Patheos Book Club Roundtable Review of "Rise of ISIS"

Patheos Book Club Review
I recently had the opportunity to participate in the Patheos Book Club Roundtable by contributing a review of Jay Sekulow's book Rise of ISIS: A Threat We Can't Ignore. Sekulow is a noted lawyer, conservative pundit, and Evangelical. I provide a conservative political and theological alternative to Sekulow's thesis. My review can be found on the Evangelical FRD website here.

Handbook of Religion: A Christian Engagement with Traditions, Teachings, and Practices

 

I just received my contributors' copy of Handbook of Religion (Baker Academic, 2014), edited by Terry Muck, Harold Netland and Gerald McDermott. My essays are on Paganism, including a descriptive overview, and a piece on theological exchanges and current issues. My contributions are followed by Gus diZerega's essay as an adherent of Paganism.

 I think this is one of the best volumes produced to date by Evangelicals on religion. It includes a number of top notch scholars on the topic, and the tone and content is far different than approaches of the past. It also includes contributions to practitioners and adherents of various religions so that they might speak for themselves. Pick this one up.

From the dust jacket:

"This comprehensive handbook provides a Christian perspective on religion and its many manifestations around the world. Written by top religion scholars from a broad spectrum of Christianity, it introduces world religions, indigenous religious traditions, and new religious movements. Articles explore the relationship of other religions to Christianity, providing historical perspective on past encounters and highlighting current issues. The book also contains articles by adherents of non-Christian religions, offering readers an insider's perspective on various religions and their encounters with Christianity. Maps, timelines, and sidebars are included."

Tour of Khadija Mosque

Last night I had the privilege of visiting the Khadija mosque in Salt Lake City. Salt Lake City is home to at least 20,000 Muslims. The mosque's imam, and a representative of the Islamic Society of Greater Salt Lake, spent some time with me and my small group including members from two different churches. We had a great time, and put down a foundation for future conversations and hopefully ongoing relationships. We will be returning in June or July to be a part of their Ramadan celebration.

Douglas Johnston at Westminster on Religion, Terror, and Error

Last night I had the pleasure of attending this lecture by Dr. Douglas Johnston, Founder of the International Center for Religion and Diplomacy, at Westminster College in Salt Lake City. The event was put together by the Utah Council for Citizen Diplomacy.

This presentation was a summary of his book with the same title as his lecture. The book description provides a better feel for last night's presentation:

How should the United States deal with the jihadist challenge and other religious imperatives that permeate today's geopolitical landscape? Religion, Terror, and Error: U.S. Foreign Policy and the Challenge of Spiritual Engagement argues that what's required is a longer-term strategy of cultural engagement, backed by a deeper understanding of how others view the world and what is important to them. The means by which that can be accomplished are the subject of this book.

The work realizes three important tasks. It shows how the United States can reposition itself to deal more effectively with the causal factors that underlie religious extremism; offers a successor to the rational-actor model of decision-making that has heretofore excluded "irrational" factors like religion; and suggests a new paradigm for U.S. leadership in anticipation of tomorrow's multipolar world. Describing how the United States should realign itself to deal more effectively with the factors underlying religious extremism, this innovative treatise explains how existing capabilities can be redirected to respond to the challenge and identifies additional capabilities that will be needed to complete the task.

 You can order the book through Amazon.com.

FRD Podcast 1.2 - Interview with Pastor Steve Stone of Heartsong Church

This podcast features an interview with Pastor Steve Stone of Heartsong Church in Cordova, Tennessee. He discusses his congregational relationship and extension of love for neighbor to the local Muslim community, and how this became an international media story. For additional background, see the many news stories on this, such as that in USA Today: http://usatoday30.usatoday.com/news/religion/2010-09-07-cordova06_st_n.htm.

This is a podcast of the Foundation for Religious Diplomacy (www.religious-diplomacy.org). The interviewer is John Morehead, an FRD board member and Custodian of its Evangelical Chapter.

Review: Evangelical Peacemakers

Evangelical Peacemakers: Gospel Engagement in a War-Torn World

David P. Gushee, editor: Cascade Books, 2013. 150 pp. $19.00 paper.

ISBN: 978-1-62564-115-1

For many years Evangelicals have been distinguished as a movement that favors evangelism and missions, putting a great deal of energy and financial resources into mobilization, strategy and execution in this regard. But by and large, they have not been known for their interests and activities in peacemaking. However, this has changed in recent years, and now a growing number of Evangelicals across a spectrum from progressive to conservative, are practicing peacemaking, inclusive of what it means to share the gospel, and as a worthy goal in and of itself apart from evangelism and missions.

Evangelical Peacemakers is a new volume that is representative of recent activities in this area. It came together as a result of papers presented at the Evangelicals for Peace Summit on Christian Morality and Responsibility in the Twenty-first century, which was held at Georgetown University in September of 2012. Rick Love of Peace Catalyst International was the primary moving force behind the formation of this conference. At the conclusion of the event, Love gathered the resulting collection of papers and asked David Gushee of Mercer University to edit the material into a volume. The result provides an introduction to and overview of varying approaches to peacemaking among Evangelicals, inclusive not only of center-left positions within Evangelicalism, but also those from more conservative views on the right.

Each of the chapters in this volume is brief, reflecting the origins of the material in summit presentations rather than extended written chapters originally intended for publication. The book begins with a Preface and Acknowledgements by Gushee who provides an initial context and orientation for what the reader will encounter in successive chapters.

The first four chapters address issues related to a Christian ethic and theology related to war, particularly Just War Theory and pacifist perspectives. Gushee begins this first section in Chapter 1 with a consideration of the U.S. as “a warfare state with a bloated national security apparatus and a pattern of excessive military engagements” (xi). His chapter concludes with a consideration of Evangelical involvement in foreign and military policy discussions in this context. In the second chapter Lisa Sharon Harper of Sojourners looks at Christ’s example and teachings in the New Testament to argue for a pacifist position brought into engagement with U.S. foreign policy. Eric Patterson of Regent University takes up the third chapter with a consideration of Just War Theory where he provides an exposition and defense of this view and then reflects on how this might be connected to contemporary events in foreign policy and international conflict. Chapter 4 concludes this first section with an offering by Glen Stassen of Fuller Seminary who introduces a just peacemaking concept as an alternative to pacifism and Just War approaches.

In the second half of this volume, eleven chapters discuss peacemaking efforts undertaken by individuals as well as organizations. In Chapter 5 Geoff Tunnicliffe describes the peacemaking work of his World Evangelical Alliance. Similarly, in Chapter 6 Mark Johnson discusses the peacemaking work of his organization, the Fellowship of Reconciliation. The seventh chapter is by Joseph Cumming of Yale University who explores his peacemaking as well as mission work with Muslims. In Chapter 8 Doug Johnston of the International Center for Religion and Diplomacy argues that U.S. foreign policy must take religion seriously, particularly in the most pressing international context with Islam. David Shenk provides a discussion in Chapter 9 of the peacemaking in his Christian tradition of the Mennonites who serve in dangerous areas of conflict around the world. In Chapter 10, Lisa Gibson of the Peace and Prosperity Alliance provides an inspiring discussion of her journey of forgiveness and its relationship to peacemaking as a result of the loss of her brother in the Lockerbie terrorist bombing in 1988. Sami Awad shares his thoughts on peace and justice in the Middle East through his Holy Land Trust organization. Pastor Bob Roberts of Northwood Church describes his personal and congregational work with service, missions, and peacemaking in Asia and the Middle East. In Chapter 13 David Beasley speaks as the former governor of South Carolina about loving witness in connection with the National Prayer Breakfast. Jim Wallis of Sojourners shares examples of peacemaking around the world, and how personal relationships and networking have been helpful to this process in Chapter 14. Rick Love helps Evangelicals who emphasize evangelism consider a typology for peacemaking in Chapter 15. Finally, David Gushee completes the volume in Chapter 16 by way of critical interaction with the perspectives provided by the other contributors.

Three areas stand out as especially significant in this volume. First is the recognition of new ways of interreligious engagement among Evangelicals. In the Preface Gushee refers to this as “an emerging new approach to Christian missions and interfaith encounter” (xiii). This is echoed in Love’s perspective where he reminds us that Evangelicals have tended to emphasize evangelism at the expense of peace, and in his view “we are pioneering what it means to be evangelical peacemakers” (107). Cumming also touches on this when he says that people tend to ”think that one either works for peace or bears witness for Christ, but not both” (49). But this dichotomy may become a major problem. Cumming shares his fear that “there is a split developing between two camps” (49) of Evangelicals around the world. Although the challenge of a split exists, a more holistic approach holds great promise as peacemaking is seen as an important part of the Gospel, as well as an essential part of Christian praxis and identity.

The second area of note relates to the tension that arises in sharing differences and disagreements among competing religious traditions. Shenk discusses Christian and Muslim interactions where when evangelism backfires, “the inclination is often to simply avoid the call to witness” (61). He points to a “trust-building friendship” approach of a pastor and imam in Nigeria who feel they must “avoid theological discussions, for that would put a wedge between them” (61). Although they leave space for mutual witness, they avoid discussion of theological differences. Shenk then goes on to contrast this “gingerly approach” (62) with other forms of dialogue and peacemaking where theology and differences are more prominent. Roberts brings the much-needed stance to this context that avoids the elephant in the room and which permits for deep relationships of trust. In his chapter he argues that we must be willing to recognize that “[m]ulti-faith engagement says we have fundamental if not irreconcilable differences between our faiths…So let’s be honest, not compromise what we believe, but treat one another with respect” (89). While dialogue has tended to avoid areas of conflict in seeking common ground, the more promising way forward is found in peacemaking and religious diplomacy approaches wherein irreconcilable differences are acknowledged and discussed, but done so with civility so that authenticity and transparency provides for a transformation of religious enemies into trusted rivals.

Roberts also articulates the third area of significance in this volume in the shift in forms of interreligious engagement. He argues that there needs to be a shift “from dialogue among clerics to engagement between congregations” (90). In his view as a church leader, [t]he greatest power of a pastor is to connect and release his people to engage with people of other faiths” (90). For some time now interreligious dialogue has been pursued by way of religious adherents taking a more passive role as they watch their leaders or religious professionals engage in sophisticated forms of theological exchange. Roberts states that [t]he real power is the people” (90), and there is great untapped potential for grassroots movements if clerics and professionals empower their people to take the lead in peacemaking at congregational, mosque, temple, synagogue, and ward levels with their interreligious counterparts in their communities.

The individuals, organizations, and fledgling movement of Evangelical peacemakers/peacemaking described in this book hold great promise for Evangelicalism and the world in which they live and serve. If these activities continue we agree with Gushee that “it is fascinating to contemplate a future for evangelical Christian leaders as global diplomats (a role long played by Catholic popes), and to see the gradual institutionalization of a vision for Christian engagement that includes grassroots peacemaking and conflict resolution” (126-7). Surely this is something Christ’s disciples should work toward as they seek to be obedient not only to the Great Commission, but also to receive the blessing Christ promised to the peacemakers (Mat. 5:9).

Review - Grace and Truth: Toward Christlike Relationships with Muslims

Grace and Truth: Toward Christlike Relationships with Muslims

By Rick Love

Paperback: Peace Catalyst International Publications, 2013. [Amazon]

ISBN: 978-1935959502

Evangelical Christians across a spectrum of denominations and political commitments are working together to provide a response to Muslims that is faithful to the best of the Christian tradition in our post-9/11 world. These efforts find their roots in two aspects of the Christian tradition. The first is a desire to emulate the way of Christ in relating to the marginalized and the outsiders that are frequently viewed with suspicion and enmity by members of their own religious tradition. Jesus’ encounter with the Samaritan woman in John 4 is a primary biblical text that exemplifies the model of Jesus that these Christians want to follow in their encounters with Muslims. The second foundation for these efforts is the desire to be obedient to Christ in his call for disciples to be peacemakers.

Rick Love, through his organization, Peace Catalyst International, takes a leadership role among American Evangelicals in peacekeeping between Christians and Muslims. Grace and Truth was written as a result of Love’s participation in a global meeting of Evangelical leaders who came together to address how relations between Christians, particularly those in the West, and Muslims might be improved, and in ways that resonate with Christian faith. Love serves as the main author of this volume, although he acknowledges the input of “more than seventy leaders form around the world” (3-4). As a result, this book “is a consensus document” (5) that brings together “a spectrum of evangelical thinking” (5) and which finds a balance between slight differences of thought on the subject matter. This contributes to the layout and overlap found in the book.

The volume is comprised of an Introduction that provides a summary of helpful information and perspectives for Evangelical readers in understanding the Muslim world, and the perspective in the material that follows. This includes consideration of the diversity of categories and perspectives that make up the Muslim world, a list of the areas of agreement and disagreement in Muslim beliefs in relation to Christianity, and discussion of “significant theological and ideological diversity” (11) among Muslims. The Introduction concludes with the suggestion that Evangelicals “find a middle path between demonization of Islam and naïve political correctness” (13).

The next two major segments of the book include one titled “Toward Christ-like Relationships with Muslims: An Exposition,” and another “Toward Christ-like Relationships with Muslims: An Affirmation.” These two sections are very much alike, with the latter incorporating slight revisions that reflect the specific views of Peace Catalyst International. Both of these segments include a series of guidelines for Christian interaction with Muslims and the Muslim world, with nine in the former, and ten in the latter “reflecting Peace Catalyst’s revised, personalized version of these affirmations” (26). The ten affirmations include:

1.     Be Jesus-Centered in our Interaction

2.     Be Truthful and Gracious in our Words and Witness

3.     Be Wise in our Words and Witness

4.     Be Respectful and Bold in our Witness

5.     Be Prudent in our Glocalized World

6.     Be Persistent in our Call for Religious Freedom

7.     Be Peaceable and Uncompromising in our Dialogue

8.     Be Loving toward All

9.     Differentiate between the Role of Church and State

10. Support and Challenge the State

The chapters that unfold each of these guidelines or affirmations are very helpful, and it is evident that a lot of careful reflection has gone into their formulation. As such, they “describe how we can be agents of peace in a polarized world” (32) as Evangelicals embrace Muslims and share the Gospel of Christ.

The next two sections are study guides that look at each of the preceding major segments of the book. They are designed for small group and Sunday school settings as well as individual study. The volume concludes with a bibliography of materials that will be helpful for further study.

Although this volume is very small, and involves a great deal of overlap and repetition in its layout and subject matter, it provides a concise and accessible study for Evangelicals. The volume might have been strengthened with a few additions, including mention of Islam’s priority of ritual rather than belief, the addition of a few more noteworthy volumes in the bibliography, and the suggestion that the study of Islam be connected to relationships and conversations with Muslims in readers’ neighborhoods. But despite these suggestions, this is a helpful book that has the potential to overcome some of the stereotypes, generalizations, assumptions, and hostility that many Evangelicals have in regards to the Muslim world in the wake of 9/11 and the continuing “War on Terror.”

I'm a Christian Who Hates You: The Problem of Evangelical Perception

I came across this image (by Seth Hahne) in connection with some blog posts on Christian "street preachers" who attend the Arab International Festival in Dearborn and who have created a lot of controversy given their very confrontational ways of engaging Muslims. For me this illustration symbolizes far more than the Dearborn clash to encompass the problem from Evangelicals in interreligious engagement in general. Evangelicals, consider this image. This is how many Muslims, Mormons, Pagans, Jehovah's Witnesses and others see us.

No matter how well meaning and how convinced that we have the truth that others need to hear, the perception of those we want to persuade is that we are disrespectful bigots engaging in hateful actions rather diplomats engaging in love of neighbor. In addition, I have also come to the conclusion that this is not merely a debate among Evangelicals about differences in doctrine or methodology (confrontation, proclamation, apologetic, missional or dialogical). Instead, it needs to be discussed as a problem of Christian ethics. 

Review: The Islamophobia Industry

My latest review was published today, a consideration of The Islamophobia Industry: How the Right Manufactures Fear of Muslims by Nathan Lean (Pluto Press, 2012). Here is an excerpt:

Human beings are wired to be aware of difference. It is natural part of human nature to forge various social alliances that foster senses of “us,” the insiders, in distinction to “them,” the outsiders. Problems arise when the outsiders become the enemy, and they further function in such a way that one’s individual and collective identity is created by way of opposition to the other. In the United States, this dynamic is all too frequently found in the post-9/11 environment in regards to Islam, where a cottage industry portrays Islam as a monstrous entity, wholly a religion of violence, pursuing terrorism and the overthrow of the US Constitution to be replaced with “sharia law.” The result of this narrative is a frighteningly large number of people adopting “Islamophobia,” an irrational fear of Muslims and the Islamic religion.

Nathan Lean discusses the phenomenon of right-wing construction of Islamic monstrosity in his volume The Islamophobia Industry: How the Right Manufactures Fear of Muslims. The book reveals the astonishing success this industry has had in shaping negative public opinions about Islam. While one might expect that anti-Muslim sentiments was high among Americans shortly after the attacks of 9/11, Lean shares Pew Research Center polling data wherein “59 percent of Americans had a favorable opinion of Muslims just two months after the collapse of the Twin Towers.” Further, a few months later, “45 percent of Americans” held “views of Muslims that were generally positive.” However, through the prolific distribution of its message through various forms of media, the right-wing Islamophobia industry was influential in shaping strongly negative opinions of Islam. In 2002, hate crimes against Muslims increased by 1600 percent, and in 2004, 46 percent of Americans “believed that Islam was more likely than other religions to encourage violence.”

How did this industry begin? Who and what make up some of its major elements? How have the media, and especially the Internet, helped carry the message of Islamic monstrosity? And perhaps most disturbingly from an Evangelical perspective, why have Evangelicals been a segment of the population all too eager to receive and perpetuate this message? Lean’s Islamophobia provides answers to these and many other important questions, which represents one of the most significant political, cultural, religious, and theological challenges of the 21^st century.

The review can be read at this link.

Grand Rapids, and Interfaith?

Watch Grand Rapids Interfaith Year on PBS. See more from Religion & Ethics NewsWeekly.

Grand Rapids, Michigan is not the first city that comes to mind as an example of Evangelicals grappling positively with religious pluralism, perhaps even in an exemplary way. But according to a recent segment at Religion & Ethics Newsweekly on PBS it is. Here's a segment of the transcript from the video:

Grand Rapids, Michigan, is a city with deep roots in conservative Calvinist Christianity—a place where dancing and card playing were once banned, mowing the lawn on Sunday was frowned upon into the 1960s, and in more recent years, a professor who taught evolution at Calvin College encountered harsh criticism. Though the Dutch Reformed Church and its more conservative offshoot, the Christian Reformed Church, is still a strong presence here, Grand Rapids today is also home to 82 Catholic parishes, five mosques, two synagogues, and Hindu, Buddhist, and Sikh temples. Interfaith dialogue would have been considered unacceptable by many here in the past. But in the last year, with support from the mayor and a wide range of community leaders, Grand Rapids has held 250 events aimed at deepening interfaith understanding.

Of particular note in the video is Dr. Douglas Kindschi with his distinction between "thin" and "thick" forms of dialogue, with the latter not compromising on religious convictions in interreligious encounters. Another is Pastor Kyle Ray's concerns that many forms of dialogue do indeed compromise religious truth claims, and the pastor reflects the concerns many Evangelicals have about dialogue. Dr. Kindschi's call for "thick" dialogue is the right approach to such endeavors, and the one advocated by the Evangelical Chapter of the Foundation for Religious Diplomacy.

The video also details a key demographic in receptivity to interreligious engagement via younger members of a religious tradition. High school as well as college and university students are already interested in engaging other religions more positively, so this makes for the right audience. Even so, it can also be a challenge in that many younger Evangelicals can also be hesitant to engage in "dialogue" and are more interested in evangelism.

Yet in spite of these promising developings in Grand Rapids, it appears that it has yet to impact a key religious demographic, that of Evangelicals. In my follow up to Kelly James Clark in relation to this activity, he responsed that this has yet to spill over into Evangelicalism. Grand Rapids has connections not only to Calvinism and the Christian Reformed Church, but also broader Evangelicalism, including the Evangelical publishers Kregel and Thomas Nelson. If programs like this cannot find a way to prepare Evangelicals in Grand Rapids to embrace a new way of engaging those in other religions that is faithful to their religious convictions and makes a more positive contribution to the common good in the public square, then it cannot serve as a model for the rest of the nation given the size and prominence of American Evangelicals.

Richard Dawkins on Al Jazeera

Richard Dawkins, the outspoken critique of religion and known as being part of the New Atheists, has been interviewed at Al Jezeera. Muslim journalist Medhi Hasan presents some interesting questions and holds his own quite well in what turns out to be a fascinating exchange. The interview is described by Al Jezeera as follows:

Fanaticism, fundamentalism, superstition and ignorance. Religion is getting a bad press these days. Much of the conflict in the world, from the Middle East to Nigeria and Myanmar, is often blamed on religion.

But how are things from a different perspective? Defenders of religion claim Adolf Hitler was an atheist. Communism under Joseph Stalin, Pol Pot or Mao Zedong banned religion, but also massacred millions. And science brought incredible and amazing advances, but also pollution and the atomic bomb.

A critic of religious dogmatism, Professor Richard Dawkins revolutionised genetics in 1976 with the publication of The Selfish Gene, which explained how evolution takes place at the genetic level. He has since written 12 more bestsellers, including The God Delusion which sold millions of copies, was translated into more than 30 languages, and catapulted him to the position of the world's foremost atheist.

Mehdi Hasan interviews evolutionary biologist Richard Dawkins at the Oxford Union and asks: Is religion a force for good or evil? Can it co-exist with science? Is science the new religion? And why if god does not exist, is religion so persistent?

The program might have more accurately described the key question as to how religion is both a force for good and evil rather than as an either/or, but the interview is worth watching, and is a great example of interreligious dialogue. Click the Al Jezeera page for "Dawkins on Religion."

Patheos Book Club: Do Jews, Christians and Muslims Worship the Same God?

There is a new volume out that is leading to some interesting discussions on an old topic. The book is Do Jews, Christians, and Muslims Worship the Same God? (Abingdon Press), with contributions with contributions by Jacob Neusner, Baruch A. Levine, Bruce D. Chilton, and Vincent J. Cornell. Martin Marty wrote an epilogue for the volume. The book's description:

Most Jews, Muslims, and Christians are devoted and faithful. Still, on any given day, it’s difficult to avoid the vigorous and heated disputes between them, whether over the “Ground Zero” mosque, lobbying state legislatures against Sharia law, sharing worship space, dissecting the fallout of the Arab Spring, protecting civil rights, or challenging the authority of sacred texts. With so much rancor, can there be any common ground? Do they even worship the same God? And can religion, which often is so divisive, be any help at all? Four internationally known scholars set out to tackle these deceptively simple questions in an accessible way. Some scholars argue that while beliefs about God may differ, the object of worship is ultimately the same. However, these authors take a more pragmatic view. While they may disagree, they nevertheless assert that whatever they answers to these questions, the three faiths must find the will (politically, socially, and personally) to tolerate differences. Perhaps what can help us move forward as pluralistic people is ia focus on the goal – peace with justice for all.

This book is presently part of a review and discussion at Patheos, with contributions thus far from Robert Hunt, Rabbi Brad Hirschfield, and Bruce Epperly. One aspect of the volume has generated some interesting discussion, a paragraph by Jacob Neusner in the volume, where he writes:

“Interfaith dialogue is made possible by monotheism, which defines the common ground on the foundations of which debate can take place. Polytheism defines dialogue out of existence, making provision, rather, for an exchange of opinions in a spirit of tolerance.”

Hunt seems to agree with Neusner, whereas Herschfield disagrees. In my experience in interreligious dialogue with adherents of many different religious traditions, including Pagans, monotheism is not a necessary foundation. What is needed is the willingness of the participants to dialogue and to be in agreement as to the type and format of dialogue through which the conversation will develop. Hunt responds in the comments to Herschfield that

For conversation to be fruitful we do need to know what we are talking about. Let’s take “faith” as in “interfaith.” The hidden assumption in interfaith dialogue is the modern, Schleiermachian, assumption of a universal human faith in something. That faith is understood to be refracted through various religious (and sects, and personal beliefs) which, with varying degrees of adequacy (or complete equality if you wish) point toward that “Something” that is (however obscured) the universal object of faith. What Neusner’s comment points us toward is the possibility that no such universal “faith” exists. Put another way he is asserting that dialogue depends on having a common object of investigation and discussion. And he is suggesting that at least with regard to faith polytheists don’t believe that there exists a common faith to be the object of investigation and discussion and therefore can’t enter into real inter-faith dialogue. Of course polytheists will need to speak for themselves about whether that is true.

Again I disagree with Hunt, and if he understands Neusner correctly, then I disagree with him as well. Human beings have profound disagreement about what "faith in something" entails, and broad based assumptions or agreements about the nature of the transcendent as "an object of investigation and discussion" are not necessary before dialogue can begin. Indeed, these are some of the pressing disagreements that must be worked through by the dialogue process, not as a prior commitment before dialogue takes place. I hope this review and discussion at Patheos invites lots of input and commentary. I'd especially like to see my fellow FRD members, and my Pagan colleagues, provide comments on Hirschfeld's and Hunt's review essays.

Evangelicals and Religious Monstrosity

My latest essay is now available at Patheos, a co-authored piece with Paul Louis Metzger titled "From Religious Threats and Tricks to Treats: A Halloween Homily on Faith Identity Construction." The essay looks at the problem of Evangelical faith identity frequently by way of the creation of "monstrous others" in various religions. From the piece:

What are some examples of the “religious other” monster that we often create? The examples we have in mind do not crave human blood, rise from the grave to consume human flesh, or require a jolt of electricity to return to life as they do in literature and cinema, but they are still threatening, lurking about in the dark shadows of our imaginations.  In years past Evangelicals held to a strong sense of anti-Catholicism, the vestiges of which are still with us. In more recent times our monstrous religious others have been Mormons, Pagans, and Wiccans, and since 9/11 the Muslim community. 

 The essay can be read here.

Review of Eboo Patel's Sacred Ground at Patheos

My latest essay has been published at the Evangelical Channel of Patheos, a combined book review of Brian McLaren's book on Christian faith identities, and Eboo Patel's Sacred Ground: Pluralism, Prejudice, and the Promise of America (Beacon, 2012). That review can be read here. My more extensive review of McLaren's volume can be read here.

In addition, Nicholas Price, board member for the Evangelical FRD chapter, recently wrote a good essay on Evangelicals and peacemaking through interfaith work that included a mention of me. You can read Nick's essay at RELEVANT.

McLaren Review at Englewood Books

My review of Brian McLaren's book Why Did Jesus, Moses, the Buddha, and Mohammed Cross the Road?: Christian Identity in a Multi-Faith World (Jericho Books, 2012) is now available online at The Englewood Review of Books. (A shorter review combined with my review of Eboo Patel's book Sacred Ground: Pluralism, Prejudice and the Promise of America will be published later at the Evangelical Channel at Patheos.) My thanks goes to Brian and Jericho for making a review copy of this book available and for the opportunity to begin a conversation over its ideas, and to Chris Smith at Englewood for the publishing and allowing me an extended word limit to engage the subject matter.

The review brings my background in theology, missiology, and dialogue to bear on the subject matter. This involves a summary of McLaren's thesis on hope for a reformulation of Christian faith identity related to other religions, and an interaction with the major elements of the book including evangelicalism and critical self-reflection, Christological hermeneutics, pnuematological considerations, liturgy and Christ's resurrection, missions and the commonwealth of God, competitive superiority and religious supremacy, and a new way forward for Evangelicals.

Here is a sample from the review that I hope will stimulate conversation in the Evangelical community:

Why Did Jesus, Moses, the Buddha, and Mohammed Cross the Road? purposefully draws upon the fact that the title sounds like the introduction to familiar jokes. But McLaren uses this a rhetorical strategy in order to provide a thought provoking discussion related to his agenda for the church’s reformulation of various areas of theology and praxis. The subject matter should not be understood as a treatise on interreligious dialogue, but instead as addressing pre-dialogue considerations. The central thesis McLaren advances relates to what he labels “Conflicted Religious Identity Syndrome,” which he defines as a part of the Christian’s faith identity that involves the extension of hostility or opposition to the other as enemy in regards to those in other religions (19). He expands on this idea with these words:

"Our root problem is neither religious difference nor religious identity nor even strong religious identity. Our root problem is the hostility that we often employ to make and keep our identities strong – whether those identities are political, economic, philosophical, scientific, or religious." (emphasis in original) (63)

McLaren hopes that Christians will consider a change of their identity, moving away from the extension of hostility to one that is ”strongly benevolent toward people of other faiths, accepting them not in spite of the religion they love, but with the religion they love” (emphasis in original) (32).

Essay at Patheos: Evangelical Reflections on a Muslim World Aflame

My first essay with the Evangelical portal of Patheos has been published. It is a piece that looks at Evangelical responses to religious pluralism and interreligious dialogue. From the piece:

If we're willing to engage in critical self-reflection, evangelicals will acknowledge that in the years since 9/11 few of us have done much to improve interreligious understanding.

To their credit, some evangelicals did get involved in sending well wishes to the Sikhs who lost loved ones in August's gurdwara shooting in Wisconsin. And other evangelicals showed support for Muslims whose mosque was torched in Missouri. But where have large segments of evangelicalism been in response to these recent events, or in interreligious engagement as a result of 9/11? Given the work of evangelicalism in pressing cultural issues, why isn't interreligious engagement on our social agenda? And why, for the most part, have evangelical leaders been conspicuously absent in regards to interreligious engagement? Perhaps it is a combination of indifference plus fear of the fallout when they do try to get involved. When Rick Warren worked alongside the Muslim community in Southern California, evangelicals attacked him for advancing "Chrislam," a syncretistic hybrid of Christianity and Islam.

The whole entry can be read here. Look for my regular contributions to Patheos in the future, as well as others who are part of the Evangelical Chapter of the Foundation for Religious Diplomacy.

FRD Documentary: Unresolvable? The Kingdom of God on Earth

 
The Foundation for Religious Diplomacy has finished its documentary and is beginning the promotion for the film titled Unresolvable? The Kingdom of God on Earth. From the film's website:

Angered by the barrage of attacks on his faith and desperate for answers, Bryan Hall, a devout Mormon, travels into the heart of the Bible Belt to discover for himself what it means to be a “Christian.”

The world he discovers is more terrifying and heartwarming than he ever could have imagined. Somewhere between the growing movement to establish a Christian Nation and those who believe Christ’s Kingdom is not of this world, the lines between fanaticism and devotion are easily blurred.

Ultimately, Hall is forced to face the same questions that he is lancing at his religious rivals. UNRESOLVABLE? challenges viewers to ask themselves the most difficult and revealing question in all of Christianity: Must you - really - love your enemies to be a true disciple of Christ? 

The website includes various video clips, and it will be available for rental or purchase in various venues including Amazon.com starting next week.

"Every good Christian should see this film." 
Richard Land President of the Ethics & Religious Liberty Commission
Southern Baptist Commission

“A must see.” 
Mike Allen Politico Playbook

“Moving and inspiring...a brilliant film every American should see."
Ralph Reed Former President of the Christian Coalition

“It touches the heart and stimulates the mind...a must see!" 
Robert Millet Dean of Religious Education, Emeritus Brigham Young University

"Courageous Christians" and a Film That Sparked a Muslim Flame

As the unrest in the Middle East spills over into other Muslim countries, the debate about the controversial film trailer for Innocence of Muslims said to have sparked the protests continues as well. Print and video media have recently linked it to Steve Klein, an individual connected to an evangelical "counter-cult" ministry called Courageous Christians United. This ministry utilizes confrontational approaches with adherents of various religions, including Mormonism and Islam. In the latter they have an affiliated ministry called MuslimInfo.org. The photo above demonstrates the kinds of approaches they use, pointing people to a website in ways that are sure to outrage Muslims.

When news broke about the Courageous Christians' connection to the film trailer the organization's president, Rob Sivulka, posted the following on their website:

We at Courageous Christians United (CCU) had no knowledge of the film "The Innocence of Muslims" or Steve Klein's involvement in it until September 12, 2012. Steve was removed from the board of CCU as of September 14, 2012 because of his involvement in this film. As the founder of CCU, Steve was an honorary board member, but he has never been to any of our board meetings. In 2006, when I wanted to form my own non-profit corporation, Steve gave me CCU, which he was no longer using.

Steve was in no way acting on behalf of our mission organization in the production of the video. While both Steve and the film maker have a right to express their views, that doesn't mean that we here at CCU endorse this movie as a good means to convey the truth about Islam. In fact, we find this film reprehensible and irresponsible, and serving primarily to provoke a violent response. (emphasis mine)

I appreciate the lack of direct involvement that Klein may have had with the film, and Courageous Christians' desire to distance themselves from it. But this statement from Sivulka and his organization has me confused. It also appears disingenuous. As demonstrated above in the photo, the organization has engaged in forms of "outreach" to Muslims at mosques by holding up signs that insult Muhammed, the prophet of Islam. They do similar things in Mormon contexts, holding up signs that insult the Mormon prophet Joseph Smith. In each religio-cultural context their has been anger and resistance on the part of Muslims and Mormons. I submit that holding up signs in front of a mosque demeaning the Muslim prophet should be construed as a parallel to the Arabic-dubbed film trailer for Innocence of Muslims which may have at least partially inflamed large segments of the Muslim world. Therefore, how can Courageous Christians pursue the types of activities they do before American Muslims and at the same time condemn a film that functions in the same way among Muslims overseas? Must not the film and the questionable approaches of Courageous Christians be considered "reprehensible and irresponsible, and serving primarily to provoke a violent response?"

In a recent essay at Aslan Media co-authored with Paul Louis Metzger in response to the recent Islamic uprisings we wrote, "What lessons might be learned by Evangelicals as they seek to respond to and interact with the broader religious world, including Islam, in a context that all too easily leads to violence?" As the article continues, among other things, we suggest the following:

Much of the conservative commentary on this event, within and outside Evangelicalism, has emphasized American freedoms of speech concerning the right to share whatever views one might have about Islam. While it is certainly true that Americans have the right to express our convictions, from a Christian perspective our freedoms are informed by love for others; at times, we must be willing to restrict our freedoms for the brethren (1 Corinthians 8) and the world at large. In this instance, it may very well entail restricting our use of our constitutional freedoms for the greater good in the public square here and abroad. With this in mind, we would do well to remember that with the Internet we live in a global village, and the rhetoric, tactics and approval of a controversial pastor or filmmakers can contribute to an international climate of tension that may lead to violence and death in other parts of the world. Simply because we have such freedoms does not mean we must always exercise them; when we do exercise such freedoms, they should be exercised in ways that come down on the side of caution, seeking to contribute to the way of peace for the sake of Americans living and serving overseas, including our fellow Christians living in Muslim lands.

The events connected with the 11th anniversary of the worst terrorist attack on American soil provide evangelicals with an opportunity to reflect on our religious identity often formed in hostile relation to those in other religions, and how our attempts at persuading others of our religious convictions might be dramatically less than persuasive, if not offensive and downright counter-productive. For those interesting in considering an alternative vision, see the website of the Evangelical Chapter of the Foundation for Religious Diplomacy, and our previous essays touching on this at Aslan Media:

"On the Dearborn Drama: Pig-Headed Engagement of Islam"

"Sikhs and Muslims, Shootings and Burnings: A Call to Peaceful Contestation"

Op-ed: Pig-Headed Engagement of Islam

Unfortunately, there is a group of Christians who use confrontational methods in relation to other religious group, including holding up signs which attack religious leaders and sacred elements of religious cultures. This can be seen twice each year in Salt Lake City among Mormons attending General Conference, and among Muslims at places like Dearborn, Michigan as they attend an Arab American festival. A recent clash between Christians and Muslims took place in Dearborn (an example of this can be seen on the video clip below), and in response I co-authored an op-ed with Paul Louis Metzger that has been published by Aslan Media. In the essay, after describing the clash, and the current survey data on perceptions of Islam by Americans and evangelicals we ask:

Is engaging others in this manner the best way to express one's faith community's convictions? Who's listening? And if they are listening, isn't the result often more turmoil and more fighting? How ironic it is that those who are concerned most about Muslim acts that disregard human life are also reportedly perpetrating demeaning acts themselves.

The essay is titled "On the Dearborn Drama: Pig-Headed Engagement of Islam" which can be read here.

"You're Not a True Muslim:" The Challenge of Religious Understanding and Self-Representation

This clip is from a talk show with Anderson Cooper where he includes those on the reality show All-American Muslim from the TLC channel. This program follows the lives, joys, and struggles of various Muslim families in America.

One of the interesting facets of this clip is the reaction of a woman in the audience to the guests from the show, and their religion. Several thoughts come to mind that relate not only to American's wresting with Islam, but are equally applicable to other minority religions that are also viewed with suspicion.

First, although the Muslims in the television program define themselves in terms of their religious practices and beliefs, the woman in the audience presumes to know more about their religion, and its "true" representation than the adherents do. Allowing self-representation in religion is crucial.

Second, related to the thought above, there is a frequent problem in the Evangelical subculture about the understanding of a given religion as the only true and right way to understand that religion. Any other representation by adherents is held to be inauthentic and deceptive.

Third, from these it follows that we must recognize diversity in religious traditions, and that these traditions change, develop, and evolve over time. Religious adherents disagree among themselves about how to interpret their tradition, so it seems difficult for outsiders to adjudicate as to which expression within a diverse tradition is the only true one.

Fourth and finally, we must be willing to work through the difficult process of listening to the religious other, and then wresting with our preconceptions in a process of dialogue so as to come to grips with religious diversity and complexity in our religiously plural environment. All-American Muslim seems to be the best type of program to help us wrestle with difficult post-9/11 issues.