Fethullah Gülen and Fr. Basil Moreau: Sowing the Seeds for Religious Tolerance and Dialogue

Fethullah Gülen and Fr. Basil Moreau: Sowing the Seeds for Religious Tolerance and Dialogue

St. Edward’s University, Austin, TX

jamesjp@stedwards.edu

Abstract

The world today is filled with experiences of tension between that which is viewed as sacred and that which is viewed as secular. These are not fresh concerns, but merely modern versions of what seems to be the ongoing attempt to resolve this tension. Two individuals have lived lives that attempt to mediate this divide between secular and sacred, each within a unique context and period of history. Further yet, each would foster a following that would utilize education as a means of promoting a just world, and subsequently, sow the seeds for religious tolerance and dialogue.

Fr. Basil Moreau, founder of the Congregation of Holy Cross, lived during the height of the Reign of Terror in early 19^th century France. While this period fostered a France that was hostile to religious practice and in particular the Roman Catholic Church, Moreau would eventually found a religious order that extend its reach into four continents, establishing schools for those often neglected by their own communities.

Fethullah Gülen found himself in the modern, 20^th century, secular state of Turkey. While the population is predominately Muslim, the state itself is secular. Seeking a just and peaceful world, Fethullah Gülen, and subsequently, his followers, have chosen the avenue of education as a mean to bridge religious tolerance, dialogue and peace.

This paper will compare these two figures and the movements that have evolved due to their work and ask the question of whether these movements offer a viable approach to building a world of religious tolerance and dialogue.

Moreau and Gülen

The world has been engaged in conflicts that seem religious in nature. Typically the approach to addressing conflict has resorted to force, coercion, or a tightening of security precautions, or at least, that is what the media would seem to present. Yet, there are other examples people of different religious backgrounds are working together for a common good and purpose, transcending the divide over what is considered secular and what is considered sacred.

Two individuals have lived lives that seemed to have mediated this divide between secular and sacred, each within a unique context and period of history. Further yet, each would inspire a following that would utilize education as a means of promoting a just world, and subsequently, sow the seeds for religious tolerance and dialogue.

Blessed Fr. Basil Moreau, a Roman Catholic priest and founder of the Congregation of Holy Cross, lived during the aftermath of the Reign of Terror in early 19^th century France. Despite this period of French history that was hostile to religious practice and in particular the Roman Catholic Church, Moreau would eventually found a religious order, the Congregation of Holy Cross, that has extended its reach into five continents, establishing schools for those often neglected or underserved by their own communities. From it’s early inception as a congregation, Holy Cross schools have accepted students from diverse religious and ethnic backgrounds.

Fethullah Gülen, an Islamic preacher and teacher, found himself in the modern, 20^th century, laicist state of Turkey. While the population is predominately Muslim, the state itself is Jacobin laicist. Seeking a just and peaceful world, Fethullah Gülen , and subsequently, his listeners have chosen the avenue of education as one of the means to bridge religious tolerance, dialogue and peace.

This paper will compare these two figures and their movements that have evolved due to their work and ask the question of whether these movements offer insight to building a world of religious tolerance and dialogue. There are some parallel, not precise, but similar movements within the context of each individual

Both Moreau and Gülen lived in a period of time in which their countries had been experiencing a shift in the political landscape.

Fr. Basil Moreau, born in France, lived in a world that was Eurocentric and colonial. Moreau was born into 19^th century France, very shortly after the Reign of Terror and the French Revolution of 1789. France, at the beginning of the French Revolution, was a Catholic nation and the relationship of the throne and the Church, despite disagreements between Paris and Rome, still promoted the belief in the divine right of kings (Shelley 1982: 375). France was facing difficult financial times. A combination of events such as the Sevens Years War and the building of the palace at Versaille were examples of the fiscal drain upon that had left the French government economically strapped. As a consequence, the French government spiraled into debt negatively impacting the social and economic conditions of a growing urban middle-class and the rural peasantry.

Similar conditions would be encountered by a young Turkish scholar nearly a hundreds years later, and not so ironically, these conditions were distantly related to the changing conditions that had earlier transformed Western Europe. The Ottoman Empire, in the aftermath of the Turkish-Russian War, the two Balkan conflicts, and the First World War, would succumb to western European occupation and experience a partitioning of much of the middle-east, predominately by Britain and France. Out of this partitioning, nationalist leaders would eventually pry away from the western powers, the territories that now comprise most of modern Turkey (Yapp 1996: 147). Much like in France, Turkey under the Sultan, attempted to initiate reforms that would introduce democratic structures of rule, such as the Ottoman Parliament in 1877 (Ismael and Ismael 1991). However, political control would eventually give way to the Republic of Turkey, established by Ataturk and the Republican Peoples Party with the goal to turn Turkey into a modern state leaning to western European culture and technological advances.

The changing political landscape was more than a transference of political control from one body to another. It reflected a shift in the traditional understanding of the source of political authority away from the divine right of kings to more democratic leaning understandings.

In France, individuals such as Voltaire, John Locke, Rousseau and Montesquieu were ushering in a different understanding of social order. Social hierarchies were questioned, raising the belief that no person should be subject to another person, each person being equal. “The democratic gospel of the French Revolution rested upon the glorification of man rather than God” (Shelley: 374).

In the newly emerging Turkish state as in other Muslim societies, political systems were being transformed by secular and materialistic ideologies would embrace the growing materialism and capitalism of the western nations. Religion was excised from the political and social structure, replaced with positivism.

These changing worldviews in France and Turkey impacted the landscape of religion and the relationship between religion structures and government. Both countries experience a pendulum affect due to the significant changes in political governance.

In France, it was the popular belief that there were close ties between the aristocracy and the Roman Catholic Church, and some of the earliest actions of the French Revolution struck at the privileges and status of the Church (Latourette 1953: 1009). As early as 1789, the new government of the National Assembly confiscated and nationalized Church property, outlawed religious communities such as the Jesuit order (Barrosse 1969: 1; Latourette: 1009), required clergy to submit an oath to the civil constitution in fear of deportation or execution, and extended religious freedom to all citizens in this formerly Catholic nation. In 1794 during the Reign of Terror, a deist religion was declared by the National Convention with Christianity being denounced as superstitious.

The nationalization of Church property greatly impacted the educational system of France. Prior to the Revolution the elaborate network of schools were predominately operated and funded by the Church. The government exerted a tight nationalist control of the facilities and of the curriculum used (MacEoin 2007: 30). We will speak more to this later. With the rise of Napoleon in 1799, a era of religious tolerance was initiated. Napoleon, a nominal Roman Catholic, was pragmatic and recognized the large role the Church served as an institution within the functioning and infrastructure of France, and thus signed a concordat with the Papacy in 1802, reinstating Catholicism as a legal religion in France, but with limited Papal authority in France (Barrosse: 3, Latourette: 1010). France remained largely de-Christianized, rooted in the philosophy of humanism (MacEoin: 8-9).

With the demise of Napoleon, a resilient Roman Catholic Church began to experience a revival. During this period of the early 19^th century, religious orders experienced a window in which to reenter French society, largely with the intent to be in service to a populace ravished by war and revolution. The state retained a monopoly on the educational system, and as is with many new movements, it would be in response to a particular need, that the Congregation of Holy Cross, founded by Fr. Basil Moreau, would emerge to respond to educational needs of the poor, burdened with years of political and social discord.

A period of secularization after the breakup of the Ottoman Empire developed in Turkey in which attempts were made to reduce the role of religion in the governance of the country partly due to the connection of religion and the rule of the Sultan. The Grand National Assembly shifted power away from former structures of authority such as the sultan, the religious structures were divested of their position as the government took control of education, closed the Shari’ah courts, disbanded religious orders and brotherhoods and required all religious functionaries to become employees of the state (Ismael). In similar fashion, the education system adopted a curriculum that sought to instill a sense of nationalism and republican.

Turkey had its own period of religious revivalism with the rise of the Democrat Party to power in 1950, which made concessions to the religious establishment. Religious education was restored in schools where parents consented, Government funding for mosques increased and religious observance was no longer discouraged. It would be in this period of relaxing of religious restrictions that Fethullah would begin his studies, graduate from private divinity school and begin preaching on the importance of understanding and tolerance (fGülen .com/introduction).

So, we have two figures, both born in the aftermath of a radical political transformation of their respective countries in which the former government structure was largely aligned with religion, Roman Catholicism in France, and Islam in the former Ottoman Empire. In the aftermath of political and military struggle, both countries would succumb to democratic and revolutionary reforms. Although religion was discouraged and in some cases even attacked by more secular leaning governments, as a social and religious structure, Roman Catholicism and Islam maintained a strong presence in the daily lives of individuals and as part of the social fabric of each country. Both countries would experience a gradual acceptance of its religious identity realization that within the general populous, religious identity remained an integral part of personal identity and that political ideology pragmatically gave way to popular religious expression.

Focusing upon the institution of education in both France and Turkey, educational institution in each of the respective countries had been seized by governments influenced by secular humanism and were being utilized to foster a sense of nationalistic pride in students. Although not necessarily intentional, a by-product was an atmosphere that relegated religion, and subsequently the values related, as antiquated. It was the awareness of this potential humanistic threat that spurred both men to chart a course that would inspire movements today that instilled the vision of each of these men.

In France, the young Catholic priest, Father Moreau became aware of a growing liberalism that was anti-Catholic, that rejected any sense of a supernatural view of life, and that was guided by the belief that the modern conscience of the day made religion obsolete, no more than relics of the Dark Ages. It was believed that Catholicism would be unable to progress due to a pre-scientific mentality and that the Church should be excluded from participation in the education system and culture (MacEoin: 49-50). Moreau, feeling that the state had an unjust monopoly on the education system, argued that the prevailing system of education fostered skepticism and pantheism. However, rather than work in opposition to the government, Moreau sought to work within the structure available, a point to be remembered in the later discussion concerning dialogue. Moreau worked for “full teaching rights” for Holy Cross educators, which meant that they needed proficiency in teaching subjects beyond religion such as rhetoric and philosophy (Barrosse 1969). He would argue that the Church needed to “accept science without prejudice, and in a manner adapted to the needs of our times” (Moreau 1849).

In fact, Moreau was less concerned with operating schools than with the education that was being provided in the schools. The Association of Holy Cross in France owned little property and for the most part, operated institutions owned by other religious orders or by the civil authorities. However, he was a loyal Frenchman who always promoted the culture and civilization of France (MacEoin 2007) and it would often be the practice for the school children to sing patriotic songs during recreation. In reality, Moreau often found himself caught in between two factions, each accusing him of leanings toward the opposition:

On the one hand, among the families of the old aristocracy, I was passed off for a wild democrat and almost a red; on the other, a representative of the people...warned me that I had been denounced to the government as a reactionary and a royalist…teaching…anti-republican ideas (C.L. 35).

While this middle course opened Moreau up to criticism on several fronts, it also allowed him to maintain a credibility that was only enhanced by his ability to foster strong educational opportunities for a people denied such opportunity. For Moreau, the purpose of education was to instill the values of the Christian faith: “…the light of the Gospel will dispel the darkness of our times, its morality will influence our manner of life, justice will reign.” It is an active pedagogy that Moreau promoted. Moreau, in writing his manual of instruction for educators of Holy Cross, describes the task for the Holy Cross educator:

Moreau did not advocate a retreat from modern studies and discovery, but questioned their relevance if they were not directed to the service of the common good, oriented toward the Christian understanding of resurrection and an option for the future (Fides 2007: 37). The task according to Moreau was:

France was a country attempting to recover from years of conflict and needed a trained, educated populace, to recover. Moreau, a man whose spirituality was “oriented toward the active apostolate,” sought “practical applications for the deepest mysteries of faith,” directed toward the education of a generation suffering from the impact of the Revolution (Kruse 1964).

Gülen, also a noted preacher, and valued similar aspects of the role of education, Gülen would inspire a different movement. Unlike the Congregation of Holy Cross that was formed through the work of Fr. Basil Moreau, the Gülen movement took on no formal structure of governance, but instead, its admirers sought to live a life that exemplified teachings of Gülen who was largely influenced by the philosophy of Rumi which took on a personal dynamic, but is a life that seeks to live out shared aims in a larger social context. Gülen is quick to point out that he has no schools, but that the schools that embrace the educational vision of Gülen are “established by individual agreements between the countries in which they are located and the educational companies founded for this purpose” (Michel 2006: 104). Having said that, Gülen’s influence and perspective of the role of education is central to the schools that are inspired by his understanding of education.

The Turkey of Gülen’s childhood was experiencing a period of political and social change, albeit, not necessarily to the violent degree that proceeded Moreau in 19^th century France. Gülen recognized as a result of the contact between Western European thought and the Islamic world, that there was a 20^th century shift in many circles of the Islamic world towards materialism, but that this did not reflect the values and teachings of Islam (Gülen 2004: 196). His critique of the enlightenment movements of the 18^th century saw an understanding of human beings “consisting of mind only…positivist and materialist movements saw humans as solely material or corporeal entities” (Gülen 2004: 194). Problematic in this view was is the impact upon scientific discovery, which primarily serves the “accumulation of material created only to fulfill bodily needs” (Gülen 2004: 195).

Gülen, like Moreau, saw the world through the lens of faith, and like Moreau, not at the expense of science, intellect, nor culture. His understanding of Islam was not one of retreat from the world, but influence by his understanding of Sufism, that humanity is in the service of God and sought “purification through the continuous struggle and action within the community under the direct guidance of the Qur’an and Sunna” (Gokcek 2006: 166). This approach took a middle road, one of balance: “between materialism and spiritualism, between rationalism and mysticism, between the worldliness and excessive asceticism, between this world and the next—and inclusive of the ways of all the previous prophets, makes a choice according to the situation” (Gülen 1995: 200-201). Gülen’s spirituality is grounded in the need to act: “action is as vital as belief and belief can be sustainable only if it is supported with action” (Gokcek 2006: 173). Rather than initiate a movement, Gülen has been the inspiration of a movement oriented towards education. Like Moreau, those in the Gülen movement, believed that education provides the most viable, “lasting solution for society’s problems and the needs of humanity,” and is modeled by, “teacher’s who embody…universal values” (Yuksel 2006:31).

Like Moreau, Gülen stresses working within the given structure, encouraging people “to serve the country in particular, and humanity in general, through education…to help the state educate and help people to develop. The purpose of education is to serve the common good by combating ignorance, enabling people to work and foster, and healing internal schism and separation within communities through dialogue and tolerance (Gülen 2004: 198-199). Schools in the Gülen movement adhere to the curriculum required by the State and do not teach religion (Unal and Williams 2000: 348). It is through the example of the teacher that students are impacted in the development of their character, occupying “themselves with what is good and wholesome…setting a good personal example” (Hendrick 2006: 37). Of importance was the synthesis of the heart and mind, a thought that echoes Moreau who expressed that the “mind cannot be cultivated at the expense of the heart” (Moreau 1849: Circular Letter 36). Dealing with some of the same mis-perceptions that faced Moreau concerning the accusation that religion was obsolete, Gülen speaks of the compatibility of science and faith: “Science cannot contradict religion, for its purpose is to understand nature and humanity, which are each a composition of the manifestation of God’s Attributes of Will and Power” (Gülen 2006:30-31). And like Moreau, the purpose of scientific inquiry, or any process of learning was to be in service to God by being in service to humanity:

…a new style of education fusing religious and scientific knowledge with morality and spirituality will produce genuinely enlightened people with hearts illumined by religious sciences and spirituality, minds illuminated with positive sciences, characterized by all kinds of human merits and moral values, and cognizant of the socioeconomic and political conditions of their time (Gülen 2006: 31).

No conflict, nor incompatibility exists between the formation of the mind and of the heart for each serves to refine the other.

The question remains, what do we have to learn from these two men, their life and their experiences, that may be useful in the promotion of dialogue and tolerance, particularly around issues of religious difference. It is unlikely that the topic of interreligious dialogue was on the mind of Basil Moreau in the mid 19^th century France. His world was a Catholic world. Interreligious dialogue of that day perhaps would have been primarily directed toward French Protestants. But this is not to say there is nothing that can be contributed by Moreau to the question. Fethullah Gülen on the other hand, has lived in a world that continues to become smaller with advances in communication and travel technologies (Gülen 2004d: 230). Both responded to the conditions they encountered, and perhaps that is the first lesson we take from both men. Utilizing a phrase from recent Catholic history, we must respond to the “signs of the times.”

Both Moreau and Gülen were not isolated in their respected worlds. Their faith and religion were not centered on an asceticism that secluded itself from the world, but was engaged in a lived context. Moreau and Gülen entered into a world that at the time sought to marginalize religious expression as irrelevant. In the current discourse, religious extremism such as Christian fundamentalism or Islamic extremist frames a world on the other end of the religious continuum, caught up in a hyper expression of religious rhetoric and action that is isolationist and seeks something of the liking of ritual purity. Both men understood the need to chart a course somewhere in the middle of extreme asceticism and extreme expression, which is modeled in the approach to education fostering schools that operate within the cultural and political settings they are located.

Each man chose a route that allowed them to work with the prevailing authority, even with the possibility of deep ideological differences, by keeping in perspective of what is most important in their work, fostering a new generation of students who will benefit humanity. In our approach to dialogue, we must be aware of our motivations.

Truth for both men is something that stands apart. Truth is a manifestation of God. Truth is not created by humanity, but God uses humanity to reveal truth. In the work of dialogue, we must be open to the truth that is not yet evident in our own understanding. This willingness to learn allows for the adaptation to one’s context. Moreau and Gülen both demonstrated this in their approach to the sciences, which was not viewed as a threat to the existence of God, but as a revealing of God within the creation. For the purpose of dialogue, such an understanding eliminates the entanglement of needing to be “right,” a focus of much of the political and religious discourse today.

Interreligious dialogue must be practical. The reality is that most people on the street do not have the time neither the resources to engage in ideological debates and discussions. They must live within their own context, most often focused upon economic survival for their families, leaving little time for the subtle nuances of dogmatic theology. Both Moreau and Gülen responded to the situations they were in. Given another time and place, they may have live very different lives. But there is an element of causality, a recognition that God’s creation is not as it should be, leading to the questions of why, how and so on. We must choose whether the questions we grapple with serve the lived experience of the people we influence, or if they merely serve an intellectual exercise. We live in a world where the likeliness of never meeting an individual of another religious tradition are minimal. Paul Weller in his discussion of Gülen points out the “one of the consequences of the creation of this global village is the need to recognize that interreligious dialogue is not a luxury…but also necessary” (Weller 2006: 77). There is real, practical need for dialogue.

While dialogue attempts to build understanding between religious traditions, it is not a call to relativism. Moreau and Gülen both view the world through the lens of their own tradition, not seeking to foster one universal expression of religion. Each is devout to their tradition. They did however, in their pursuit of truth and in the embrace of scientific enquiry, acknowledged universal truths such as the inherent dignity of all humanity. Holy Cross schools and Gülen inspired schools do not seek to impart dogmatic instruction, but do strive through the witness of their teachers, to model virtues. Inherent in both men is the understanding of the common link shared by all humanity. Moreau speaks to those teaching those who are not Catholic or Christian, to see “only the image of God imprinted within them like a sacred seal that you must preserve at all cost” (Moreau: CE 5). Gülen echoes a similar thought citing a phrase of the prophet, peace be upon him, that “a believer is the mirror of another believer” (Gülen 2004: 6).

The Book Genesis (1:27-28), calls upon humanity to recognize that each of us, male and female, are made in the “image of God.” At this point of recognition, we are then able to acknowledge the frailties and the amazement of each human being. It is an approach that carries with it a sense of humility of one’s own limitations, opening the window to consider what another brings. Then we are truly in dialogue as only equals can be.

Aslandogan, Yuksel A. and Muhammed Cetin (2006). The Educational Philosophy of Gulen in Thought and Practice. Muslim Citizens of the Globalized World: Contributions of the Gulen Movement, eds. Robert A. Hunt and Yuksel A. Aslandogan, Somerset, NJ: Light, Inc. and IID Press.

Barrosse, Thomas. (1969) Moreau: Portrait of a Founder. Notre Dame, IN: Fides Publishers.

Ergene, Enes (2008) Is the Gulen Movement a Religious Order? [http://en.fgulen.com/about-fethullah-gulen/an-analysis-of-the-gulen-movement/3021-is-the-gulen-movement-a-religious-order.html] accessed October 19, 2009.

Gokcek, Mustaf (2006). Fethullah Gulen and Sufism: A Historical Perspective. Muslim Citizens of the Globalized World: Contributions of the Gulen Movement, eds. Robert A. Hunt and Yuksel A. Aslandogan, Somerset, NJ: Light, Inc. and IID Press.

Gulen, M. Fethullah (2005) The Statue of Our Souls: Revival in Islamic Thought and Activism. New Jersey: Light.

Hendrick, Joshua D. (2006) The Regulated Potential of Kinetic Islam. Muslim Citizens of the Globalized World: Contributions of the Gulen Movement, eds. Robert A. Hunt and Yuksel A. Aslandogan, Somerset, NJ: Light, Inc. and IID Press.

Kruse, Roberto, J. (1964). Basil Moreau: The Cross ( A Study in Spiritual Theology). Dissertatio ad Lauream in Facultate Theologica Pontificiae Universitatis Gregorianae, Saint Meinrad, IN.

Latourette, Kenneth Scott (1953). A History of Christianity: Reformation to the Present, Vol. II, revised edition. Peabody, MA: Prince Press.

MacEoin, Gary (2007) Basil Moreau: Founder of Holy Cross, revised by Joel Giallanza. Notre Dame, IN: Ave Maria Press.

Michel, Thomas (2006) Gulen as Educator and Religious Teacher. M. Fethullah Gulen: Essays-Perspectives-Opinions. Somerset, NJ: Light, Inc.

Shelley, Bruce L. (1982). Church History in Plain Language. Dallas, NY: Word.

Weiker, Walter (1991). The Republic of Turkey. Politics and Government in the Middle East and North Africa. Ed. Ismael, Tareq Y. and Jacqueline S. Ismael. Miami, FL: Florida International University Press.

Weller, Paul (2006) Fethullah Gulen, Religions, Globalization and Dialogue. Muslim Citizens of the Globalized World: Contributions of the Gulen Movement, eds. Robert A. Hunt and Yuksel A. Aslandogan, Somerset, NJ: Light, Inc. and IID Press.

Yapp, M.E. (1996). The Near East Since the First World War: A History to 1995. 2^nd edition. New York, NY: Longman