Multi-Faith Discourse: Beyond Lampoon Tract Propaganda

130622 P Multi-Faith Discourse 1It is important for Christians to know who they are in their faith to enter meaningfully into conversations with those of other religions. It wasn’t an Evangelical Christian from whom I first heard these words, but a professor at a Mainline Protestant liberal seminary, who said his students were not sure how to proceed in conversations with those of other faiths because they were not sure of their own tradition, including such doctrines as Christology. As a result, he said they were at a loss in pursuing such conversations in ways that would prove significant as encounters with those in other religions.

Of course, it is also important to learn well the traditions of those with whom one enters into conversation. The Apostle Paul appears to have been well-versed in Pagan thought, as reflected on Mars Hill (See my article on this subject titled Idol Makers). It wasn’t simply Evangelicals from whom I heard these words, but also from a leading Pagan figure, Jason Pitzl-Waters, who spoke in my world religions class this past Thursday. Jason is the moderator of the blog, The Wild Hunt: A Modern Pagan Perspective (For a discussion of Paganism, see my treatment of the subject and the ensuing comments on the topic at Idol Makers). Jason has spoken two years running in my world religions class (Here is what he wrote last year concerning his rationale for speaking in the class). Jason knows who he is and does not take jabs at us or frame us in view of anti-Christian propaganda. Moreover, Jason does not have hang-ups concerning Christianity; he did not grow up with them either. All this makes it possible for him to engage us well and for us to enter into meaningful conversations with him.

Jason doesn’t expect Christians to believe Pagans are on the right path, but to respect Pagans enough to understand them. He encouraged us Evangelical Christians to be like the Apostle Paul, who thought the Pagans of his day were in error and believed they should convert, but still understood them. Jason encouraged us to embrace a Pauline attitude and said that it is okay to want to try and convert Pagans since that is an Evangelical Christian value. Still, he argued that it is not right to approach Pagans in propaganda-like terms (such as cartoon gospel tract characters that distort and sensationalize real Pagans), but rather in thoughtful terms like Paul did in his nuanced interaction with the Pagans on Mars Hill in Acts 17.

Last year there was a breakthrough in my class when my students realized that Mike Warnke’s Satan Seller does not represent Paganism. They were also taken aback when Jason exhorted us: “If you want to lead me to Christ, become my friends.” It is unlikely that Jason will ever convert; regardless, I would hope Evangelical Christians like myself would want to be his friends, real friends and not just pragmatically so that friendship becomes merely the means to the end of evangelism and conversion. Otherwise, our relational talk is only a propaganda ploy and a front for ulterior motives. As Jason said, “All too often, relationships are abandoned in favor of the sell.”

Jason actually wants to encourage Evangelical Christians to develop a “deeper” missional stance. “Why is that?” I asked him. He responded by saying that he wants to help Christians develop a deeper missional attitude, which is centered in honesty and unfiltered knowledge (not perspectives tainted by inaccuracies and distortions) of the religions with which they interact. He wants us to try and convert the real him rather than a paper cut-out version, which is a caricature. He wants us to see him clearly. If we see him/them that way, then we can have honest discussions and live together in a harmonious manner. If we don’t engage openly with understanding, it leads to even greater distortions. We don’t have to agree about ultimate reality to live harmoniously, but we do need to respect one another for who we are, not discount one another for what we are not. This is a valuable sentiment, and one that I not only share with Jason, but also with my colleague John Morehead at the Evangelical Chapter of the Foundation for Religious Diplomacy. We at the FRD advocate understanding and a discussion of our differences through religious diplomacy rather than a downplaying of differences found frequently in interfaith work.

As Jason reminded us, everyone of us knows how uncomfortable it is when we are misunderstood. Jason does not want to see Christianity defined by misguided extremists. All he asks in return is that we don’t approach Pagans as diabolical cartoon characters. The more thoughtful we are the less likely will it be possible for others to make us the brunt of their own cartoon jokes and the inspiration for their own horror stories.130622 P Multi-Faith Discourse 2

Going further, the more secure in Christ we Christians are the less we need to devalue others from different paths: rather than devaluing them, we should lift up Christ who does not devalue them either but loves them and knows them for who they are, not what we would reduce them to be. By valuing him, we learn to value them in all their radical difference from us; by devaluing them, we end up devaluing him who is radically different from all of us.

This piece is cross-posted at Patheos and The Christian Post. Comments made here are not monitored. To join the conversation, please comment on this post at Patheos.

Idol Makers

Golden CalfWe Christians need to be on guard in our understanding of such movements as contemporary Paganism. We tend to lump all of modern Paganism into one general and distorted category. We often fail to account for the vast complexity within the movement and articulate Paganism accurately. For all our concern about pagan idolatry, we may be guilty at times of making their idols for them. We need to develop the practice of respect for understanding their practices, rituals, and beliefs.

The Apostle Paul was a very nuanced Christian thinker. He understood the world of ancient Paganism and respected the Romans and Greco-Roman culture enough to understand carefully what they practiced and believed. As Paganism lost ground in the ancient world with the rise of Christianity, a sophisticated understanding of pre-Christian or pagan religions also lost ground. Unlike many Christians throughout the ages, Paul understood that idols were not to be identified at every turn with pagan deities. In Acts 17:16-34, we see that he (like many ancient Pagans) understands that the statue to the unknown God is not a god, but that it represents or can represent God beyond the idol. The same goes for Paul’s reflection on idolatry in 1 Corinthians 10. The idols to which food was sacrificed were nothing, even though in his estimation, the idols were associated with demons (1 Corinthians 10:14-22). In other words, Paul was able to distinguish the material object from what he understood to be a demonic presence.

Just as Paul had a more complex understanding of Paganism’s practices and beliefs, including the worship of idols in his day, we need the same kind of complex awareness of Paganism and its understanding of the sacred in our day. It would be too simplistic to say that Pagans today worship nature. Contemporary Paganism doesn’t generally see a tree as a god, but as an extension of the divine pantheistically or panentheistically conceived (but pantheists and panentheists are not all Pagans). The natural world is sacred and an extension of the divine, but nature is not generally worshipped today as a divinity.

If one were to account for a theology of contemporary Paganism, one would have to place hard polytheism involving distinct deities on one end of the spectrum and a completely metaphorical account of divinity on the other end: here divinity would be viewed as a metaphor for nature or humanity or society (some Pagans view the gods atheistically as symbols without ontological reality). In between, there is a variety of understandings, including a combination of the two ends of the spectrum. Across the spectrum, nature plays a key role. The emphasis is not on right belief, even though beliefs do have a bearing on practice; for example, whatever beliefs one branch of Paganism entails involves a connection to nature and care for it. The emphasis on sacred regard for nature is widespread.

Gender is also key to Paganism. The divine can be seen with a female face and body. This is very different from most Christian understandings of God, though it connects contemporary Paganism with ancient forms of Paganism. There are female and male forms of deity, whether viewed literally or metaphorically. The divine can be female in origin. While many educated Christians do not gender God, still, Christianity has often had a very patriarchal view of God, even though Scripture uses feminine and motherly associations at times to speak of the Creator. For Paganism, the female gender is associated with birthing (not creating) and nurturing nature.

Contemporary Pagan religions are largely praxis-based faiths and spiritualities. Harmony with nature is a key value. The more we are out of harmony the worse it gets. Many Evangelicals care for the creation (creation care) since they believe that we should be good stewards of the earth until everything ends because God is its creator. In contrast, the underlying motivation in caring for the earth for Pagans is that the earth itself is sacred. For contemporary Pagans, the earth is not a creation given to us; so, we don’t have dominion over it since we are bound up with it. As the contemporary discussion on the environment developed, it shaped Paganism as a nature religion in a significant way. Honoring and having a significant regard for nature is key to Paganism in the contemporary context.

It is very difficult for modern Paganism with its praxis-oriented spirituality to take seriously Christianity’s worship of a Creator God, when many Christians jettison care for what we call creation. The loss of practical consideration of creation stewardship on the part of Christians has perhaps created a vacuum that has been filled by the sacralization of nature by Paganism today.

Why would many Christians have no regret at destroying an ancient forest by paving roads that will bear fleets of SUVs when we would never allow SUVs to pass through our sanctuaries and run over our communion tables? How can our churches with their symbols be viewed as sacred when they are built by human hands, and not the creation at large, when it is built by the hand of God?

While we Christians would not wish to divinize the creation, we should also guard against turning our own creations into idolatrous machines that wreak havoc on what God himself as made. When we do, we are guilty of worshiping our own creations rather than God. At least, Pagans old and new are charged with worshiping God’s creation (Romans 1:18-25), not our own.

This piece is cross-posted at Patheos and The Christian Post. Comments made here are not monitored. To join the conversation, please comment on this post at Patheos.

Conversation with Jason Pitzl-Waters, Mike Stygal, and John W. Morehead

untitledToday we had an opportunity to follow up on a recent conversation with some of our friends in the Pagan community. This time, Jason Pitzl-Waters joined us too. Jason blogs at The Wild Hunt, Mike is Vice President of Pagan Foundation, and John is Custodian of Foundation for Religious Diplomacy’s Evangelical Christian Chapter. Along with Dr. Metzger, they discuss matters of interfaith dialogue between Pagans and Christians, including some of the key sticking points in these relationships.

Listen in for a constructive engagement of the Pagan/Christian divide. Consider adding your voice to the comments section of Jason’s blog and practicing good dialogue.