Diyanet stepped up its crusade for social-cultural engineering

Recent Friday sermons by the Diyanet (Turkey’s Directorate of Religious Affairs) have faced significant criticism from various segments of Turkish society for several reasons that will be listed below. Besides, I quote an X user who analysed the last 30 Friday sermons at the end of this post.

Main Criticisms

• Gender and Inheritance Rights
• Opposition to Equal Inheritance for Daughters: The August 15 Diyanet sermon reiterated classical Islamic inheritance law, which gives daughters half the share of sons. Women’s rights groups, such as EŞİK, strongly condemned this stance. Critics argue the sermon undermines constitutional guarantees of gender equality and the Civil Code, and fear it will pressure women to accept lesser inheritances. EŞİK warned that such messages enable government-backed legal changes that risk stripping women of equal inheritance, and may further expose women to social pressure and violence when asserting their legal rights.bianet
• Women’s Attire and Bodily Autonomy
• Commentary on Women’s Clothing: An August 1 sermon labeled styles of women’s dress such as shorts, tattoos, and see-through garments as “clothed nudeness.” This sparked public backlash for promoting restrictive, patriarchal norms and for singling out women’s choices in a public religious context.bianet
• LGBTI+ Rights and Social Marginalization
• Anti-LGBTI+ Rhetoric: A January sermon cast “desexualization” and efforts to “erase the natural essence of men and women” as threats to society’s moral fabric, using rhetoric commonly employed to marginalize the LGBTI+ community. Though not named directly, the sermon suggested that non-heteronormative identities encourage vice and erode family values. This drew sharp criticism from activists who accused Diyanet of fueling discrimination against LGBTI+ persons, especially in the context of the government’s “Year of the Family” campaign.duvarenglish

Recurring Themes in Criticism

• Instrumentalization for Political Purposes
• Many observers argue that Diyanet sermons routinely reflect government policy, especially under the AKP, using religious discourse to shape public attitudes toward controversial political and social issues. Diyanet has been accused of politicizing religious space, “legitimizing” divisive state positions, and amplifying polarization — particularly on gender justice, women’s rights, and minority protections.duvarenglish+1
• Marginalization of Dissent
• In recent years, critics have noted that sermons regularly marginalize various groups (e.g., the Hizmet movement and other sociopolitical dissenters), framing them as threats to national and religious unity.sobider

Summary Table

Criticism Theme Example / Incident Critics Gender and inheritance Sermon opposes equal inheritance for daughters EŞİK, women’s rights defendersbianet Women’s attire Clothing like shorts, tattoos declared “nudeness” Feminists, progressive journalistsbianet LGBTI+ marginalization “Desexualization” rhetoric targeting LGBTI+ community LGBTI+ activists, human rights groupsduvarenglish Political instrumentalization Use of sermons to support government positions Academics, opposition groupsbianet+2 Marginalization of dissent Sermons stigmatizing opposition (e.g. Hizmet) Dissident movements, civil societysobider

These criticisms reflect concern that the Diyanet is increasingly used as a tool for state policy, rather than serving as an independent religious institution working for all citizens. The protests focus particularly on gender justice, minority rights, and political neutrality in religious discourse.sobider+2

Here is Güzin Göksu’s analysis:

I reviewed the Friday sermons from the last 30 weeks. I tried to uncover the underlying messages being dictated to the public under the guise of religion. I believe I have identified the underlying ideology: a nationalist-communal unity and obedience, aiming to align the public’s daily behaviors — from consumption to digital language — along a politically focused moral framework.

In foreign policy, the Gaza issue takes center stage, while family law dominates domestic policy, with unity and obedience serving as the overarching concepts binding both together. All sermons revolve around these three main axes. This framework is rationalized with Quranic verses and hadiths. In other words, rather than conveying the message of the Quran to people, it seems to serve the function of sanctifying the political message.

Issues such as what we buy and sell, how we use water, and how we speak on social media are transformed into a kind of consciousness control instrument using a religion-based legitimization method. A characteristic feature of sermons is that they embed every kind of macro-level call into micro-level daily practices of obedience.

For example, in a sermon on water, the principle of “waste is forbidden” is reduced to the level of personal behavior, and water is transformed into a social right and a trust for future generations, thereby merging environmental and climate policy with the ethics of worship. However, in doing so, it does not mention public waste at all, imposing religion as a doctrine that binds only the lowest class of people and concerns only the individual, while making the dimensions of executive power and public waste invisible. This is a cleverly constructed rhetoric. It is almost like religious engineering.

The following topics are completely absent from the texts:

• Polytheism and obedience to authorities other than Allah
• Taghut
• Decision-making and governance based on justice
• Trust and merit
• Consultation and shura
• Quranic principles on how governance processes should be established based on participation and competence
• Justice in measurement and weighing
• Prohibition of bribery and favoritism
• Accumulation of wealth, concentration of assets, and justice in circulation
• The principle that wealth should not circulate only among the rich
• Procedure and transparency, recording of debts
• The themes of postponing or forgiving debts are never mentioned.

Additionally, the stories of the prophets mentioned in the Quran are either not mentioned at all or are used in areas that serve state policy, such as the story of the people of Lot regarding homosexuality. The stories of Pharaoh and Moses are rarely mentioned.

I also created a word cloud of the most frequently used words in the last 30 sermons. This can provide significant insight into the political function of Friday sermons:

unity, solidarity, ummah, nation, state, oppressed, oppressor, brotherhood, obedience, privacy, family, generation, youth, morality, waste, zakat, fitra, sacrifice, rights of the servant, public rights, boycott, Gaza, Palestine, Jerusalem, Zionist, mercy, conscience, disinformation

[embed]Diyanet stepped up its crusade for social-cultural engineering - Erkan's Field Diary Recent Diyanet sermons face criticism for views on inheritance, women's rights, and LGBTI+ issues, sparking debate over…erkansaka.net