any non-Christian religious symbols. At the same time they might argue passionately for the public display of crosses, the Ten Commandments in courthouses, and the prominent positioning of Nativity scenes in the public square.

I once believed this desire for the public recognition of “Judeo-Christian values” was rooted in people’s faith in Christ. I don’t think that anymore. The case in Switzerland reveals that the issue may not be one of religion but culture. The referendum in Switzerland was not fueled by a desire to keep Christianity central, but to keep Muslims marginalized. The citizens recognized that Islam isn’t simply a set of theological beliefs, but a worldview that carries with is (like all worldviews) cultural implications.

The question for those of us in the American church, particularly in leadership, is how will we interpret the growing population of Muslims in our country? Are they a threat to traditional American values needing to be kept on the margins? Are they spiritual competition in the marketplace of faith needing to be out-marketed? Are they political and cultural enemies to be outlawed? Or are they our neighbors whom Jesus calls us to love?

If your city or town was voting on a referendum to ban minarets in your community, what would you do? If you are a church leader, what would you tell your congregation? If the imam from the local mosque came to you for support against the referendum, what would you say to him? If your city was voting to ban church steeples would your response be any different?

minarets



4 comments
Leave a comment »

  1. Very interesting. I think it is not inappropriate for any nation or culture to ask immigrants to adjust in some way to their new surroundings. I wonder if there are restrictions in Muslim countries about building churches or temples of other foreign religions. OK. I don’t wonder. Of course there are. And I don’t have a problem with that. But then as an evangelical protestant I don’t place a high value on the public display of symbols because I believe strongly in contextualization and in heart oriented worship. A theology I commend to my commandment posting fellow Americans…

  2. This isn’t a religious question, it is political. “The minaret is the power symbol of political Islam and sharia law.” The flash point in American-Islamic relations will not come over religious symbols or buildings, but over the rule of law. You can believe what you want concerning religion, but everyone is subject to the same law in America, even (supposedly) the President. I can’t imagine a sub-culture/community in America living under sharia law without some backlash by the government.

  3. The Swiss shouldn’t restrict minarets; they should restrict Muslim immigration.

    The crux of the issue is concern over Islamic influence on Swiss culture, and I believe their worry is completely justified. Though a long way from a majority, any time Muslims are dominant in a culture, minority cultures suffer. Some would argue Muslims also suffer.

    It’s tough to say these things as a Christian, but I see no other option.

  4. As an advocate of religious pluralism in the U.S. public square, it pains me to agree with MT in the case of Europe’s political/religious tug of war with burgeoning Islam in (relatively) secularized Europe.

    It’s difficult to compare small pockets of (moderate) Muslim minorities in religious America with the rapidly ascending form of fundamentalist Islam in places like Switzerland.

    Perhaps the central question is not whether certain types of religous structures should be banned, but whether Sharia law is compatible with liberal democracy or vice versa.

    I’d be curious to hear from Christian brothers and sisters in Switzerland to see if they view the rapid influx of Muslims as “spiritual competition in the marketplace of faith” or something more serious.

    Regarding Syke’s hypothetical scenario, how likely would it be for an imam from a local mosque in Western Europe to extend an invitation to Christians asking for their support against the referendum?

Leave Comment