By David Dietz, *Like Muslims today, Mennonites once faced unfair discrimination* - York Daily Record -York, PA, USAMonday, September 13, 2010
"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances."
My ancestors were Anabaptists.
These people lived in Switzerland and Germany at the time of the Protestant Reformation [from 1517 - 16th century]. They were considered too radical by the state churches of the time, and so they were persecuted mercilessly by both Protestants and Catholics alike.
Early in the movement, there was one group of Anabaptists that took over the town of Münster in Northern Germany in a violent apocalyptic putsch. They were soon crushed by a coalition of surrounding authorities.
However, the vast majority of the Anabaptists were pacifist, and in no way a threat to public welfare. For about a century and a half, the Anabaptists were hunted down, tortured and executed across Europe. When the executions petered out in the mid-17th century, Anabaptists were still discriminated against in many places, with restrictions on where they could live and what property they could own.
The Anabaptists were some of the first people to advocate for the separation of church and state. Eventually, many of them emigrated to Pennsylvania, where they were afforded liberty beyond their wildest dreams. In Pennsylvania, Mennonites, Lutherans, Anglicans, Quakers,
Presbyterians all got along remarkably well. Here, there was no state church, and everyone pretty much saw the value in taking a "live and let live" approach. Sure, each church still thought they were right and sought to persuade their neighbors to convert, but no one was burning anybody at the stake.
At the time of the American Revolution, Mennonites (descendants of the European Anabaptists) and other historic peace churches such as the Amish, Quakers, and Brethren refused to participate in the war. They may have had sympathies one way or the other, but they could not in good conscience kill their fellowman. As a result of this non-participation, many were treated harshly, and some lost their property.
After the war, passions cooled, and Mennonites were relieved to see freedom of religion preserved in the new American government. Eventually, with the advent of the Constitution, both religious freedom and the principle of separation of church and state were enshrined in the First Amendment.
Today, we live in a nation far more pluralistic than the Penn's Woods of three centuries ago. Today we have more than just Catholics, Protestants and a few Jews and Mennonites. Now we have members of nearly every religious group in the world present in this country. In order for the nation to maintain its cohesiveness, now, more than ever, religious liberty must be upheld -- even when it's not popular. Especially when it's not popular.
So, some fundamentalist fanatical Muslims attacked the World Trade Center nine years ago and dealt a major psychic blow to this nation. Many still feel scarred as they venerate the site of the attack as sacred ground. Now, two blocks away, a Sufi Muslim group wishes to build a community center in the site of an old department store. And suddenly, the Sufi group gets lumped in with "the terrorists" and accused of being insensitive to this nation's wounded pride.
People say it's disrespectful for Muslims to build a "mosque" so close to Ground Zero, where other Muslims attacked America in 2001. Of course nobody has a logical rubric for how to determine where one should draw the line in New York for a totally unconstitutional no-mosque zone.
To accuse the Sufis of being somehow connected to the hijackers who attacked the World Trade Center is no more logical than the false comparisons many Europeans in the 16th century drew between the Mennonites and the Münsterites. They were completely different groups with completely different natures. But they both were labeled "Anabaptist" and lumped into the same category by prejudiced and ill-tempered outsiders.
How is it any different today? All Muslims are not alike. The vast majority are ordinary, peaceful, good people. The Sufis of the Cordoba Center are no more like the hijackers than the Mennonites were like the Münsterites.
If Americans really do want to discriminate against a religious minority, in direct contradiction to the tenets of the First Amendment, then let's consider the logical conclusion of such action. If Muslims are denied the right to build a community center/mosque two blocks from Ground Zero, then what is to stop us from next restricting where they may live? Muslim Ghettos, anyone?
Perhaps we could restrict their right to marry with non-Muslims as well. Then, perhaps we could make them wear a yellow crescent sewn on their jackets, and then we could force them to carry papers identifying them as Muslim. And then we could put them into concentration camps . . .
At some point, we'll have to pull down the Statue of Liberty and send her crashing into the sea. Because we really don't stand for her style of welcoming, strength-in-diversity democracy anymore.
David Dietz lives in Hellam Township.
"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances."
My ancestors were Anabaptists.
These people lived in Switzerland and Germany at the time of the Protestant Reformation [from 1517 - 16th century]. They were considered too radical by the state churches of the time, and so they were persecuted mercilessly by both Protestants and Catholics alike.
Early in the movement, there was one group of Anabaptists that took over the town of Münster in Northern Germany in a violent apocalyptic putsch. They were soon crushed by a coalition of surrounding authorities.
However, the vast majority of the Anabaptists were pacifist, and in no way a threat to public welfare. For about a century and a half, the Anabaptists were hunted down, tortured and executed across Europe. When the executions petered out in the mid-17th century, Anabaptists were still discriminated against in many places, with restrictions on where they could live and what property they could own.
The Anabaptists were some of the first people to advocate for the separation of church and state. Eventually, many of them emigrated to Pennsylvania, where they were afforded liberty beyond their wildest dreams. In Pennsylvania, Mennonites, Lutherans, Anglicans, Quakers,
Presbyterians all got along remarkably well. Here, there was no state church, and everyone pretty much saw the value in taking a "live and let live" approach. Sure, each church still thought they were right and sought to persuade their neighbors to convert, but no one was burning anybody at the stake.
At the time of the American Revolution, Mennonites (descendants of the European Anabaptists) and other historic peace churches such as the Amish, Quakers, and Brethren refused to participate in the war. They may have had sympathies one way or the other, but they could not in good conscience kill their fellowman. As a result of this non-participation, many were treated harshly, and some lost their property.
After the war, passions cooled, and Mennonites were relieved to see freedom of religion preserved in the new American government. Eventually, with the advent of the Constitution, both religious freedom and the principle of separation of church and state were enshrined in the First Amendment.
Today, we live in a nation far more pluralistic than the Penn's Woods of three centuries ago. Today we have more than just Catholics, Protestants and a few Jews and Mennonites. Now we have members of nearly every religious group in the world present in this country. In order for the nation to maintain its cohesiveness, now, more than ever, religious liberty must be upheld -- even when it's not popular. Especially when it's not popular.
So, some fundamentalist fanatical Muslims attacked the World Trade Center nine years ago and dealt a major psychic blow to this nation. Many still feel scarred as they venerate the site of the attack as sacred ground. Now, two blocks away, a Sufi Muslim group wishes to build a community center in the site of an old department store. And suddenly, the Sufi group gets lumped in with "the terrorists" and accused of being insensitive to this nation's wounded pride.
People say it's disrespectful for Muslims to build a "mosque" so close to Ground Zero, where other Muslims attacked America in 2001. Of course nobody has a logical rubric for how to determine where one should draw the line in New York for a totally unconstitutional no-mosque zone.
To accuse the Sufis of being somehow connected to the hijackers who attacked the World Trade Center is no more logical than the false comparisons many Europeans in the 16th century drew between the Mennonites and the Münsterites. They were completely different groups with completely different natures. But they both were labeled "Anabaptist" and lumped into the same category by prejudiced and ill-tempered outsiders.
How is it any different today? All Muslims are not alike. The vast majority are ordinary, peaceful, good people. The Sufis of the Cordoba Center are no more like the hijackers than the Mennonites were like the Münsterites.
If Americans really do want to discriminate against a religious minority, in direct contradiction to the tenets of the First Amendment, then let's consider the logical conclusion of such action. If Muslims are denied the right to build a community center/mosque two blocks from Ground Zero, then what is to stop us from next restricting where they may live? Muslim Ghettos, anyone?
Perhaps we could restrict their right to marry with non-Muslims as well. Then, perhaps we could make them wear a yellow crescent sewn on their jackets, and then we could force them to carry papers identifying them as Muslim. And then we could put them into concentration camps . . .
At some point, we'll have to pull down the Statue of Liberty and send her crashing into the sea. Because we really don't stand for her style of welcoming, strength-in-diversity democracy anymore.
David Dietz lives in Hellam Township.
[Picture: Dirk Willems saves his pursuer. Photo: Wiki.]
Posts
No comments:
Post a Comment