₦airaland Forum

Abimbola Adelakun

aadelakun@punchng.com

The Christian Association of Nigeria is, for the billionth time, raising sanctimonious alarms against the perceived Islamisation of Nigeria. This time, the charge is that the Federal Government wants to sneak in an “Islamisation” agenda through floating a Sukuk Islamic bond. CAN, with a righteous indignation, claims that Nigeria is a secular country and the government ought to be taking a neutral stance in matters of religion. It argued that that using legal mechanisms to promulgate the issuance of Sukuk is tantamount to a violation of the secular spirit of the Nigerian constitution and should, therefore, be nullified.

The Minister of Information and Culture, Lai Mohammed, reportedly responded that the bond was necessitated by the need for the inclusion of those whose religion opposes interest-yielding initiatives. Mohammed’s response — and the responses by Muslim Rights Concern and National Supreme Council for Islamic Affairs- shows that perhaps what Nigeria is dealing with, is not so much a religionisation but a lack of ideological anchor. Nigeria seems unable to decide which mammon it wants to worship — secularism (in its ideal sense) or multi-religiosity. Consequently, its liberalism is selective; calibrated to pander to a political base as it is politically expedient.



That said, it is almost laughable that CAN, after profiting from the politics of religion in Nigeria, now insists Nigeria is a secular country and religion must be divorced from our cultural life. The body could have been more credible if they made a case for secularism during the last administration and cautioned President Goodluck Jonathan when he was virtually making policy pronouncements from the pulpit each time he visited one church or another. Jonathan should have been “neutral” on matters of religion and not grant some church leaders, as it was reported by the media, waivers to import items into the country, or publicly kneeling before them, or ship them to Israel for prayer meetings on our national kobo. CAN’s president and Jonathan’s so-called spiritual adviser, Pastor Ayo Oritsejeafor, almost turned Aso Rock into an extension of his church. Did CAN consider such a blatant display of religiosity a form of Christianisation too? If a Muslim president had done all that Jonathan did, CAN would have yelled Islamisation!


CAN should know that both Christians and Muslims in Nigeria want the same thing — their religious culture being the dominant one. Historically, as the Abrahamic religions have a totalising tendency, both religions will relentlessly strive to usurp each other and their animosity will probably never cease. In Nigerian terms, it means that our elites will garner goodwill based on which religion they subscribe — or pretend to- and while in office, they will have to play the sides that guarantee them winning the next election.

The easier solution would be to argue for a society that is genuinely religiously neutral, but no one has managed to achieve that ideal just yet. Even the societies that once took it for granted that they have “killed” God have regressed to the primacy of religion to settle old scores. It turns out that God was never dead; he only went into a remission. While I understand that CAN needs to manage its own space in the polity, and their constant cries of “Islamisation” is a tactic of achieving this, I think they need to do better than this habit of crying wolf frequently.


CAN, indeed, has been fighting Islamisation for a while. It pushed back when, in 1986, the military dictator, Ibrahim Babangida, tethered Nigeria to the Organisation of Islamic Countries as, supposedly, an observer nation. In 2014, CAN asked people to fast and pray for 31 days to combat Islamisation. While it drew many examples from the tense political situation in the country — Boko Haram, Fulani herdsmen, the religious debacle in Osun State- it also pointed out that the governorship candidates of the South-West APC were “80 per cent Muslims” even though Christians constitute about half of the population in the region.

During the 2015 election, one of the biggest fears peddled around was that Candidate Muhammadu Buhari, if he became President, would Islamise Nigeria. Last year, a prominent lawyer in the country contended that the staffing of Nigerian security agencies with Muslims was proof that Islamisation was creeping into the country and would soon override our national character. The menace of the Fulani herdsmen too has been bandied as an example of impending Islamisation. When Buhari included Nigeria in the coalition of Muslim-Arab nations to fight Islamic terrorism, it was also allegedly part of “Islamisation.”

Last year, when the National Assembly proposed to amend laws to increase the jurisdiction of Sharia Courts of Appeal regarding criminal cases, it was further cited as evidence of looming “Islamisation.” On the supposed project of Islamisation and the financial sector, we have been here before. In 2011, when the idea of Islamic banking was advanced, CAN alleged that it was part of the treacherous plot to Islamise Nigeria. Then CBN governor, Lamido Sanusi, a Muslim Fulani from one of Nigeria’s Islamic enclaves, was branded a proponent of Islamisation even though Nigeria had a Christian president. Six years later, we are still fighting against the Islamisation of the Nigerian financial sector. Earlier this year, CAN cried out that the Christian Religious Knowledge and Islamic Religious Knowledge have been synchronised in the school curriculum, and that it would lead to “Islamisation.” Lawmakers had to accede and reverse what was an otherwise sensible initiative.

Nigeria, meanwhile, is not the only country where the fear of Muslims is raging. On a global scale, Islamophobia is trending in the hearts of the people who are convinced that Muslims are coming to put an end to their civilisation. Current acts of Islamic terrorism have enabled societies which themselves have practised some of the most atrocious acts around the world to tuck in their own unpleasant history and unleash the feral instincts of their being against others’ unfolding history.

Today, the foreboding cry of “The barbarians are at the gate!” has been replaced by “The Muslims are at the gate!” That moral panic is shaping political terrains and ideological re-configurations around the West. In countries like India and Myanmar (former Burma) too, Muslims are being persecuted and hunted down like animals. Nigeria is implicated in this global wave of Islamophobia through the particularities of her own history and culture.

But is Islamisation a legitimate fear in Nigeria that warrants CAN making ear grating cries of “Islamisation” at every turn? I doubt it. While CAN keeps pointing us to the examples of countries that were systematically Islamised over the centuries, it seems to forget that our historical trajectories are different. Years of colonialism and Christianisation have not totally eroded our pre-colonial cultural instincts, why keep frightening us with spectres of a country where we will be forced to bow before the same God? Even western nations, with migration of Muslims into their region, can never be fully Islamised. Cultural contact with masses of Muslims (and any religion) will reshape western culture one way or the other but a world dominated solely by Islamists is not going to happen. There are too many contending forces to make this a possibility. Islam itself is not static; it is going through what some critics have called a “westernisation.” Recently, Saudi Arabia just allowed women to drive (shortly after allowing them to vote) and some of their conservatives think they are acceding to western criticisms on women’s rights. East or west, the world is undergoing changes, and the terms under which Islamisation can happen are no longer that simple.

If CAN wants to maintain its share of public space, it should devote its energy to more urgent issues of social justice and not this pathetic plaint of “Islamisation.” When you live in a country where your life is discounted, where prospects of self-fulfilment and self-realisation are scanty, “Islamisation” is the least of your problems. How worse can Islamisation be for a Nigeria already living in a dystopia?.

2011 Pew study finds Muslims are more "phobic" of non-Muslims than the non-Muslims are "Islamophobic" of Muslims.

*.According to FBI 2008 statistics, anti-Muslim incidents in the US are dropping and only account for 1.3% of all hate crimes.

*.Jewish victims of hate crimes in the US outnumber Muslim victims by a 10-1 ratio.*.Anti-Christian hate crime incidents outnumber anti-Muslim incidents in the US.

*.There are 13 countries in the world where the state can execute you for being atheist. Every single one is officially Islamic.

*.9 of the top 10 persecutors of Christians are Islamic countries. Of the top 50 countries, only 12 have a source other than Islam.

*.Turkey tops list of countries violating the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR) for 3 consecutive years.

*.As of 2010, Indonesia had over 150 religiously motivatedregulations restricting minorities’ rights.

http://wikiislam.net/wiki/Muslim_Statistics

It is very significant that the Sira devotes 67% of its text to jihad. Mohammed averaged an event of violence every 6 weeks for the last 9 years of his life. Jihad was what made Mohammed successful. Here is a chart of the growth of Islam.Basically, when Mohammed was a preacher of religion, Islam grew at the rate of 10 new Muslims per year. But when he turned to jihad, Islam grew at an average rate of 10,000 per year. All of the details of how to wage jihad are recorded in great detail. The Koran gives the great vision of jihad—world conquest by the political process. The Sira is a strategic manual and the Hadith is a tactical manual of jihad.

this is why Muslims won't stop killing people to establish Islam because Islam is senseless. can not be explained beyond killing someone.

Amazing article.

CAN are only fighting for their pockets, they don't even take Christianity serious, Pastors in Nigeria are more men of money than men of god.







OPPOSITION TO SUKUK: CAN IS PLAYING ‘DOG IN THE MANGER’ BY PROFESSOR ISHAQ AKINTOLA
The Christian Association of Nigeria (CAN) issued a press statement yesterday to protest against the Federal Government’s first ever sukuk (noninterest lease assets facilities) which was announced last week. The statement which was dated 19th September, 2017 was signed by CAN’s General Secretary, Rev. Dr. Musa Asake.
The Muslim Rights Concern (MURIC) considers CAN’s position demeaning. It is not only infantile, petty and overbearing but also spiteful and egocentric.
Our position is based on the fact that CAN has all it needs in Nigeria today because the whole system is Christo-Western: education, the judicial system, the economy, everything. Muslims who were deprived of all their Islamic landmarks and ways of life by the colonialists are constrained to start the struggle all over again by demanding Shari’ah, use of hijab in schools, Islamic banks, sukuk, etc. It must be made clear ab initio that Nigerian Muslims had all these before the advent of the British colonialists who changed everything in favour of Christianity.
There is nothing the Muslims are demanding now that the Christians don’t have already on a platter of gold. It must also be stated that the Christians do not need the things that the Muslims are asking for. Why should somebody keep blocking his brother from getting his own share when he already has his own?
The fable of the dog in the manger is quite didactic in this regard. A British dog in the 13th century was fed with meat until its belly was full. Then the owner took hay (dry grass which only the horse needed and it is useless to the dog) and gave it to the horse. The dog had eaten and it was now the horse’s turn. Surprisingly, the dog started barking. It jumped on the hay and kept the horse at bay.
‘Dog in the manger’ has since become an English idiom. We must now ask CAN why it is playing dog in the manger. Shari‘ah is not for them but CAN screamed until the roofs nearly came down. OIC does not hurt any Christian but CAN shouted to high heavens. Hijab is for female Muslims alone but violent envy pushed CAN to shout itself hoarse. Islamic bank is for Muslims alone but CAN labeled it Islamisation of Nigeria. Can CAN give us a list of those who have been Islamised since Islamic banking started in the country? CAN leadership has become a professional false alarmist, a dog in the manger.
To reject the existence of sukuk pari passu with Islamic banking is like demanding that the agricultural sector should operate without bringing harvests to the markets or that hospitals should exist without pharmacies and laboratories. Having fought rigorously and bitterly against the establishment of the Islamic bank in Nigeria without success, our Christian neighbours seek to strangulate Islamic banks in the country.
We are constrained to ask, “How Christian is the Christian Association of Nigeria?” Every good Christian wants to be like Jesus and he turns this idea of emulating Jesus to a song. We have no doubt that CAN leaders also sing the song. But how sincere are they about emulating Jesus? Jesus says, “Love your neighbour according to thy self” (Mark 12:31) but CAN leaders do the exact opposite.
There are lots of good Christians in Nigeria and we interact very well but why must the petty ones always lead them? They are a belligerent lot, warlike and aggressive. Have they ever seen Muslims opposing a benefit going to Christians? We did not protest when you started going to Jerusalem even though we know that it is not mandatory for Christians. You enjoy Western banking system, Western education, common law, etc without any protest from us. Why is it that CAN always cries foul each time we seek parity?
CAN’s claim that sukuk is unconstitutional is false, baseless and misleading. How can laws made by the Federal Government be ultra vires? CAN is misleading Nigerian Christians. CAN should know what to do if it is unconstitutional. We challenge CAN to go to court today. It should not wait till tomorrow.
This was how CAN deceived Nigerians in 1999 when it said Shariah was unconstitutional and MURIC challenged it to go to court. They went to court of course but they beat a quick retreat. They withdrew the case when they found out the truth. But why heat up the polity all the time when you have the means of finding out the true status of sukuk? CAN likes making noise and we are enjoying our garrulous neighbour.
CAN calls sukuk a sectional religious financial policy but it forgets that the stock exchange has hitherto been monopolized by Christian-oriented bonds for decades and the Muslims did not complain for once. CAN loves to permanently marginalize Nigerian Muslims yet it is CAN that shouts ‘Islamisation’.
If it is true that sukuk implies Islamisation, then the stock exchange is imperialistic Christianisation. But almost the whole of Europe has embraced the sukuk industry. This includes France, Germany, Italy, Ireland, Luxemburg and Britain. Paris EUROPLACE established sukuk as far back as 2007 and France has since established the Islamic Finance Commission. Germany issued its first sukuk in 2004. That was 13 years ago. Ireland’s sukuk assets amounted to 180 trillion euros by 2010. Luxemburg started using sukuk in 2002. Britain has been using Islamic banking since the 1990s and the Sanctuary Building Sukuk was launched in 2005. The United States Office of the Comptroller of the Currency recognized the ijarah and mubarahah more than 30 years ago! But has America been Islamised? According to Bloomberg LP, KFH Research, the global sukuk issuance as at 31st December 2013 was $135 billion but grew rapidly to $2.004 trillion by 2016.
These are verifiable facts if CAN would eschew its armchair leadership style. Even Google alone is enough but CAN leadership will not search. They are just interested in rabble-rousing and cantankerous razz-mataz. CAN should seek education. The Bible says “My people perish for lack of knowledge” (Hosea 4:6). CAN should stop misleading Nigerians and inciting Christians against their Muslim neighbours.
MURIC calls on Nigerian Christians to either ignore CAN or find out the truth by themselves each time CAN cries wolf. Afterall the Bible asks Christians to “Investigate everything but hold onto that which is the truth” (I Thessalonians 5:21). Don’t allow anybody to push you into violent behavior. Don’t allow anyone to make you hate your Muslim neighbour.
Let us eschew primordial sentiments. Sukuk is purely business. We advise Christians to take their destiny in their own hands instead of allowing warlike leaders to lead them into unnecessary confrontation with Muslims every time. We invite CAN leaders to eschew bitterness. We should be partners in lending the voice of reason to the national debate instead of constituting clerical nuisance to the Nigerian nation.
Before we round up, we advise CAN leadership to desist from giving religion a bad name. The word ‘religion’ is from the Latin word ‘religio’ meaning ‘to link’, ‘to tie’ or ‘to bind’. Therefore religion is about linking people together in love and sharing. It is not about dividing them. Religion is about love, forgiveness, tolerance, giving and taking. Let us be good examples for the young generation. Our constant bickering has led to too many religious crises. It has pushed our followers to the precipice of war and instigated them against one another. Why must we live together like two envious wives of the same husband when we should see ourselves as two sons of the same father? This is the etymological essence of religion.
Professor Ishaq Akintola,
President,
Muslim Rights Concern (MURIC)

The article will still not force people with brains to use their brains

Bari22:
CAN are only fighting for their pockets, they don't even take Christianity serious, Pastors in Nigeria are more men of money than men of god.







OPPOSITION TO SUKUK: CAN IS PLAYING ‘DOG IN THE MANGER’ BY PROFESSOR ISHAQ AKINTOLA
The Christian Association of Nigeria (CAN) issued a press statement yesterday to protest against the Federal Government’s first ever sukuk (noninterest lease assets facilities) which was announced last week. The statement which was dated 19th September, 2017 was signed by CAN’s General Secretary, Rev. Dr. Musa Asake.
The Muslim Rights Concern (MURIC) considers CAN’s position demeaning. It is not only infantile, petty and overbearing but also spiteful and egocentric.
Our position is based on the fact that CAN has all it needs in Nigeria today because the whole system is Christo-Western: education, the judicial system, the economy, everything. Muslims who were deprived of all their Islamic landmarks and ways of life by the colonialists are constrained to start the struggle all over again by demanding Shari’ah, use of hijab in schools, Islamic banks, sukuk, etc. It must be made clear ab initio that Nigerian Muslims had all these before the advent of the British colonialists who changed everything in favour of Christianity.
There is nothing the Muslims are demanding now that the Christians don’t have already on a platter of gold. It must also be stated that the Christians do not need the things that the Muslims are asking for. Why should somebody keep blocking his brother from getting his own share when he already has his own?

Stupid post.
You should be concerned with what government does with money and not pastors. Goverment force you to pay money but Pastors don't.