Vol. 2, No. 1, Fall 2003

Peter Civetta

The Performance of God -
Religious Discourse in the Aftermath of 11 September

"God is being sought out with a fervor I have never seen in my lifetime."(1) These words, spoken by Episcopal priest Terry White in his sermon on September 16th, 2001, echo sentiments expressed across faith traditions in the aftermath of the events of 11 September. In the following days and weeks, people clamored for answers, and many turned or re-turned to their local religious institutions. Although politicians made speeches and television provided endless coverage and analysis, much of the task of trying to deal with these events fell squarely on the shoulders of the world's clerics. Therefore, Christian and Jewish sermons as well as Islamic khutbahs played an important role as people processed, responded, or, in many cases, processed how they might respond.(2)

This paper examines four such addresses delivered in the immediate aftermath of September 11th. Certain methodological issues require clarification before commencing. First, these sermons appear as discrete examples of preaching/khatabah and not necessarily as representative of some greater tradition that may or may not have existed. The four sermons [page 2] are exactly that, four sermons. Second, while this study will explore all of the material, the sermons do not appear as equivalents or even parallels. Unique circumstances, only partially knowable now, conceived and created each of the sermons. The preachers/khateebs' personalities and congregations further individuate them from each other. However, each example remains related, a unique performance event dealing with a single experience affecting, in varying degrees, people around the world.

Using performance paradigms to examine phenomenon such as sermons marks the ever-expanding curiosity of theatre and performance studies. No longer tied to the disciplinary focus on traditional theatre and drama, the study of preaching/khatabah represents just such a new area for exploration. I believe much may be gleaned about sermons through performance exemplars. I also believe religious addresses, in their creation, delivery and reception, have much to offer our field. To that effect, this paper uses a dramaturgical model, exploring the context and history surrounding the presentation of a performed text.

As with any complex event, the historical and theoretical foundations for religious addresses frame each event before it takes place. An examination of the oratory traditions of each faith, their homiletics, remains in order to fully contextualize the four addresses I have chosen. The discipline of homiletics serves as the dramaturgical foundation for this study. Whether a sermon gets received as radical or conventional lies only in marking it against the established homiletical norm. Homiletics offers a macro-model from which to view each individual event.

Khutbahs, religious talks given by an Imam, occur during a communal performance of Jummah (Friday prayers). Jummah, as part of Salat (prayer), remains one of the five pillars of the Islam; therefore khutbahs retain major significance within the practice of the faith. [page 3] However, the performance of Salat need not be corporate, for as long as a person completes their prayers, even alone, they fulfill their commitment. Therefore although strongly encouraged to attend, listening to khutbahs is not a required element of the faith.

Structurally, a khutbah consists of two consecutive speeches with a short break taken in between for prayer. A khutbah generally begins with praise of Allah, the declaration of faith, peace and blessings for the Prophet, and a quote from the Qur'an. They usually cover only one main topic, supported by quotes from the Qur'an or Haddith, the sayings of the Prophet Mohammed. The khutbah's goal lies in instruction and/or reminding the assembled congregation about their religion, serving, according to the European Counsel for Fatwa and Research, as "a call, a guidance, and a means of education" for a particular community.(3) Khutbahs, in this sense, not only espouse the tenets of the faith, but also assist in the binding of the people together. Khutbahs serve as unity mechanisms for the community, connecting them as they confront any religious or secular challenges.

While enjoined to make their khutbahs inspirational, khateebs must also steer away from controversy. In a fatwa (religious legal opinion) offering guidelines for the performance of khutbahs, Saudi Mufti (religious leader and scholar) Sheikh Muhammad Al-Gazali states:

[page 4] The key factor in understanding the importance of khutbahs lies in their connection to the specific community hearing them. Khutbahs strive to raise God consciousness, to borrow a phrase from New York Imam Kasim Kopus. They may speak to theological or historical issues, but must remain relevant to the gathered community's present and daily life. The intent of a khutbah lies in bringing the beliefs of Islam into direct connection with the praxis of its individual adherents.

Jewish homiletics reflects a similar focus on the community addressed. However, Jewish sermons often embrace controversial issues, seeking to challenge the congregation. Rabbi Abraham Cohen delivered one of the only explicit discourses on Jewish homiletics in his 1936 lecture series at Jew's College in London. He highlights the importance of sermons as cooperative, both with the congregation and the synagogue itself. He states, "Only by holding a clear conception of the scope and purpose of the synagogue and its services can one secure a true understanding of the nature and aim of Jewish preaching".(5) Later he adds that the aim of a sermon is "to influence the thought and action of [its] listeners. In Judaism 'knowledge' is not just something connected with the mind, an abstraction. It alone has value when translated into action, particularly ethical conduct".(6) A sermon, in his conception, emerges as a performative, collaborative event. Never truly passive to begin with, the congregation gets recognized as active participants. This active collaboration reflects Cohen's purpose for Jewish sermons, to instruct the people on issues they need to hear and in ways they can readily understand. He [page 5] states, "The instruction is a means to an end, that end being the hallowing of life by the ideals and precepts of Judaism. 'To learn in order to do' is the true Jewish principle".(7)

Christian homiletics contains similar echoes. Episcopal priest and homiletician Reverend Barbara Brown Taylor offers a three-part model similar to Cohen's. Brown Taylor likens the preaching dynamic to a three-legged stool, asserting sermons as the mutual creation of God, the preacher, and the congregation. She writes, "All three participate in the making of it, with the preacher as the designated voice. It is a delicate job for the one in the pulpit, a balancing act between the text, the congregation, and the self".(8) The three-legged stool image works so well because of its emphasis on balance as well as authority. While the Bible may seem to dominate Christian preaching, her model reminds that too much emphasis on one leg of the stool will cause it to topple.

Harry Emerson Fosdick, one of the 20th century's most celebrated American preachers who for decades he had a weekly radio show with over three million listeners, described the overall purpose of sermons in the following way: "every sermon was to start with the real problems of the people and was to meet their difficulties, answer their questions, confirm their noblest faiths and interpret their experiences in sympathetic, wise, and understanding co-operation".(9) While current homiliticians may dispute the need to provide complete answers in their sermons, Fosdick highlights the necessity of connecting with the congregation and remaining relevant to their lives. Both of these attributes appear repeatedly within Christian homiletics.

[page 6] Sermons, in all three traditions, focus on the relationship to a specific group of people at a particular time. Each of their homiletics expresses the need to connect the religious talk with the congregation addressed, offering this insight as the heart of understanding the nature of the sermonic moment. Sermons are therefore not interchangeable, but inextricably linked to the communities that created them. A study of the performance of sermons should not, then, focus on abstract theological discourse, but rather should offer opportunity to learn about and explicate the community from which the sermon came. In other words, to learn about a community, look at the sermons they hear, and vice versa, to learn about sermons, look to the communities that created them. The delivery and reception of sermons functions as a construct. Sermons assist in the constitution of the identity of the community. Sermons both show and tell a community about itself. Sermons may respond to a crisis, such as 9/11, but they do so for and to specific communities in a precise context.

The four sermons I have chosen each reflect the different communities that heard and also helped to create them. The Reverend Billy Graham addressed a televised audience from the National Cathedral.(10) Rabbi Scott Glass delivered a Rosh Hashanah sermon to his congregation in Ithaca, New York.(11) Imam Arshad Gamiet spoke in a London mosque,(12) and Reverend Peggy Bosmyer preached at St. Margaret's Episcopal Church in Little Rock, Arkansas.(13) These four, culled from over one hundred and fifty surveyed, communicate a wide spectrum of responses, providing fertile ground for exploration. Outside of Graham, the [page 7] preachers/khateeb remain relatively unknown outside of their communities. This obscurity represents the work of so many clerics forced to deal with the extraordinary pressure to create meaningful sermons after 11 September. Rabbi Glass expressed sentiments echoed by numerous others, "Never before have I felt more ill-prepared to stand before the congregation." However their sermons showcase the astonishing responses created and delivered within the first few weeks after 11 September.

As with all choices, my selections were subjective. I focused on two elements in my search: a diversity of people and locations, and for a sermon that seemed, at least to me, to encapsulate a type of response. With regard to diversity, I have chosen across gender and geographical lines as well as showcasing a response from outside the United States. Diversity also played a part in my decision to include Graham. Many famous orators and speakers weighed in after 11 September, and so I wanted to include a response given from a position of power, in addition to those voices projected from smaller communities. With regards to encapsulation, I feel each of these sermons characterize certain types of responses. However, I do not view these sermons as representative, a reductionary move. Each sermons stands as a testament of each community, but taken within the context of a larger faith tradition. Copies of all four are available upon request.

Evangelist Billy Graham, according to his web site, "has preached the Gospel to more people in live audiences than anyone else in history -- over 210 million people in more than 185 countries and territories -- through various meetings, including Mission World and Global Mission".(14) He has counseled many U.S. presidents and spoke during the National Day of Prayer and Remembrance at the request of President Bush. Bush and many other political [page 8] leaders attended, and the content of the sermon reflected this powerful and influential community. In many ways this sermon appears as much a political address as a religious one. References to the President, Congress, and the nation almost outstrip direct references to God. Graham states early on "some day those responsible will be brought to justice, as President Bush and our congress have so forcibly stated." It appears that justice, then, gets decided and dictated by Bush, not by God as one might expect in a religious address.

The sermon contains many violent images (backlashed, disintegrate, implode, backfired) and none of these referred to the events of 11 September. Graham's martial tone reflects a sermon constructed and delivered for political purposes. For example, given all the powerful experiences around that time, Graham singles out when Congress "stood shoulder to shoulder the other day and sang, 'God Bless America.'" Graham's sermon directly supports its governmental audience, while constructing a nationally televised audience dependent upon that government. Near the end Graham says, "We also know that God is going to give wisdom and courage and strength to the President and those around him. And this is going to be a day that we will all remember as a day of victory." The question remains: is that victory God's or the military victory of the U.S. government led by President George W. Bush, the sponsor of the sermon itself?

Peter is a doctoral candidate in Theatre Studies at Cornell University. He is currently working on his dissertation, an ethnographic exploration of religious addresses across faith traditions. He previously delivered a version of this paper at the ATHE 2002 Religion and Theatre Emerging Scholars Panel.