How does the contrast between the sacred and the holy, or morality and ethics, appear in Martin Luther King, Jr.’s ethic as expressed in his “Letter from Birmingham Jail”? 

          King’s understanding of the interdependence of people is what inspired the content of his letter in response to the white clergy who believed the civil rights movement was ‘unwise and untimely’.  In the letter, King states, “Injustice anywhere is a threat to justice everywhere.  We are caught in an inescapable network of mutuality, tied in a single garment of destiny.  Whatever affects one directly affects all indirectly”.  
          King’s statement questioned the ’sacred society’ of the white clergy and their morals; instead, he brought up ethics and the idea that humanity is not comprised of white individuals, but is actually a collective of different individuals that should be treated justly.  His inclusion of all humanity instead of just a specific society is what makes this a ‘holy’ act.  King’s audacity to question just laws is summed up in the following:  “An unjust law is a code that a majority inflicts on a minority that is not binding on itself”.  In this, he maintains that unjust laws are begging to be broken and a law that begs disobedience must be corrected to reinstate justice for all. 

 Describe Martin Luther King, Jr.’s “kitchen experience” and explain its significance for his spirituality and ethics.     

          Martin Luther King, Jr.’s  “kitchen experience” occurred in the early days of the Montgomery bus strike.  This event that occurred as his public career was burgeoning was a poignant experience in his life where he was finally able to overcome the fear of death.  Overcoming fear of mortality is an event vital to the life of a religious figure.
          In the story, it is recounted that King came home late from a boycott meeting and received a phone call:  “N*gger . . . we are tired of you and your mess now, and if you are not out of this town in three days, we’re going to blow your brains out and blow up your house”.  He had received many phone calls of this nature before, but this one in particular struck at his core for some reason that night; it made him think of losing his family or vice versa.  These thoughts left him restless and he decided to go to the kitchen for coffee; his rationale, his principles, and everything he used to make sense of the world around him was no longer comforting him.  
          In his desperation, he did what he knew best–he bowed down and prayed.  In a moment of vulnerability, he expressed his weakness to God and his belief in what he thought right.  God spoke back to him and told him to rise and stand for truth and if he did so, He would be with him and remain with him until the very end.  This self-induced salvation for King is what provided a direct experience with God that he would take with him for the rest of his life.  King’s spirituality and ethics were deeply rooted in his religion because of his “kitchen experience”–this example fits well with Masao Abe’s model for Christianity because his religious experience leads to ethics. 

Comment on the differences between the speeches made by Umar and Abu Bekr when Muhammad died.  What makes Bekr’s speech the more appropriate Islamic response?

          In his speech, Umar stated, “Some of the disaffected will allege that the Messenger is dead, but by God, he is not dead: he has gone to his Lord as Moses son of Imran went and was hidden [on Sinai] from his people for forty days.  By God, the Messenger will return as Moses returned and will cut off the hands and feet of men who allege that the Messenger is dead”.  Umar was making appeals to sacralize Muhammad in a way that should have only been reserved for Allah (from an Islamic perspective).  
          To clarify to the congregation inside the Mosque that Muhammad was not a deity to be worshipped or expected to return, Abu Bekr followed with a statement of his own:  “O men, if anyone worships Muhammad, Muhammad is dead; if anyone worships God, God is alive, immortal”.  In this address, Fasching and deChant claim, “the true essence of Islam was reaffirmed, the very core of the first pillar, the shahada (confession) – there is no God but God”.  
          Bekr’s speech conveys the proper understanding of Islamic belief.  Muhammad is to be remembered as a special man among men who was chosen by Allah to be his messenger – the Messenger of his will, but not as an equal of God.  Likening him to a similar like a saint or lesser god would be considered shirk, or idolatry, and that would be going against Islam’s first pillar. 

What is the hajj, and why was it so important to Malcolm X?  What made Malcolm’s experience different from that of the Muslims he met during the hajj?
         
One of the Islamic pillars requires all Muslims to make a pilgrimage, or hajj, to the holy city of Mecca once in their lifetime if possible.  Fasching and deChant claim that this pilgrimage was “his own flight (hijra) from the sacred society of the Nation of Islam to the traditional Islam and a new vision of a holy community, open to all races and religions”.  
          Malcolm X, who once identified as a member of the sacred society of the Nation of Islam, was converted to a member of the holy community and no longer promoting black separatism, but seeking justice for the human collective instead of just the specific group he belonged to.  
          Malcolm’s experience was different than that of the Muslims he encountered during the hajj because his perspective was that of a member of the Nation of Islam.  It was on the hajj that he first learned to pray and posture himself.  Most importantly, he learned that Islam means “submission, peace, and unity of all peoples of the world”.  One could think being ignorant of these Islamic staples originally had him at a disadvantage, but Malcolm’s receptiveness to the holy event allowed him to absorb many universal and spiritual elements that made the hajj a priceless experience during his life journey.