“Houston, we have a problem.” These words, immortalized in the movie Apollo 13, have entered into the common lingo of our day as a way to say, sometimes humorously, that something is amiss. The wording, I discovered, is not exactly accurate, since both Apollo 13 crewmembers John Swigert, Jr and James Lovell said “Houston, we’ve had a problem.” The shade of difference in the meaning though means little. The problem referred to, if you remember, was a major one--life threatening in fact for the three crew members as they sped toward the moon. An electrical explosion shut down many operations in the command module including the oxygen system. “Houston, we’ve had a problem” translated by the movie into the present tense, was the start of some very tense days in 1970. After the film came out in 1995, the misquote phrase joined the popular jargon. Now-a-days, when you hear it, you know something’s not right. And so it is that the phrase comes to mind as I read the Acts lectionary text for today and think about pluralism as it stands these days.
When we became a part of The Center for Progressive Christianity several years ago, in preparation for that stance, several of us participated in an ongoing study of that organization’s eight points. The second of those eight points states:
By calling ourselves progressive, we mean that we are Christians who recognize the faithfulness of other people who have other names for the way to God's realm, and acknowledge that their ways are true for them, as our ways are true for us.And in the light of today’s Acts reading, I want to say “Houston, we have a problem” though I wonder if Houston really cares or can do something about it.
Most of us, during that study, and I’d wager today, would affirm that 2nd point of The Center for Progressive Christianity. The thought behind this different approaches to God is known as pluralism which has a fairly major influence on us these days. No longer do we automatically discount something because it is different from us. Neither do we reflexively accept something because it is like us. We are more discerning now and more open. This, in and of itself, is not a bad thing. We are working on being open to diversity in our midst and learning how to live that out.
On the website The Journey with Jesus by Daniel Clendenin, he writes that David Barrett identified 10,000 religions in 2001 in the World Christianity Encyclopedia. Ten thousand separate religions that humanity has turned to in its attempt to understand, get closer to, and/or explain the divine. Of those 10,000, 150 of them have one million members or more. Either way you look at it, Christianity is one amongst many. And as Clendenin asks, “Is it reasonable to believe that Jesus is the only way to the only God, and that the other 9,999 religions are false?” Most of us would not take such a hardline position, I would surmise. But Clendenin goes on to make some important points to consider before we rush to a blind and wholehearted embrace of religious pluralism. (http://www.journeywithjesus.net/)
Because out there, in the world today and throughout the vast scope of our history, people have done some amazing things in the name of religion. And I’m not saying “amazing” always in the sense that they are wonderful things being done; I’m thinking too about actions and events that make us stop and shake our heads in dismay.
There have been crusades and jihads and wars, killing thousands upon thousands of people, all fought to prove that one religion’s path to God is the right one to the right God. We’ve had centuries of slavery and subjugation of entire peoples, often in the name of religion. Women have been and continue to be oppressed through religious beliefs. Some ancient Polynesian religions, I understand, had a class of slaves who were the human sacrifices to the Gods. Hinduism has long history of a complex caste system including the untouchable caste that, if you’re unlucky to be born into, you cannot escape. In the jungles of South America, Jim Jones led hundreds to their suicides in his church. Polygamy has been practiced by religious figures throughout history, including but not limited to the Mormons. which has some break-away sects that still understand their religious call to be one of multiple wives for one husband.
From Donald Wildmon of the American Family Association to Fred Phelps of “God Hates Fags” fame to Iranian Ayatollahs to Osama bin Laden to the Lord’s Resistance Army of northern Uganda to countless others today, we haven’t come far from the Crusaders marching to conquer the Moors several times a thousand years or so ago. But if we are to truly embrace pluralism, we need to recognize that it’s more than thinking warmly of the Dalai Lama or working together with a Jewish synagogue for Interfaith Hospitality Network.
And so we read today’s lectionary text from Acts in which Peter, defending himself and his colleagues, says flat out: “There is salvation in no one else [than Jesus] for there is no other name under heaven given among mortals by which we must be saved.” (4:12) How do we defend our stance on religious pluralism facing such a direct statement by a true leader of the early church? Even from the words of Jesus we hear “I am the way, the truth, the life, no one comes to the Father except by me” (John 14:6) and the parable about a wide easy road and a narrow, difficult gate that is hard to get through in Matthew. (7:14)
As we did that study about becoming a member congregation of The Center for Progressive Christianity, I recall that during the session about point two, this one that I read a few moments ago about pluralism, we likened getting to God as a gate. We discussed whether there was only one path that led to that gate or whether there were multiple paths. As I remember it, we pretty much agreed that there were indeed multiple paths and we were on one of them, that path known as Christianity. We ended up with an image on newsprint with a number of lines converging from the bottom at a point near the top on a line, the space above which we had labeled “God.” It was an upside down funnel of the theological variety.
But I wonder now if that was only part of the picture. I wonder if there are other paths we didn’t draw in; lines that do not go to the gate we had imagined; paths that might even lead away from the top of that page where we placed God. Perhaps it’s not so much an upside down funnel as it is a mishmash of paths and lines going in all directions. What then do I do with pluralism? If I embrace and blindly accept these 9,999 other religions without much investigation into them, am I being naive and opening myself, and perhaps others, to possible movement away from God? And with so many other religions to check out, how and where does one draw the line that says “no, that is not a religion that leads to God.”
And I still have that defense from Peter to contend with. Now, mind you, circumstances between dear, old Peter and us are quite different. There was no “Christianity” then; there were a group of followers of Jesus of Nazareth, most of them Jewish. They hadn’t even gotten to the point where they were a thorn in the side of the Roman Empire yet; they were up in today’s reading before the Jewish high priests, not some imperial court. Peter was defending this sect within Judaism to the Jewish authorities. He shrewdly used a verse from Psalm 118 in his defense (the part about the rejected stone being the cornerstone) since they were indeed building a new religious edifice and that would be a verse that the priests would surely have known. Peter wasn’t talking so much about other religions in this case, but about how this new group related to Judaism.
So where does this leave us? Probably with more questions than answers. How do we approach pluralism? How do we work in interfaith situations and not seem triumphal? Where do we draw those lines about some of those other 9,999 religions? Do my lines need to match yours? Do I have to accept religions that still oppress women or gay men & lesbians or are xenophobic? Is violence such a part of religion so as to leave it to be irredeemable? And what then can be said about our own religion? How do we approach those who would say that their religious stance is the only way to that gate we see as the entrance to God? Is there no common ground? And how do I deal with other Christians who take very seriously the fact that following Jesus is the only way to approach God? Are we practicing the same religion? I’m not sure.
I fear this is one of those times at which I present more questions than answers. As we seek to find Truth however, we wonder about the truths that are out there. Indeed, Houston, we do have a problem. We have a problem in the tension between accepting other religions and acknowledging their ways as true for them while not diluting the message we are called to proclaim of God’s love and grace to the ends of the earth. We have a problem in opening ourselves up to others while understanding our call to bring the Gospel to others.
If you find yourself pondering such struggles, you are not alone. You are joined by many who seek to understand God as best they can while remaining true to the Christian faith that claims them.
© Gerry Brague, 3 May 2009
Posts
No comments:
Post a Comment