| If I hadn't mentioned it – I’m a seminarian and a bit opinionated. My friend Chris posted a response to my last post, and posted some thoughts that might seem unrelated at his blog cminer0308 but be prepared, dear readers, because I think the question of the transforming power of Christ and the question of world religions is often related (if not always directly). I know – some of you will probably disagree with me, but that’s fine… we’ll never get anywhere if we don’t talk, now will we?
Christianity and World Religions
Contemporary American society displays tremendous religious diversity. In the past, the question of the appropriate relationship between Christianity and other religions usually implied the work of missionaries, or the appropriate relationship between Christians and Jews. Today, however, inter-religious contact is far more likely to take place in our own communities, and with members of many more religious traditions. In the old paradigm, Christians could ask questions about the righteous “savage,” a figment who lived in some far away place where the Christian Gospel had never been proclaimed, but who lived according to the laws of God evident in nature.
Increasingly, the paradigm of “anonymous Christianity,” though still appealing to many in the Catholic tradition, seems inappropriate when dealing with adherents to other religions within our own communities. In their practice we recognize that their basic beliefs, religious goals, and pious practices can diverge significantly from our own. I also believe we need to take truth claims as truth claims, meaning it does disservice to all involved when we ignore any religious claim to uniqueness – in other words, not all religious traditions are paths to the Divine, at least not to the same Divine. As a result, I believe we need to revisit the question of Christianity’s relationships with other religions, beginning with the biblical witness as mediated by the traditions of the church, carefully examined in light of our experiences of the real differences (and meaningful similarities) between religious traditions. In the following essay, I will argue for a twofold response to other religions, and then turn to application, attempting to express broad guidelines for pastoral responses and inter-religious dialogues in light of these insights.
Christianity has always had to deal with some degree of religious diversity. While there have been times when Christians in small towns (both in Europe and North America) could have spent entire lifetimes without ever meeting someone who was not at least nominally a member of their parish, those times have passed almost everywhere. Today, Christians live in a social context more like that of early Christianity than almost anything between then and now. In the United States, Christianity competes with a variety of other religious traditions, new and old, that claim to provide truth for adherents. For Americans, there are many ways of being religious, but are all ways equal? Some might argue yes, but accepting religions founded on the work of a novelist (Scientology), the worship of pre-Christian pagan deities (various forms of neo-paganism), or the human will (Church of Satan), as equal to God revealed through the Torah or the Incarnation makes me uneasy.
Considering the nature of contemporary society, and its analogous relationship with that of early Christianity, the general focus of the New Testament, particularly the Pauline epistles, provides structure for my thinking. Paul writes to communities of new believers who have abandoned the religions of their communities and families (in the case of Gentiles), or who have come to understand their faith differently in light of the resurrection of Jesus (in the case of Jews). The consistent truth-claim of New Testament Christianity was that God was in the process of transforming the world, as evidenced by the resurrection of Jesus. As a result, Paul encouraged people to abandon their ancestral religions to embrace the “true and living God.” According to Acts, he recognizes deep religious intention, and even an attempt to worship “an unknown god” in Athens, but then attempted to persuade the people of Athens that their piety, however well intentioned, was inferior to the Gospel he proclaimed (Acts 17:16-34).
The New Testament offers a twofold picture of early Christianity – attempting to convince Gentiles that the God of Israel was the only True God, as revealed in the death and resurrection of Jesus, and trying to convince Jews that Jesus was the Messiah. For most of Christian history, the first of these two propositions has remained consistent – Gentiles should believe in the One God because of Jesus. However, the role of Judaism evident in Acts and the Epistles has often been diluted or abandoned, treating Jews not as worshippers of God and the people of the Covenant, but simply as non-Christians. At this point, I believe a careful reading of the New Testament texts should lead Christians to treat believing Jews as equals, worshippers of the same God, and participants in God’s covenant (Ro. 11:1-6, 11-29). While we recognize the significance of the resurrection of Jesus, we must also recognize that even the New Testament authors admitted that this kind of resurrection was not what second-Temple Judaism expected, and should understand that though we struggle to read the same texts, our traditions of interpretation make mutual understanding and reconciliation unlikely, and perhaps, impossible by human means within human history.
While I believe a careful reading of the New Testament should lead us to understand ourselves as gentile Christians “grafted in” to Judaism, and that this should provide a way for Christians to understand Judaism, it does not explain how we should deal with other kinds of religion. Two factors should come into play here: first, as I have already mentioned, the New Testament speaks to people turning away from their other religions to worship the God of Israel; second, the practical moral results of following a particular religion. The first factor insists on the peculiarity and ultimate significance of Christianity (as exemplified by Gal. 4:8-10), the second raises the question of the possibility of worshipping the True God without knowing it.
I am convinced, as a result of the biblical witness and the general shape of the Christian tradition, that we meet God, and come to understand who God is as a result of the life, death and resurrection of Jesus. In light of this encounter with God, I believe we inherit the responsibility to offer others the opportunity to enter a relationship with God through Jesus. Other religions, however, make other claims about absolute truth. Islam rejects the resurrection of the body, and the possibility that God could become enfleshed, both Hinduism and Buddhism reject that God is a Personal Other with whom we can have a relationship. Not all of these can be equally true, though adherence to any of the three can lead to highly moral living. As a result, we need to see them as viable ways to be moral and attempts to understand God beyond the Jewish and Christian traditions, but should recognize that these are not different paths to the God of Jews and Christians, at least not complete paths. Instead, we should accept that we believe different things, and enter into conversation to explain what we believe honestly, accurately, and completely, admitting that we believe Christianity’s claims are true. While such a claim makes implicit critiques of the truth-claims of other religions, our life as a Christian community and our honest and humble expressions of Christian faith should be clear and bold, without resorting to violence, coercive tactics, or slander.
In some cases, however, other religious beliefs can lead to violence, oppression, licentiousness or other forms of immorality. In these cases, Christians should not make concerted efforts to reach mutual understanding. Here, a living witness of a different way of life, empowered by the Holy Spirit, and expressed in Christian care should demonstrate our concern for adherents of these religions, with the concerted effort to demonstrate the superiority of Christianity.
Pastorally, the mission of the United Methodist Church is to “Make Disciples of Jesus Christ.” As a result, the goal of a United Methodist pastor should be to offer people ways into relationship with Jesus, and to deepen the faith of the Christian community. In addition, we should attempt to teach the people of our congregations to respect religious differences, recognize them as real differences, and attempt to encourage members of our churches to express their faith clearly and boldly, without resorting to violence, coercive tactics, or slander.
Wesley insisted that God in Christ could save anyone, anywhere (even a Calvinist), and to say otherwise was to set limits to God’s limitless grace. However, he also insisted that true faith in Christ transformed lives, inspired people to take responsibility for others, and to accept God’s calling and empowerment to live holy lives. For me, then, the primary question is not one whether God can save people who believe differently than I do, but rather, how to fulfill the mission of the Christian church to make disciples. Perhaps there are millions of “anonymous Christians” in the world, but as I understand the pastoral mission, my job is to participate in making self-acknowledging Christians out of people who do not know that Jesus is Lord and Redeemer of the World. For me, recognizing that God’s grace is boundless and beyond my understanding allows me to focus on this mission, and not worry about the details.
|
