You have commented 339 times on Rantburg.

Your Name
Your e-mail (optional)
Website (optional)
My Original Nic        Pic-a-Nic        Sorry. Comments have been closed on this article.
Bold Italic Underline Strike Bullet Blockquote Small Big Link Squish Foto Photo
Africa: Subsaharan
Will African Christians Raze Mecca in a Couple Generations?
2004-06-03
From Asia Times On Line
Dear Spengler,

If Mecca is ever razed by an invading army, it will not be Israeli or American or European, but it will march up from Africa south of the Sahara - though it would take a couple of generations more for the impending Christian transformation of Africa to proceed that far. If I were an Arab, I would be looking anxiously south. The current crisis in the Anglican Communion is revealing. Elan and freshness of thought are actually with the conservatives. The prominent role of the Nigerian Archbishop Akinola is also telling (his province contains many more practicing Anglicans than Britain and North America combined).

The challenge from Islam may produce a number of surprising and unexpected responses in the West, of greater significance than the military conflict. Interesting times ahead.

Sincerely,
Douglas Bilodeau
Bloomington, Indiana, USA


Dear Douglas,

Thank you for bringing this issue forward. Prof Philip Jenkins of Pennsylvania State University predicts an "historical turning point" in Christianity, "one that is as epochal for the Christian world as the original Reformation". In the October 2002 edition of The Atlantic Monthly, he wrote, "In the global South (the areas that we often think of primarily as the Third World) huge and growing Christian populations - currently 480 million in Latin America, 360 million in Africa, and 313 million in Asia, compared with 260 million in North America - now make up what the Catholic scholar Walbert Buhlmann has called the Third Church, a form of Christianity as distinct as Protestantism or Orthodoxy, and one that is likely to become dominant in the faith." (Click here for the article.)

This may look like a "Third Church" to Catholic eyes, but what I perceive is the proliferation of Anglo-Saxon, that is, American, Christianity, albeit in the patchwork raiment of local peoples. Growth of church membership in the southern hemisphere concentrates in denominations of American or British origin. Observes Prof Jenkins, "it is Pentecostals who stand in the vanguard of the Southern Counter-Reformation. Though Pentecostalism emerged as a movement only at the start of the twentieth century, chiefly in North America, Pentecostals today are at least 400 million strong, and heavily concentrated in the global South. By 2040 or so there could be as many as a billion, at which point Pentecostal Christians alone will far outnumber the world’s Buddhists and will enjoy rough numerical parity with the world’s Hindus."

Samuel Huntington’s characterization of American civilization as "Anglo-Protestant" has merit, but his shot goes astray. No predestination prevents other peoples from adopting the Anglo-Protestant principle as their own. Of the 6,000 languages spoken on the planet, two go extinct every week (Why radical Islam might defeat the West, July 8, 2003). We are well into a Great Extinction of the Peoples, such as has not occurred since the collapse of Rome. Just as the endangered peoples of the 4th century embraced Christianity as a promise of immortality beyond the grave of their culture, so the peoples of the South flock to the same Cross. Seventeen hundred years ago they acknowledged the authority of Rome. Today the source of Christian authority is America.

The secularists who dominate American foreign policy seem to think that they can export the shell of the American system, namely its constitutional forms, without its religious kernel. It seems that the peoples of the South know better. It is no stranger that America’s hold over the world’s imagination should find religious expression first and political expression later, than that radical Protestants should have founded America in the first place. The new Christians of the South will surprise us for ill as well as good. Such matters of the spirit lie beyond anyone’s capacity to predict and well may have huge strategic impact, as you observe.

Spengler
Posted by:Mike Sylwester

#23  LOL! Rainman indeed! Get rid of the pork chop LH and it may stop for a month.
Posted by: Harpi   2004-06-03 7:12:12 PM  

#22  There is also a major showdown brewing in South America. In recent years, both Islam and Evangelical Christianity have been making major gains in that formerly Catholic continent.

The Islamos have the tacit support of many local elites and the satanic forces with which these elites are aligned: the UN, NGOs, and, most critically, *spit* activists *spit* from the US and European media/academic axis.

At the very heart of the demonic enemy's propaganda empire, the anthropology departments of American universities, the assault on Christian proselytizing in Latin America has become a major priority for professors and their subordinate devils. At the same time, these monsters have nothing but praise for Islam, often citing shariah law as an effective antidote to "cultural genocide", their Orwellian term for what enlightened people would call the marketplace of ideas. Islam and left authoritarianism are the big losers in this market, Christianity is the winner.
This is really the common ground between the two great strains of idolatry and satanic power in the present world, Islam and the media/academic Axis.
Posted by: Atomic Conspiracy   2004-06-03 7:00:41 PM  

#21  They already are doing so.
Posted by: rkb   2004-06-03 5:27:32 PM  

#20  I'm hopeful that one day Christians in Africa will send missionaries to Europe and America.
Posted by: eLarson   2004-06-03 4:43:23 PM  

#19  Libhawk, dude, Robert C. is right--you need to take a chill pill or a walk.
You're bordering on turning into the Rain Man of RB (i.e. not making sense anymore and just babbling).
Posted by: Jen   2004-06-03 3:23:27 PM  

#18  1. Nigeria includes a considerable number of pagans, who are on the christian side of this fight
2. Yes, they allow state option on sharia.
3. They also have ethnic differences, and economic differences, such as lead to conflict across the continent. Its not at all clear which is central in the conflict of the last few days
4. And the US troops in the Horn are there with the cooperation of the muslim govts of Djibouti, and Eritrea, BOTH of which support the US in Iraq, BTW, as most non-muslim states in africa do not.
5. You still have not given me a shred of evidence that the leaders of Nigerian christians attribute their problems to Saudi.
Posted by: Liberalhawk   2004-06-03 3:21:02 PM  

#17  "Again most of the hundreds of millions of african christians do NOT live in countries with large numbers of muslims. Again if the christian churches in Nigeria see Saudi Arabia as responsible for their problems with muslims, id be interested in seeing evidence that they think this. Or that they advocate a harder line on Saudi. Im not saying they shouldnt, i just see no evidence that they do."
Oh, and you're quite wrong about this: Nigeria is in a fight for its soul right now between Islam and Christianity!
The country is divided pretty much half and half between the 2 religions and they even let the northern and Muslim part of the country practice shari'a.
This has caused ALOT of violence and threatens to cause a lot more.
It got so bad last week that President Obasanjo had to declare martial law and called out the army.
And the U.S. has sent troops (don't know how many and what kind) to the Horn of Africa, because it promises to be Al Queda's Second Front, along with Thailand.
Posted by: Jen   2004-06-03 3:14:39 PM  

#16  I "drug" the gay clergy/gay marriage into it, because you said that the only African Christian leader you said you'd heard about was Archbishop Tutu.
I pointed out the controversy in the Episcopal Church because many African Episcopal leaders and ministers have spoken out for months about the problems in African Christianity of which this report speaks.
IOW, I was pointing out clearly that you're just not paying very close attention to world events except that which proves and confirms your own viewpoint.
If you don't know much about a subject, stop advertising your ignorance and slow down your rush to prove to RB readers how vast your "knowledge" allegedly is.
Posted by: Jen   2004-06-03 3:09:55 PM  

#15  LH -- take a chill pill. I took the image from the original article -- and the commentary on it -- as just, well, imagery. Not for predictions of an actual event.
Posted by: Robert Crawford   2004-06-03 3:05:55 PM  

#14  why did you drag gay marriage into a thread that had nothing do with it? And i didnt first mention the UN, YOU did, in response to my mentioning Tutu.

Again most of the hundreds of millions of african christians do NOT live in countries with large numbers of muslims. Again if the christian churches in Nigeria see Saudi Arabia as responsible for their problems with muslims, id be interested in seeing evidence that they think this. Or that they advocate a harder line on Saudi. Im not saying they shouldnt, i just see no evidence that they do.

Posted by: Liberalhawk   2004-06-03 3:02:45 PM  

#13  Libhawk, make the leap if your brain won't explode!
African religious leaders are adamant about eschewing the modern Liberal agenda regarding homosexual clergy (and I'm sure marriage) because they're trying to live according to the dictates of the Bible and be *real* Christians!
The Church, as this story points out, is under attack on every front, but no more so than in Africa, where millions are being converted and won over to Christ and Christianity while they deal with modern issues like AIDS and sexual promiscuity.
I don't know how you drug US foreign policy and the UN into it, but you did.
While the clergy, ministers and priests are fighting to keep African Christians in the Church, it is besieged by the increasingly militarized Muslims there who prefer to convert the "natives" with the sword and the gun.
Posted by: Jen   2004-06-03 2:48:50 PM  

#12  i didnt ask about gay priests, i asked about Iraq. Opposed to gay priests != supportive on US foreign policy. In fact, Oppposed to gay priest!= opposed to the UN. Why do y'all think that the particular alignments of US domestic politics extend to West Africa? As far as i know the Greek Orthodox primate of Jerusalem doesnt have much use for gay marriage, either, but hes still a terror apologist.

(and on the other hand there are gays in muslim lands who hate the fundies, and there are gay Israelis who are victimized by terrorism)
Posted by: Liberalhawk   2004-06-03 2:42:39 PM  

#11  Liberalhawk, once again, you're proceeding to a conclusion with too little info and of the wrong kind.
Bishop Tutu is a Mandela/UN apologist and not one to be looked to for Christian leadership.
In point of fact, many African Episcopal leaders have stood up to the Archbishop of Canterbury over the "gay priest" scandal and they've been cited recently in lots of articles about that.
Many countries in Africa, particularly Nigeria and Sudan, are in the fight of their lives with Islam for souls and for their countries!
If they want to burn down Mecca, who could blame them?
Me, I'd like to provide the matches and gasoline!
Posted by: Jen   2004-06-03 2:35:41 PM  

#10  indeed, the only prominent anglican churchman in africa ive seen quoted on the middle east is bishop Tuto (hes anglican, not methodist, right?) and not to positive effect, from my point of view. Yet we manage to minimize the support for our position from Kuwaits, albanians, bosnians and central asians cause theyre MUSLIM. But we assume the best about african christians, cause theyre CHRISTIAN. Feh!
Posted by: Liberalhawk   2004-06-03 2:31:17 PM  

#9  why would a bunch of Nigerian anglican and Kenyan pentecostals go off to attack Mecca? Dont they have enough problems of their own. You guys are living in quite a fantasy world. Hell, has the Anglican primate of Nigeria even endorsed the US-UK position in Iraq- if he has, its news to me.
Posted by: Liberalhawk   2004-06-03 2:24:25 PM  

#8  True Mike, but other muslims would go to Saudi to defend it with or without their governments permission. This includes military units. I have to wonder though, if the Arabs took any African-female slaves, would it be ironic that a good number would contract HIV and die?
Posted by: Charles   2004-06-03 2:20:43 PM  

#7  ..InshAllan. One thing that should be noted is that the Saudi Army, though tough and very professional, can't function well as a unit, and may very well crack under a horde-type attack.
The other thing is that not a single muslim soldier from anywhere else on the planet will ever be sent to defend it. The other muslim nations are deeply resentful of the Saudis because they are the Guardians of the Holy Cities, and they'll happily watch as they go down.

Mike
Posted by: Mike Kozlowski   2004-06-03 2:16:05 PM  

#6  So, the new African Christian ruler of Hejaz will have a staff of lobotomized eunuchs to perform menial tasks. Because the women will now be unveiled, the native male population will not be able to handle the view otherwise.

Yikes.
Posted by: BigEd   2004-06-03 12:35:12 PM  

#5  Raze mecca! What a novel idea. Once gone that puts an end to one of the pillars. That along with the targeting of jihadie clerics and you have a road map to peace.
Posted by: Lucky   2004-06-03 12:14:14 PM  

#4  
Will African Christians Raze Mecca in a Couple Generations?
How about next week?
Posted by: Barbara Skolaut   2004-06-03 12:09:36 PM  

#3  Bad news for Allan! All praise be to him.
Posted by: Infidel Bob   2004-06-03 11:43:16 AM  

#2  they need to start doing more in Nigeria especially in retaining the oil-producing region as predominantly christian
Posted by: Frank G   2004-06-03 11:38:36 AM  

#1  Interesting idea -- best hope for Africa then would be evangelicals spreading Christianity, personal liberty and democracy across the continent. That would certainly bind the knickers of the average African jihadi.
Posted by: Steve White   2004-06-03 11:30:15 AM  

00:00