Pitts and his Two Homes

First, I’d like to correct the professor’s quote in the prompt. It says “the vulgar are not required to read the Alcoran” but that’s a mistake. What it actually says is “the vulgar are not permitted to read the Alcoran” (Pitts 290).

“I was lately perusing an English Alcoran, where I find in the preface that the translator saith that the vulgar are not permitted to read the Alcoran but (as the poor Romanists) to live and die in an implicit faith of what they are taught by their priests” (Pitts 290). What the beginning of that quote does is start with a sense of equivalency between Islam and Catholicism that Pitts previously would say over and over again. The first English translation asserts that Catholics and Muslims are similar in that they are not allowed to read their holy book. To only hold faith told to them from priest without having read for themselves first. This would track with his previous comparisons between Catholicism and Islam. However, then he writes, “This I utterly deny, for it is not only permitted and allowed of, but it is (as I intimated before) looked on as very commendable in any person to be diligent in the reading of it” (Pitts 290). What this does is discredit the English translation of the Alcorn (as Pitts calls it), whose assertion is that Muslims are not permitted to read the Qu’ran, but also implies that Islam is better than Catholicism because Muslims are encouraged to read and study their holy book. So why this disavowal? Because he’s come to respect the faith. He lets a Turk chastise him without being defensive about it, “I shall acquaint you with one passage of a Turk to me in the temple cloister” (Pitts 288). He lets him have his own speech with direct quotes, as we discussed in class. He’s even compared this place of worship to the Royal Exchange, “for, as I said, the temple is much of the figure of the Royal Exchange” (Pitts 288). This comparison between one of his birth country’s institutions and the religious institutions of another country speaks volumes of his growing respect. It’s done without his usual posturing, hemming and hawing about “poor Catholics, poor Muslims, etc”. He’s begun to link his home, England, with this new place, one that he’s beginning to consider a home as well.

So why does Pitts disavow the comparison to Catholics? Because he’s begun identifying with Islam.

What side are you on Pitts

Enrique Aguilar

Pitts captivity and conversion to Islam led to a new point of view from an outside person, while he was forced to covert or be killed,he converted and he was able to live and criticize the rituals and habits Muslims partake in, from a Presbyterian westerners perspective.  Throughout Pitts accounts of tradition , we can see how Pitts compares Islam and Catholicism. In his day to day ventures he experiences many different and new scenarios. Pitts is confusing as he seems to be on one side for a while and then speaks highly of the other, Islam and Catholicism, although he specifies that he was never fully devoted to Islam. Pitts does not feel equal to the individuals he has come across in his voyage. He refers to them as less ,  “I could not choose but admire to see those poor creatures so extraordinarily devout and affectionate when they were about these superstitions…”(274) In Pitts process of integration to Islam he praises the extreme devotion Muslims have to their religion, he accepts the flaws in his religion, and Pitts was keen on the idea opposing Roman purgatory.  “This beat-olloh is open but two days in the space of six weeks,viz., one day for the men and and the next day for the women. I tarrying at Mecca about four months , had the opportunity of entering into it twice, a reputed advantage which many thousands of haggis have not met with…” He doesn’t seem to understand the ritual that goes down in the beat-olloh , but he does know it is rare and many people wait to get the opportunity to participate. “And, I confess, I found nothing worth seeing in it:only two wooden pillars in the midst to keep up the roof and a bar of iron fastened to them on which hanged three or four silver lamps.(which are ,I suppose, are seldom if ever lighted)” (281)

Pitts tone on Islam and Catholicism

When Pitts talks about Islam, although he seems to acknowledge the religion and how the Catholics and Muslims will see eye to eye in some aspects, he also does not fully believe in Islam. Yes, there are some points where he talks in high regards about Islam, but I can’t help but notice his tone. When he talks positively about Muslims and the Mahometans he follows it up with a negative connotation or disbelief, this leads me to believe that he is either in denial about Islam or that he catches himself showing any sort of amusement towards Islam, and by doing this he will not be accepted back to his society so that’s why he follows it up with a negative connotation. For example, although he shares his fascination for Islam, he will usually have pity or call people who practice Islam negative terms such as ‘poor ignorant creatures’ (274) which he often refers to muslims as creatures; this stood out to me as I interpreted it with him having a liking toward the religion and how it is practiced, but maybe he doesn’t like the people of the religion. Pitts references clothing and prayer items that are similar in Islam-Catholicism, such as a Muslims and Catholics wearing long garments (muslim men wearing thobes and catholic priests wearing robes), and then mention of prayer beads. Most muslims have a Tasbih with them at all times to recite the 99 names of Allah, dhikr (remembering Allah), giving Istighfar, etc. and every Bead is used to repetition or to count; similarly Catholics use the Rosary Beads as a form of prayer and the beads are specific to a prayer on each bead. From my understanding, even though the Religions have similarities Pitts has to disavow the Muslim-Catholic analogy to appeal to his western peers and prove that he has changed and will not revert into Islam.

Paana Zamani  

Pitts’ Moral Positioning in a Theological Orient

Throughout his captivity narrative, Joseph Pitts’ assumes the role of the Orientalist, by not only reporting and documenting the customs and culture of the Orient, but by also constantly referencing and anchoring Islam with Roman Catholicism. Through the Muslim-Catholic analogy, Joseph Pitt could reach a suitably-similar audience in the Occident, because Catholicism’s material institutions had catalyzed a return to more fundamentalist approaches of worshipping the Christian god, and therefore, invalidating the ”truth” of the Muslims’ religion would be no different than invalidating the”truth” of the Roman Catholic church. Yet, what is done when Joseph Pitts deviates from coupling Papists and Muslims together as heretical, and in actuality, may be perceived to be ”defending” the Muslims over the Papists? Does this tiny bit of defense signify that Joseph Pitts is still an apostate himself? The instance of inverting the audiences expectations can be seen in Chapter 7, when Pitts’ purposefully dedicates a couple of lines to rectify a Muslim mistruth: “The translator saith that the vulgar are not required to read the Alcoran but (as the poor Romanists) to live and die in an implicit faith of what they are taught by their priests. This I utterly deny, for it is not only permitted and allowed of, but it is (as I intimated before) looked on as very commendable in any person to be diligent in the reading of it.”(290) The misconception that Pitts’ is taking his time to clarify is the notion that, like the Romanists, Muslims similarly are far removed from the actual literature of their religion, due to the fact that the impoverished class cannot read their holy scriptures. He clarifies, and places an emphasis on the importance of true representation, writing ”I utterly deny”. Apart from Joseph Pitts’ defense of the honorable ”Sola Scriptura”, something that both Protestants, like him, as well as Muslims, respect in their religions. However, does this signify that Pitts’ remains an apostate? Or even “worse”, is he still a Muslim? I argue that Pitts, although recognizable in some texts, still remains a Orientalist, and as a dedicated Orientalist, Pitts cannot obviously look on and accept a western misconception of the Orient, because as an Orientalist scholar, he has the unspoken tradition to report back truthfully to the Occidental powers.

Pitts, Catholicism, and Islam

During the time that Joseph Pitts was held captive, he states that he was forced into the religion of Islam and as a Muslim, he gained vast knowledge that had not yet been acquired by his contemporaries. An example of this is that Pitts is the first western European, at the time, to make the sacred pilgrimage to Mecca with his second master. During this pilgrimage and visit to Mecca, he gains a deeper understanding of the customs and practices of the Islamic religion. It is this greater understanding that allows Pitts to gain a sort of sympathy towards this religion, particularly in the way that Muslims are highly devoted as is evident when he states, “I profess I could not choose but admire to see those poor creatures so extraordinary devout” (276). Although there is admiration towards Muslims and their religion Pitts very clearly still holds his own religion to be the superior one as is revealed by the choice of words “poor creatures” as well as how he goes on to the Muslims at Mecca as “blind and idolatrous” (276). Earlier in his account, Pitts uses the Islamic religion to compare to and criticize the concept of purgatory however he also uses Islam or rather the devotion that the Muslims show as a goal that those of his religion should follow. It is understandable why Pitts would be frustrated with the state of the church in regards to things such as purgatory and therefore he uses Islam to critique this while simultaneously condemning Islam. However, it can not be denied that Pitts did grow to have some form of respect for the religion as the sight of it all even brought tears to his eyes. This in the eyes of anyone who had read his narrative would call into question whether he had truly been forced into Islam or perhaps converted of his own accord. Therefore it is by pure necessity that Pitts abandoned this analogy of Catholicism and Islam because it was necessary for him to create some distance to either hide his true feelings towards Islam or to enforce the idea that he never truly was a follower of the religion.

Turning Turk with Joseph Pitts

By: Suki Kaur

What is going on with Joseph Pitts?

After adorning and observing the religious methods worshipping in Islamic cultures, why would Joseph Pitts start condemning those methods? I thought the methods of worshipping God in the Islamic cultures were supposed to be an inspiration for the Western World religion(s). Just at the mention of the word “vulgar” is making me wonder, maybe Joseph Pitts value(s) are being compromised and that, for him would be an intolerable and unacceptable act from the viewpoint of Islamic religion and Catholic religion. It would be going out of the boundary that Joseph Pitts has drawn around according to his viewpoint of religion. When Joseph Pitts mentions that once he started to carefully read the Alcoran, the preface stated the vulgar are not allowed to read the Alcoran but they are supposed to live life and die in faith by the absolute teachings of the priest(s), this action is seen as a highly praised or desired act in the reading of the Alcoran. So as Joseph Pitts is doing the reading of the Alcoran, he seems to imply that he should be looked at as a believer of the Islamic religion, he clearly states in the following quote, “This I utterly deny, for it is not only permitted and allowed of, but it is (as I intimated before) looked on as very commendable in any person to be diligent in the reading of it” (Pitts 290) it could be referring to (the Alcoran). As a person who did not want to and was forced to conform to the Islamic religion externally, it seems to me that Pitts might be conforming to the religion internally as well. I am also not sure why Pitts would read the Alcoran when it is not suppose to be translated into any language other than the “Arabian Language.” (Pitts 290)

Pitt’s Contempt for The Catholic Church

Elliot Ruvalcaba

Throughout Pitt’s immersion into the Muslim culture, he draws multiple comparisons between Islam and Catholicism. However, while maintaining his explicit critiques of their faiths, his disavowal of the Muslim-Catholic analogy he created forms from the reasons he takes issue with each religion. He identifies a distinction between them through their devotion and practices. Presbyterians have differentiated themselves from Catholics by permitting their followers to read the bible and form their interpretations instead of being restricted to the exegesis provided by priests. They also do not believe in a hierarchal system, unlike Catholics. Pitts sees this similarity reflected in his observance of the Islamic faith, and their passionate devotion without intermediaries is what he most frequently praises.

In statements like, “I could not choose but admire to see those poor creatures so extraordinarily devout and affectionate when they were about these superstitions… I could scarce forbear shedding of tears to see their zeal,” he commends their dedication and simultaneously utilizes it to reassert his reprimands against Christians and any Christian denominee for their lax loyalties (pg.276). Pitts also describes the cave of Hira as “not at all beautiful, which I [he] admired.” (pg. 278) This statement contributes to how Pitt uplifts Muslims by degrading Catholics; in this case, for having overly-lavish cathedrals for priests to retire in. Through his repeated use of “blind” and “superstitious” for the Mohammetans, it’s evident that his appraisal of the Catholics comes from their roots in Christianity. However, his Muslim-Catholic analogy disavowment is most apparent in his final statement of chapter VII where he encourages all Christians, including Catholics and Protestants, to read from the Alcoran and form individual analyses of their text. Through a backhanded statement, he implies that the self-exegetion of religious text is a practice each person should do, and in their prohibition, the Catholic Church is denying their followers a direct relationship with God.

Pitt’s distinction between the religions totals to the idea that while the Mohammetans are “false” in their worship, they are admirable for their strictness to their devotion. However, while Catholics are a branch of Christianity like Presbyterians, they pervert the religion by adding idols and intermediaries. He views them as subjectively worse than Mohammetans in that regard for being “blasphemous” in method while practicing his faith, and all Mohammetans would have to do is, “take the hint and learn thereby to bless the goodness of God,” as he had (pg.223).

Joseph Pitts, Islam, and Devotion

During his enslavement to Algerian pirates, Joseph Pitts blatantly voices his opposition to other religious practices than his own, being Presbyterian. Although Islam is the religion most criticized throughout Pitts’s writings, Judaism and Catholicism also receive their share of disdain. However, Pitt’s resentment for Catholicism becomes increasingly apparent throughout his writings to the point of comparison of Catholicism to Islam as parallels. Then Pitts abjures this comparison to some degree which I argue is due to Islam although being a form of faith he dislikes promotes practices with which he agrees. 

Despite Pitts’s hostility towards Islam and its followers, he acknowledges the extreme devotion Muslims have to their faith and practices. One form of devotion is the reading and studying of the sacred text of Islam which aligns with the customs of Pitt’s Presbyterian faith and what he wishes more followers of the faith would practice. In this sense, Pitts would want to have distance between Islam and Catholicism because if they have their overlap what does this mean for his Presbyertain faith with he also aligns with Islam (in a distant way).

However, it is also clear that Pitts wants to distance himself as much as possible from Islam in order to avoid being perceived as a traitor to his faith thus he continues with comparisons such as “Thus those blind infidels (as the papists do, to whom they are really something akin in several things) apply themselves to imaginary intercessors instead of the living and true God who alone is able to command the swelling and mounting billows of the sea to be quiet and be still.” I believe Pitts is performing as a Presbyterian that must denounce anything and everything that does not align with the practice however as a Presbyterian he can not ignore when a proper practice of faith (i.e. extreme devotion)  is being exhibited. 

(2/3/2022, Chelsey Olivarria)

fear of fear.

While dissecting Joseph Pitts’s narrative, one can notice multiple explanations as to why he now disavows the Muslim-Catholic analogy. In his narrative he emphasizes, “I profess, I could not choose but admire to see these poor creatures so extraordinarily devout and affectionate” (274). Meaning that this is the part where Pitts differentiates Catholicism and Islam beliefs until he thoroughly understands in more critique how similar their aspects can be. This is important to Pitts because he seems to have this valuable connection and need to not completely deny the religion. That being said, this demonstrates how Pitts is denying both parts because he shares his idea with two specific reasons. To elaborate, one of the reasons he starts to think this way is because he fears being looked down upon by Presbyterians. This is something essential because if they look down upon him because Presbyterians felt like he was part of Catholicism and a Priest, he wouldn’t be valuing their beliefs. This means a lot to him because he is a Presbyterian, meaning he wouldn’t want to feel as if he’s disrespecting the main aspects of the religion. 

In addition, Pitts also states, “I converted to Islam, but at least I’m not Catholic since Muslims don’t worship idols and are really devoted to their scripture” (246). This is also important because Pitt isn’t found praising the Catholic religion, rather he’s learning about it and understanding that of its value or concern. As a person that respects his religion, he is compelled to stop the analogies for fear that his own religion will assume the worst of him.  It is important to become open to knowing more about other religious beliefs because one becomes more open-minded in doing so. However, in his situation, he is put in a decision where they will assume that he is praising the Catholic religion if he doesn’t stop his analogies about them. To conclude, I believe that in this case, it is essential to understand other religions as much as one’s own.

Questionable Devotion

Maya Carranza

In the beginning, Pitts held poor views of Islam, however in this chapter his perception shifts. Pitts admires how devoted Muslims are to their religion, making negative remarks about Catholics while praising Muslims. Throughout he compares Catholics to Muslims stating, “They usually carry their beads about their arms or necks, whereas others carry them in their pockets.” (279). This sparks an image of Catholic rosaries used during prayer. He adds, “Here are likewise some dervishes that get money as well as at other places by burning of incense…” (289). This is also done during a Catholic mass as a basket is passed around where a small donation is made and incense can often be found burning in the church. To add, he participated in Muslim rituals and visited places of worship. It makes one wonder if he would practice Islamic faith if he wasn’t Christian. He seems indecisive and contradicts himself as he doesn’t allow himself to fully enjoy and value the religion due to his hatred and biased opinions towards Catholic and Islam beliefs. His animosity towards Catholics stems from the fact that they worship saints and religious figures other than God. As he expresses appreciation towards Muslims, he holds back before his faithfulness to his religion is further doubted. Although his journey gives him first-hand experience of Islam, his questionable devotion to Christianity is what prompts Pitts to disavow the Muslim-Catholic analogy.