Book Review and Analysis: Making War in the Name of God by Christopher Catherwood (Work in Progress)

Book Title: Making War in the Name of God

Author: Christopher Catherwood (History Professor in the University of Cambridge and the University of Richmond. Member of the  Royal Historical Society).

My Personal Expectation with de Book ( Basically why I Picked it up): The topic presented in the title of this publication, is something that always has interested me, religious conflicts, and the subject  has dominated my studies since I have gotten my hands of Samuel Huntingtun's Clash of Civilizations more than 15 years ago . Now the title establishes Wars in the name of God so I'm gearing up for a book that will present me, the reader, with a wide range of conflicts between many religions,  or at least the ones that symbols are on the cover Judaism, Christianity and Islam. The title and cover doesn't give us a time frame so I guess the book goes back to the dawn of organized religion. So sit tight my review and analysis of the book will probably come around in two weeks maybe. less.   

So a finished my review and Analysis of this interesting history book, that basically is about the conflict between Christianity and Islam so here is my breakdown, of the stuff I liked.

Central Thymes and Concepts, that interested me as the reader:

• The author explains that there is two classes of Jihad, the first being minor or military and major or religious, which is the internal struggle for sanctity, and the author affirms that most Muslims that live in the west view the second as the right path. But in the west most none Muslims do not know this distinction and only think of Jihad as those violent acts that one sees on the TV or reads in scores of book on the subject. Now Christopher doesn't it leave it there he recommends reading David Cooks, Understanding the Jihad, and that author establishes that even though most Muslims today view Jihad as an internal struggle, historically the military concept of Jihad has prevailed. that this division is more of a modern novelty, and that the internal struggle is more of a perpetration for the military struggle.
•  Catherwood  affirms that people in the West and in the Islamic world must stop repeating  that the West as a civilization is responsible for perpetual aggression against the Islamic World, that they are victims of Imperial Christianity, these is a bold affirmations that the author  defends pretty effectively, establishing that since the death of the Prophet Mohammed, from  632 till 1683, Islam had been on a expansionist aggressive with the leader of the State was also the leader of the faith, with Christianity on the defensive. Christianity in its early phases was a persecuted and was clandestine faith, while Islam from the beginning has been militaristic and political, where the leader of the faith was the head of State. but this example of  Catherwood is not to show how evil Islam is, but to give people  some historical perspective and the author directly establish that Islamic world acted as an imperial power in expansion, just like the West has been acting since colonialism as individual Nation States not in the name of a faith.
  
• The author presents a unique perspective referring to how the crusades started citing Bernard Lewis that explains that the true conflict that had arose in Palestine  sparking the crusades wasn't a conflict between Christian and Muslims ( in the first phase), but really  between Sunni and Shia Muslims to end the dominion of the Fatimid's, there was a Sunni need of ending this heresy in the heart of the Muslim world, and the famous Saladin was the man to do it.
  
  
  
  
  • The book on page 115 establish one of the sad aspects of religious conflict that  I hadn't noticed explicitly, when these conflicts explode people kill people that they know, civilians kill civilians, even women and children, this is a shocking but true conclusion.  For some reason in religious  conflicts convert the other in something infrahuman that does not have the right to live and sadly there are many examples that makes validate this point.
    There is a need humiliate the other, denigrate him/her, dehumanize then p116, doing this make the act of killing easier for people that normally would not attack and kill someone like a soldier, the enemy is a virus a plague that can destroy your life and everything around you and also your god your reason of existence. People like Osama bin Laden take a normal human conflict and take it out of Its context to a cosmic level to get divine sanction, there is no sin or wrong doing God thinks It's ok. Once the Other is dehumanized and terrible act against the Other is valid because It's the Will of god, they are not personal enemies they are gods enemies.
    
    
    
    
    • Chris presents the reader  how Orthodox Christian's  religious animosity towards Muslims evolved, and to a certain extent it a byproduct of the fall of the Ottoman Empire, that was  left on standby during the time the existence of the  State of Yugoslavia. Author establishes that the Balkan War was a religious War First and foremost. In the Ottoman empire each religious group was classified in the Millet System, so Orthodox Christian were in the Orthodox Millet. The Ottoman Empire really cracked down  on the Balkan region and there were mass conversations in Bosnia and in Albania. Serbs considered the Slavs that converted traitors of their blood line. And one must add that Serbs had their own Orthodox Church that governed itself, symbol of the lost Serbian Empire. For Serbs to be Serb is to be Orthodox and vice versa, and all this tied to the land. Author establishes it wrong to use the term ethnic cleansing during the Balkan Wars, because the groups involved are all of the same ethnicity: Serbs, Croats and Bosnians, it was a religious-cleansing.
      
      
    
    
   

 
 


The Good stuff about the Book:

• Book concentrate on the conflict between Islam and Christianity, but it  also dives into internal conflict in each faith.
  
  

  • Author actually does something pretty interesting  establishing that it's possible that he'll not be objective, establishing that he's a religious person, a Anglican to be exact and that  his maternal family come from Wales. while his paternal family comes from North Ireland, and he explains that this has a great impact on his religious views. This is valuable the an author that  actually addresses this issue because many authors act like their  totally impartial or do their best, but almost always their religious or political views  seep in, so knowing this right of the bat you know how to filter the information, but the funny thing is that  in this case this author is one of the most objective ones that I've ever come across in a long time.
    • Chris points out there is a problem with authors that work on Islam and conflicts related to this faith; I must add with any faith , or they establish that  it's a totally aggressive religion prone to violence (like another book I'm reading ...) or a totally not responsible for any violent acts, and just some individuals are the ones causing  some trouble but don't represent the faith, so the author establishes both of these points of view are wrong, and I'm on the same page that one has to find some middle ground. From my point of view one cannot say Islam is a religion of Peace or Christianity is a Peace, this is wrong they are just religions and nothing else, now in this case they both have holy books that promote peace but also violent acts, what I've learned over the years people take what they want from their faith a tend to discard the rest, in other words religious people are picky, so the people make faiths violent or peaceful.
    • The chapter about the war in the Balkan and why it happened, has one of the best explanations that I've have ever come across about this conflict, the author really nails it in this part of the book.
      

      • Book set me on the search of a author that Chris cites called Vmik Volkan that seem pretty interesting.
    • The book is well written in the aspect that the author goes straight to the point, he doesn't go overboard with information and it a easy read I finished it pretty fast because it's enjoyable, because the author writes from his perspective it isn't a copy and paste of another history  book, authors do that sometimes when you get with these types of books.

       
      
      

The Bad:

• Book on the cover references the conflicts with Judaism but only refers to them marginally, but a Jewish star is on the cover one would think there would be more about their conflict with other faiths, it mentioned how the suffered at the hands of the crusaders, but there is no mention of the Arab Israeli conflict.  
• The Author sustains that the  Balkan Wars where the principle motors in the birth of modern Fundamentalist, pretty much forgetting Chechnya and Afghanistan.
  • Book only concentrates on the conflicts between Christianity and Islam, and at moments in goes in to the internal struggles of each faith, but vary rarely mentions other faiths, so the title of the book is just to brood and a little misleading because you get the idea that possibly the book covers  all religious conflicts.
   
   
  
  

Overall: I'm going to give this book a 7 out of 10, becuase you can tell the author takes the book to his confort spot the Balkan Wars omiting tons of stuff, maybe changing the title you acutally fix this.