A Call to Action: Women, Religion, Violence, and Power

by Jimmy Carter

  The Coptic authors proceed to explain that over time men assumed dominion in the home because they were better suited to hunting, carrying heavy loads, and physically protecting the weaker women and children. When machines were introduced, women found them to be “fearful and dangerous.” Men thus used the power of machines to establish their own strength and authority, though in fact the power of the machine was replacing that of man, for the responsibility of running a machine does not depend on physical strength. At this point women woke up and discovered the rights they had lost through their own passivity, revealing the truth of the original statement that God’s blessing was granted at the creation to men and women equally and that authority was given to them equally, on condition that they work together in harmony and unity toward a single aim. Equality was proven when women began to be involved in the struggle for a living, learning, and employment and attained the levels of achievement that had for long ages been reserved by men: “The success women attained in every field returned to them all the rights they had surrendered in the false belief that they were created inferior to men.”

  In the explanation of Paul’s letter to the Galatians quoted above, the treatise says, “He deliberately uses the words ‘male’ and ‘female’ rather than ‘man’ and ‘woman’ to eliminate all aspects of differentiation or discrimination. . . . When a woman is united with Christ she is exactly like a man who is united to Christ, and if a man is united to a woman in Christ, they become in Christ one perfect human being. . . . The Holy Spirit, moreover, does not eliminate the beauty of the first creation, but removes its pitfalls and restores it to its original perfection.”

  In many places the New Testament describes how Jesus ignored the lowly place of women among Jewish leaders, such as the pious Pharisee who “gave thanks to God every day in his morning prayers that he was not born ‘a woman or a leper or an unclean gentile.’ ” Christ forgave the woman sentenced to death for her adultery, treated as an equal the Samaritan woman who was an outcast among her own despised people by drinking from her cup and sending her into the village as one of the first known evangelists, and appreciated the loyal support of a group of women who “followed him wherever he went and served him in every way they could.” Referring to Jesus’ followers, the religious pamphlet adds, “The appearance of the women and their going about openly among the crowds, leaving their homes, was a significant event in Israel since it represented an overthrow of the Jewish traditions concerning women and formed part of the official complaint lodged against Christ, which led to his crucifixion: ‘We found this man perverting our nation.’ ” (Luke 23:2)

  When the followers of Christ were suffused with the Holy Spirit at the time of Pentecost, the Bible says, “All these with one accord devoted themselves to prayer, together with the women and Mary the mother of Jesus, and with his brothers.” (Acts 1:14) The treatise declares:

  The coming of the Holy Spirit upon the women in the same way as He came upon the men, and his filling the women in the same way as He filled the men, is the first permanently effective indication that women had entered into grace and were to be granted equal rights with men in the Kingdom of God. . . . God was aware of how degraded, isolated and abused women had become throughout the ages of the natural law, when man was living by simple skills and was of limited understanding. He Himself took the initiative in order to strike off the fetters that human society had placed on women’s hands as on the hands of slaves.

  In the Coptic booklet the apostle Paul’s declarations that women should keep their heads covered, not cut their hair or wear jewelry, and refrain from speaking out during public worship or assuming a position of leadership are explained as admonitions to address local disturbances by rude and unruly women at services in some particular early church. Paul is also quoted in his letter to the Romans, where he lists heroines of the early Church. It is the same phrase, fellow-worker, that Paul uses to describe his associates in the apostolic mission, including Timothy, Titus, and Epaphroditus. In another letter Paul mentions Euodia and Syntyche and adds, “I ask you also, true yokefellow, help these women, for they have labored side by side with me in the Gospel together with Clement and the rest of my fellow workers whose names are in the book of life.” (Philippians 4:2, 3) The Coptic treatise adds, “It is noteworthy that the names of Euodia and Syntyche come before the name of Clement, who became pope of Rome.”

  This interesting document concludes its analysis of the status of women by rationalizing the policy of the Orthodox Church about excluding women as priests: “So just as the Apostles’ wives went with them, having a mission complementary to that of the Apostles in serving the women, just as prophetesses arose in the church alongside the men prophets according to the Gift of the Holy Spirit, though to serve the women, and just as the older women served the church in the same way as older men, and all these with no special ordination rite, so we find alongside the deacons, deaconesses to teach the women also with no special rite of ordination. That is to say, for every service carried out by men there is a service allotted to women.” To me, this argument ignores the fact that women prominent in the New Testament ministered to both men and women and leads to the impractical conclusion that there should be separate churches for male and female worshipers, with women apostles, priests, deacons, and bishops leading the worship services attended by women and girls. There are good arguments to be made on both sides of the question of women being equal in serving God, but there can be no justification in extrapolating this to discriminate against and abuse women in our secular society.

  I am sure this theological debate will continue about the proper treatment of women, within the Coptic Church and throughout Christendom, and I am equally certain that the words and actions of Jesus Christ will eventually prevail.

  We call on all religious leaders throughout the world to take a firm stand and collectively commit to promoting the basic rights of girls and women. This will constitute one of the most important movements in religious history, leading to peace and well-being in our societies. It is a responsibility of any sincere religious leader who seeks to make this world a better place to live. The Carter Center can help bring leaders and people of conscience together for this purpose in a way that will sustain these difficult but necessary efforts to advance equality, justice, dialogue, and peace—across cultures, nations, and continents to assure that our efforts are universal.

  SHEIKH MUHAMED CHÉRIF DIOUP, ISLAMIC RIGHTS SPECIALIST AND CHILD PROTECTION OFFICER, TOSTAN, SENEGAL

  We had several Jewish participants in our Human Rights Defenders Forum, and they described some of the same historical trends and sharp debates among Jewish religious scholars who interpret Holy Scriptures in different ways. The status of the ultra-Orthodox, or Haredim, has changed dramatically since I first visited Israel as governor, primarily because of their high birthrate. They now comprise about 10 percent of the total population and, if current rates continue, are expected to increase to 30 percent in the next three decades. Although some originally refused to become involved in politics, they later formed a number of parties with increasing influence, and in Israel’s special form of parliamentary government it has been necessary to include these relatively small groups to give the governing leaders a majority in the Knesset (parliament). This became a matter of sharp debate in the election of January 2013, when the party led by a newcomer to politics, Yair Lapid, won a surprising second place. One of his most popular campaign promises was to eliminate some of the special privileges of the Haredim. To some degree, this issue had been called to public attention by the Haredim’s policy of restraining the freedom of women.

  The ultra-Orthodox in Israel have always been given tacit permission to control their own neighborhoods, and when they lived in relatively small and clearly defined areas there were few problems. But as their ranks have swelled and different Jewish religious groups have become more integrated within communities, the Haredim’s enforcement of strict dress codes, even among
passersby on the streets and students entering and leaving schools, has resulted in verbal and physical attacks on women and girls who dress conservatively but in ways that the more strict sects of Haredim consider indecent. Large posters warn women to dress “modestly,” and on some bus lines non-Orthodox women are forced to sit in the rear seats or are sometimes forbidden to ride at all. Visual images of women or girls are not permitted, and some ultra-Orthodox men consider it improper to have a nonrelated woman near them or to hear a woman sing or speak in public. This has caused some highly publicized confrontations, especially among the few who are serving in the military. Some women’s insistence on worshiping at the Wailing Wall has caused additional personal conflict and resulted in cases now being decided in the judicial system.

  These encounters among Israelis of different religious groups have grown increasingly serious, and many are now being resolved through the courts, with some early decisions seeming to be in favor of women’s rights. The basic issues are still in doubt and can be resolved only by seminal laws that are being considered by the Knesset concerning the special status of ultra-Orthodox believers and how they are permitted to practice their faith among neighbors who have different beliefs. More women candidates have sought and won seats in the Knesset and now make up 23 percent of its members. There are no women included in the lists of the ultra-Orthodox parties and little indication that wives or daughters in these families are demanding more political or personal rights. It is interesting that 60 percent of these women are in the workforce, while only 45 percent of the men have jobs. There are special government grants to help these devout families support themselves.

  As with Christians and Muslims, Jews have come to realize that the basic rights of women are strongly affected by how men choose to interpret and apply the meaning of Holy Scripture. When our mothers, wives, sisters, and daughters are considered both different and inferior in the eyes of the God we worship, this belief tends to permeate society and everyone suffers.

  It is difficult for me, as an American Christian, to understand how deprivation of women’s rights in Muslim countries can best be confronted and alleviated. At our Human Rights Defenders Forums we listen attentively to participants from different religions and geographical areas, but we refrain from any involvement in their affairs unless requested. One of the most competent and courageous contributors has been Zainah Anwar, who is a defender of human rights for women in Malaysia. She has concentrated on the actual teachings of the Koran and emphasizes that the sacred text of Islam is her most powerful asset. “I am outraged that my religion is distorted and used to justify patriarchy and the discrimination and oppression of women. This totally contradicts what I believe in a just God and a just Islam,” she says.

  The problem of using a distorted interpretation of Holy Scripture to repress women has been addressed only recently in Western nations, but it began in the 1970s in Malaysia, where women were beginning to receive higher education and become economically independent, and some religious leaders saw this as a threat to their authority. That is when Anwar became active. In 1988 she organized a group called Sisters in Islam (SIS), which petitions the government to reform sexist laws, organizes major conferences, trains women on existing laws and how some contradict their religion, and publicizes their beliefs and activities. They revisit the original teachings of the Koran to prove there is no basis in Islam for viewing women as inferior to men. Anwar explains, “A bunch of us decided that it was really important to find out whether our religion is oppressive toward women, because that’s not how we’ve been brought up to understand Islam.”

  These women decided not to depend on human rights techniques that were used in the West but to concentrate on the original teachings of the Koran and its message of equality. SIS members point out, “In Islam, everyone is treated equally, and no one comes before the other, and certainly nobody comes from anybody’s broken rib. Creation is always spoken of in the Koran in terms of pairs—both are created equal and both are created at the same time, and one is not the derivative of the other.” It is not surprising that SIS has earned trust and gratitude in other Islamic countries, as pointed out by Rakhee Goyal, executive director of the Women’s Learning Partnership, a nongovernmental organization that works with Muslim women in many regions: “They are at the forefront of study not just in Malaysia but also within Muslim majority societies in looking at how we define the role of women vis-à-vis Islam.”

  When appropriate, SIS supplements its emphasis on religious law with arguments based on international human rights covenants, national laws, and local social issues. Anwar and her SIS associates are working actively in northwest Africa, Indonesia, the Philippines, and Singapore and have played an important role in the work of The Carter Center. She says, “There is a whole variety of opinions, different interpretations, a multiplicity of laws—this splendid diversity that is part of the Muslim heritage provides us with an incredibly rich source of information, scholarship, and opinion that we can work with to promote our belief in an Islam that upholds the principles of justice and equality, of freedom and dignity.”

  The work of SIS has aroused opposition in Malaysia, where recent Islamic laws have tended to restrict women’s property rights, make polygamy and divorce easier for men, and subvert efforts to thwart domestic violence legislation. This presents Malaysian women with a dilemma, says Anwar. “The choice before us is: Do we accept what these kinds of mullahs are saying, or if we want to be a feminist, do we then reject our religion? For us, rejecting our religion in order to become a feminist is just not a choice. We want to be feminists, and we want to be Muslim as well.”

  She emphasizes that it is counterproductive for SIS to be too closely associated with Western ideals or organizations:

  That [kind of support] doesn’t help because those who are not familiar with our work see us as the kind of group that the West wants to develop in Muslim countries. We are not a product of the West; we are a product of our own society and the challenges that we face within our own society. One way for the West to play a productive role is to encourage comprehensive scholarly inquiry into the Islamic canon by developing stronger transnational links between universities. Some of the best work by Muslim scholars is occurring at colleges in the United States and Europe, and these researchers need to be given a platform to speak in places where moderate Islam is under threat. The scholarship that is emerging in the West now is extremely important, and to expose that scholarship, that new thinking, to Muslims in Muslim countries is important.

  Upon returning to Ghana after participating in the Carter Center human rights conference, “Mobilizing Faith for Women,” we were asked: “Are you on a genuine mission to empower women and make them more productive to support their husbands and families while in marriage? Or are you being paid by your white masters to advance the course of women who develop to become unmanageable, uncontrollable and independent from men?” This is very worrisome because it illustrates the fundamental reasons why we decided to struggle for the rights of the disadvantaged in our communities. The solution is advocacy and training at the top level of Islamic leadership in developing countries. Assisting Imams, Islamic scholars, Muslim chiefs, and opinion leaders as well as youth leaders in this way will advance understanding of the struggle for the empowerment of women and all of us who believe in human rights for all.

  ALHAJI KHUZAIMA, EXECUTIVE SECRETARY, ISLAMIC PEACE AND SECURITY COUNCIL IN GHANA

  I was pleased when Pope John Paul II accepted my invitation to visit me during his tour of America in 1979. I remembered that when John Kennedy was campaigning to be the first Catholic president, his critics had predicted that the pope would be a guest in the White House, and in my welcoming speech I remarked that this dire prediction had finally come true. During his stay the pope and I had a long and quite relaxed and informal conversation, as he had requested. We talked about political issues with which I was dealing at the time, a possible visit by him to Jerusalem and t
he West Bank, religious developments in China in which we both were involved, and our mutual hope that growing competition between Roman Catholics and evangelical Protestants in Latin America would be without rancor.

  When I brought up the subjects of the use of condoms to combat sexual diseases or the status of women in the Church, I found him surprisingly conservative concerning any possible changes in Church practice. I asked him if the Catholic Church had gotten stronger or weaker in the previous five years or so, and he replied that it dipped following Vatican II because of the dramatic changes made in Church liturgy and the opinion of many believers that the Church had become too liberal, but he thought it was regaining influence and strength, at least in some parts of the world, as more traditional values were reemphasized. I was aware of the plea of some American nuns to the pope of “the possibility of women . . . being included in all ministries of the church” but didn’t pursue this matter further.

  Made up of about 80 percent of Catholic nuns in the United States, the Leadership Conference of Women Religious (LCWR) was formed in 1956 with approval from the Vatican “to assist its members [to] carry out public services of leadership to further the mission of the Gospel of Jesus Christ in today’s world.” Its other avowed goals are to foster dialogue and collaboration within the Church and in the larger community and to strengthen relationships with groups concerned with the needs of society, thereby enhancing the potential for effecting change. This relatively progressive commitment was reinforced by the results of Vatican II (1962–65), which was convened under Pope John XXIII, when some of the more stringent controls of the Vatican were loosened and there was an implication that the Church would accommodate more influence from sisters. In 1979, during the visit of Pope John Paul II to the United States, the president of LCWR made a formal plea for more involvement of women. Since then, most Church leaders have continued to emphasize “bedroom” issues, including abortion, birth control, and homosexuality, and have also affirmed a rigid adherence to the traditional role of women that excludes their admission to the priesthood or other positions of authority. It is estimated that there are now only about a third the number of nuns in America as during the time of Vatican II, but they remain active and have made some specific requests for consideration.