Immediate Word

"(The Apostle Peter's) current successor," declared the newly minted Benedict XVI in his first papal mass, "takes as his primary task that of working -- sparing no energies -- to reconstitute the full and visible unity of all Christ's followers. ...

"I address everybody, even those who follow other religions or who simply look for an answer to life's fundamental questions and still haven't found it. To all, I turn with simplicity and affection, to ensure that the church wants to continue weaving an open and sincere dialogue with them, in the quest for the real good for man and society."

What precisely the erstwhile Cardinal Ratzinger may mean by such terms as "sincere dialogue" and "full and visible unity," only time will tell. Informed observers suggest we may expect more openness and gentleness than has hitherto been evident in his role as head of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith. However that may be, his accession to the world's most visible position of Christian leadership at the same time as the story of the earliest Christian church is unfolding in the lectionary pushes us to ask what we mean by such terms as "dialogue" and "unity," and how we see our relationship to other Christians and to other faiths. As Julie Strope, our liturgy writer for this week, notes, "every day Christians are in conversation with individuals of other faiths and other religions." How we relate to the Muslim down the street, or (sometimes even more problematic!) the Pentecostal or Catholic across the back fence, is an issue that concerns every one of us.

Both our First and Second Lessons this week show us early Christian leaders in dialogue with their non-Christian surroundings. 1 Peter, addressed to Christians in a hostile environment, urges an apologetic stance of confident hope blended with gentleness. Acts 17 shows us Paul bringing his missionary zeal to Athens, and recounts his effort to build bridges with the dedicated dialoguers in the Areopagus. Both of these passages can help us reflect on our own relationships with people in other branches of the Christian family, as well as adherents of other faiths altogether, and find constructive ways, as Julie says, to "articulate our experience with Christ and share our hope."

Dialogue in the Bible
Paul's second missionary journey took him westward to the Greek cities of Philippi, Thessalonica, and Beroea. Typically on arrival in a new town, Paul and his companions would go to the synagogue and "argue with them from the scriptures, explaining and proving that it was necessary for the Messiah to suffer and to rise from the dead, and saying, 'This is the Messiah, Jesus, whom I am proclaiming to you' " (Acts 17:2-3). Turmoil over the new teaching followed the evangelists, and Paul had to be hustled out of both Thessalonica and Beroea for his own safety. On leaving Beroea he went to Athens and waited for Silas and Timothy there -- and of course continued his pattern of evangelizing. Acts 17:16ff tells us that, distressed by the idols he saw all around, he did not confine himself to his usual activities in the synagogue, but also argued in the marketplace with whoever happened to be there. Because of this public proclamation of "foreign divinities" (v. 18), he was eventually brought to the Areopagus to account for himself.

The Areopagus, or Mars Hill, was a rocky hill that, as F. F. Bruce describes in his commentary, The Acts of the Apostles (p. 333), was home to "the most venerable Athenian court, dating from legendary times. Its traditional power was curtailed as Athens became more democratic, but it retained jurisdiction over homicide and moral questions generally, and commanded great respect because of its antiquity. Under the Romans it increased its prestige. It had supreme authority in religious matters and seems also to have had the power at this time to appoint public lecturers and exercise some control over them in the interest of public order." So it is not surprising that Paul was brought to this body and asked, "May we know what this new teaching is that you are presenting? It sounds rather strange to us, so we would like to know what it means" (vv. 19-20).

Recognizing the famous intellectual curiosity of his hearers (v. 21), Paul embarks on an account at once winsome and bold. Whether the speech recorded in Acts 17 does in fact owe much to Paul's thinking has been a matter of no little debate: it certainly, in quoting the ideas of pagan poets, bears little enough resemblance to his exposition of the faith in his letters. The evident reason for this is that he is speaking not to a Jewish audience but to a pagan one, and attempting to find some common ground. Whether Paul or Luke is the ultimate author of this attempt is a matter of secondary concern; what is more notable is that the early church evidently considered this a legitimate, and in fact an important, strategy.

We should probably not be surprised that Paul borrowed the familiar literature of his hearers to begin the proclamation of his own faith. As pastor and former missionary Arch Taylor noted in an online lectionary discussion in 2002, "the Old Testament is replete with examples of biblical monotheism co-opting polytheistic language and thought forms to express its faith." We have only to think of the parallels between Jewish and Babylonian creation stories, the assumption of multiple divine beings in the opening to the book of Job, or the resemblance of the Song of Songs to Egyptian love poetry, to recognize that the covenant people have always been in conversation with the ideas, images, language, and thought forms of their surroundings. Some of these ideas are accepted fairly uncritically, as part of the assumed background; others (such as the creation stories) are turned inside out and given a radically new twist. So we see Paul the evangelist doing what the theologians and teachers have done from time immemorial.

If Paul begins by seeking common ground, however, he moves on to a clear Christological proclamation and call to conversion: "While God has overlooked the times of human ignorance, now he commands all people everywhere to repent, because he has fixed a day on which he will have the world judged in righteousness by a man whom he has appointed, and of this he has given assurance to all by raising him from the dead" (vv. 30-31). The New Testament, and certainly Paul, knows nothing of inter-confessional dialogue for its own sake. Whether introducing pagans to the one true God, or whether arguing with fellow Jews about the identity of the Messiah, Paul, in common with the rest of the early church, believes he has the singular truth, and seeks to supplant other understandings with it.

Not all early Christians started riots over their beliefs, however. Where Paul could be contentious and irascible, the first letter of Peter counsels a gentler approach. Written probably between 70 and 90 C.E. to Christians in Asia Minor, the letter addresses people experiencing social tension and hostility, often from their own families, because of their new faith. As a "foreign" religion in the Greco-Roman world, Christianity was suspect, raising fears that its adherents would upset hierarchical relationships and engage in adultery, insubordination, and sedition (David L. Balch in the Harper Collins Study Bible, p. 2277). This letter, like the pastoral epistles, shows itself anxious to give the lie to such fears, and encourages Christians to abide by those societal values and conventions that do not directly conflict with Christian belief (including the subordination of women and slaves that most Christians today do find in conflict with their belief!).

Where Paul sought common ground for purposes of evangelism, 1 Peter seeks it for apologetic and pastoral reasons. He urges his flock not to bring suffering upon themselves by untoward behavior, but to live in what would be generally recognized as an exemplary fashion, "so that when you are maligned, those who abuse you for your good conduct in Christ may be put to shame" (3:16). Recognizing, however, that they would still encounter hostility, he urges them to accept it without retaliation (v. 9), and to be always ready to offer a gracious witness to their faith, blending the confidence of Christian hope with gentleness and respect (vv. 15-16). For both apologetic/evangelistic and pastoral reasons, the later New Testament authors sought to make clear to the non-Christians around them that Christians were not a threat to society but shared their neighbors' concern for morality and good order.

Dialogue Here and Now
If the advice and example of these early Christians is to remain helpful to us, we must begin by recognizing how much has changed. The most salient fact about Christianity in New Testament times was that it was new. It was an offshoot of a "foreign" minority religion from an obscure corner of the empire; and even in the homeland of its parent Judaism it was seen as a sect of dubious legitimacy. Today, although ignorance of Christianity is once again becoming widespread (even among regular church attendees!), the situation remains vastly different from what it was in the first century. We are only a couple of generations removed from the reality of Christendom, when not only did the vast majority of North Americans and Europeans identify themselves as Christian and more or less actively practice that faith, but the legal, economic, and cultural structures of our society also assumed that virtually all of us were Christian.

Schools began the day with Bible reading and the Lord's Prayer in addition to the national anthem. Churches served as functionaries of the state in solemnizing and registering weddings. People testifying in court or taking an oath of office were asked to swear on the Bible. Grade school students often received a New Testament -- in the classroom, on class time -- from the Gideons. Christian observances such as Christmas and Easter were also national holidays. Congregations and their ministers enjoyed certain tax exemptions.

Much of this, of course, is still true, even in a massively secularized and multi-cultural society. Many people will still openly assert, "This is a Christian country!" And, even should all that fall away, Christianity is deeply woven into Western culture: much of our literary heritage, for instance, is all but unintelligible without a thorough knowledge of the Christian Scriptures. So the Christian today is in a very different situation from that of Peter and Paul and their hearers. Despite the presence of great numbers of adherents of other religions and no religion, the playing field still belongs to us, and we need to consider the requirements of hospitality: majority status as much as minority status calls for respect and gentleness.

At the same time, we need to recognize that Christendom as a unifying construct is dead. Though it still has a pervasive vestigial presence, it no longer claims loyalty or structures existence in the way that it did. We are once again in a position of needing to explain to the world who we are and what we believe. Understanding cannot be assumed.

Paul's example of beginning with the culture of his hearers is one that is widely followed today. Movie references and video clips are finding their way into sermons; youth groups listen to Christian bands playing in musical idioms familiar from the secular world; you will even find Bible stories recast as rap pieces to appeal to the children. Some of these efforts are more successful than others, and some are more theologically defensible than others, but of course that too is nothing new, as Acts 17 attests. Beginning with common ground and building on cultural connections, if it requires a certain amount of critical discernment, is simply good sense.

It is in discerning where to go from that common ground that we may run into more difficulty. The Bible, as noted earlier, does not know much about dialogue for its own sake. When Christians talked to non-Christians about their faith, it was for purposes of conversion or self-justification. When Christians (or Jews) talked to Christians (or Jews) of differing convictions, it was either to change their minds or to come to a working consensus. (Which of these the new Pope envisions in his plea for ecumenical conversation is, of course, a matter for lively speculation!) There is not much evidence in the Bible of dialogue for the pure interest value of the exercise: indeed, Luke seems to have found the Athenian proclivity for this quite unusual (Acts 17:21). So one of the questions that our readings raise for us is why we enter into interdenominational and interfaith dialogue at all.

Formal dialogue usually does begin with some stated purpose, such as progress toward intercommunion, or a unified witness on some important matter. Benedict XVI has articulated a goal of "full and visible unity." Formal dialogue normally does arise from the perceived need to be working together on something, though this purpose may sometimes become somewhat lost in the minutiae of the dialogue itself.

Of more concern to the folk in our pews is the informal dialogue, the daily encounters with people of other Christian confessions and other faiths altogether, and here the question is, "How shall we live together?" This is rather different from the question Paul ("How can I convince them about Jesus?") or even Peter ("How can we reassure people Christians aren't troublemakers?") was addressing. Our people have two great needs as they contemplate the "How shall we live together?" question: to know, "Who am I?" and to discover, "Who are you?"

"Who am I?" may seem obvious; but the unfortunate reality is that many Christians today do not have a very solid handle on their own faith. Often it is the encounter with a non-Christian (or other Christian) neighbor that brings this reality home. So a sermon on ecumenical/interfaith relations is a good time to get in a plug for working on one's own faith and learning about one's own heritage (phrasing it, of course, in an empathic and inviting way!). Discovering the riches of one's own tradition is often one of the great gifts of ecumenical and interfaith dialogue: more than one ecumenist has said that the more they learned about someone else's tradition, the more they were driven to discover -- and appreciate -- the wealth of their own.

Beyond this appropriation of our own identity, however, we need to listen carefully to the other. An attitude of curiosity is an excellent adjunct to a solid grounding in our own truth, allowing us to learn "Who are you?" and to see where the points of connection as well as difference are.

The example of our scriptural predecessors suggests that, whenever possible, we should build a relationship of respect and amity on such common ground as we may possess. Standing together on shared values and concerns allows us to live harmoniously as neighbors and pull together on projects of mutual interest. It also brings us close enough to bear witness to convictions we may not have in common. Though many today avoid talking about matters on which there may be disagreement, we would be more faithful to our heritage if we would simply state what we believe and why, giving a reason, as 1 Peter says, for the hope that is in us -- with, of course, gentleness and respect, which includes a willingness to listen to the hope that is in our neighbor in return.


Team Comments

George Murphy responds: Pope Benedict's statements about his interest in healing divisions among Christians and reaching out to those of other religions have aroused a great deal of interest and speculation. Will he make some dramatic "Nixon goes to China" ecumenical move that would be too risky for a more liberal pope? Will he play it safe and simply not endanger ecumenical progress that has already been made? Those are important questions but of course we can only guess at the answers, and perhaps the new pope himself isn't yet clear how he'll proceed in this area.

But our concern about ecumenical and interfaith matters shouldn't just be focused on what the Roman Catholic Church may do (though for Roman Catholics that's of course of primary interest). Paul's Areopagus speech in Acts and 1 Peter's admonition to be ready to give a reason for our faith should get us to ask about the adequacy of what we're doing about such matters.

It's commonplace now to say that denominational loyalties are fading fast, and that many Christians don't care very much whether the church they attend is labeled Catholic, Methodist, Presbyterian, or something else: Other factors determine church membership. Obviously that varies from one communion to another. In any case, it's important to say that the unimportance of denominational labels doesn't -- or shouldn't -- mean that doctrines are unimportant. Whether or not we are justified entirely by faith, or infants can be baptized, or the Bishop of Rome has final jurisdiction in the church on earth, or there will be a pre-tribulation rapture, are important questions and they make a difference to what we understand the Christian faith to be and to how we live as Christians.

But we can talk about those differences in civil ways with other Christians without suggesting that those who disagree with us aren't really Christians, or that they have to accept our doctrinal system to be saved. Certainly if someone is feeling uncomfortable with what is being taught or practiced in a church they belong to and is looking for a different one then it may be appropriate to invite them to our own. But this is a quite different thing from active sheep stealing. (This assumes that we're talking about people who actually are members of a church in a meaningful sense. Those for whom "I'm an Episcopalian" means "I may go to an Episcopal church on Christmas Eve" really fall in the unchurched category to be considered below. Unfortunately, the fact that they may think they are Christians because they "believe in God" may make it more difficult to get through to them.)

But ecumenical relations -- those between Christians of different communions -- aren't what our texts are talking about. Paul was speaking to pagans and the author of 1 Peter thought that it was important to be able to explain why one is a Christian to those who aren't. These texts are germane to issues of interfaith relations and to questions about how we're to witness to those outside the Christian church as a whole. That may mean speaking about Christ to Buddhists or Muslims, but it's more likely that it will mean talking to those who "aren't very religious but believe in God."

As in so many other situations, discussion here is bedeviled by extremes -- the notion that one faith (or lack of it) is as good as another and that "we all believe in the same God" or the conviction that Christian commitment requires us to harangue non-Christians about the need to be saved at every opportunity.

In contrast to both those extremes I think that what Paul Tillich called "the method of correlation" strikes the right note. We should be prepared to respond, on the basis of Christian faith, to address the questions and concerns that people outside the Christian community have. In other words, we don't start by asking "Have you been saved?" for the very terms in which that question is posed may not mean anything to many people. (Saved from what?) Instead, we try to discern the existential questions that they're asking, and to try to see how a Christian understanding of reality can address those questions. That means being patient and letting them get to the point where they feel that they can tell us what they're concerned about, what questions keep them up at night.

But this doesn't mean that we simply let the other person set the agenda. If the other person is concerned only with the relatively superficial question, "How can I make a lot of money?" we obviously shouldn't be content just to operate on that level. "We seek to answer their questions," says Tillich, "And in doing so we, at the same time, slowly transform their existence so that they come to ask the questions to which the Christian message gives the answer" (Paul Tillich, Theology of Culture [Oxford, New York, 1959], p. 206).

Carlos Wilton responds: "All he knows to do is condemn, condemn, condemn." So said a despairing Spanish Catholic to an Associated Press reporter in St. Peter's Square, just after the election of Joseph Cardinal Ratzinger as Pope Benedict XVI. Already the new Pope is sounding a conciliatory note toward non-Catholic Christians, and even toward adherents of other religions. It remains to be seen whether this conciliatory note will be a hallmark of his papacy, or whether he will revert to the doctrinal hard line he advanced as head of the Vatican's Sacred Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith.

Chris cites a source that repeats the frequently heard line, "I'm spiritual, not religious." Those adherents of "an unknown god" to whom Paul addresses his Areopagus speech might have been saying something similar, in the religious idiom of their own day. At the Areopagus, Paul models a certain openness to dialogue with those whose faith differs from his own. Will Benedict XVI be able to dialogue with those in our own culture who revere an unknown god? Or will he realize the worst fears of the Spanish pilgrim, speaking a message that can only be summarized, "condemn, condemn, condemn"?

It is becoming increasingly difficult to ignore the fact that we live in a heterodox culture. Not only are some of our neighbors "spiritual, not religious"; increasingly they are Muslim, Buddhist, even Wiccan. If we follow Paul's example, in the future we will engage more and more in interfaith dialogue.

I found myself in an informal interfaith dialogue a couple of years ago. I'd been out at the Presbyterian church (U.S.A.)'s General Assembly in Denver, Colorado. At seven in the morning, I'd just boarded the shuttle that would take me to the airport for my trip back home. I was the only passenger in the van, and the driver -- who, from his accent I surmised did not come from the U.S.A. -- asked me what I'd been doing in Denver. Was I here on business, he wanted to know?

"Well, in a manner of speaking ... I've been at the Presbyterian General Assembly."

"Maybe you can tell me, then," he asked with sudden interest, "what's the difference between all these Christian groups: the Presbyterians, the Baptists, the Catholics?"

"God has some timing," I thought to myself! "It's seven in the morning, I'm barely awake, and the Lord's putting me in a position to witness to a non-Christian."

Well, I answered the man's question the best I could, then decided I needed to find out more about him. Looking at his dark complexion, I asked the question that comes naturally for a New Jerseyan these days: "Do you come from India?"

"No" he said, pausing a moment as though considering how much to tell. "I come from Iraq." Then he began to tell his story: how he's from the south of Iraq, and how he'd fled his homeland in 1991, after Saddam Hussein began to crack down on the Shi'ite revolutionaries. He'd lived five years in a refugee camp in Saudi Arabia, before being granted asylum in the U.S.A.: that's five years of living in a tent.

"Do you have family back in Iraq?" I asked.

He told me he did -- and that he'd been able to send a few letters over the years, and occasionally talk on the phone -- but never about anything of substance. Never anything more than "Hi, how are you?" Anything more than that, he told me, could put his family at risk.

Had he spoken with his family after the most recent war, I asked? Did he know they were all right?

No, he told me. It's not possible to contact them right now. I told him I hoped his family was safe, and he nodded, saying yes, he hoped so, too. He'd done well for himself in the States, but he hoped to return to Iraq at the earliest opportunity.

Then he brought the topic back around to religion. He told me how, a few weeks before, there'd been a Christian missionary convention in town. He'd been driving a few people to the airport, just as he was driving me. One of his passengers, he said, was a woman who seemed intent on making him a Christian. She told him -- right there on the airport shuttle -- that he would go to hell if he did not accept Jesus as his Savior.

"I asked her how she could be so sure of that," he went on. "I just know," she replied. "I asked her if she'd ever been out of the United States, and she said no, she hadn't. I asked her if she'd ever read any part of the Qur'an, and she said no, she hadn't."

Too bad, I said to myself, listening to the driver tell the tale. Too bad this man's most recent encounter with a Christian sharing her faith was with a woman who was evidently more intent on speaking than listening. She'd probably come out of that missionary convention all fired up to spread the good news: and the first stranger she meets is this Muslim cabdriver. He was a sitting duck: she let fly with her evangelical shotgun, but failed to bag the trophy.

The driver and I talked some more. We talked about God, in whom we both very evidently believed. We talked of the similarities between our two religions: the importance of loving neighbors, of seeking justice, of giving alms to the poor. When the 45-minute shuttle ride was over, he handed me back my bags and I handed him his tip, and we shook hands warmly. I felt we'd shared much more than just a ride. I think he felt the same way.

Should I have tried to do what my well-intentioned but zealous sister did, and confront this stranger then and there with the demands of the gospel? Should I, too, have asked him to give his life to Christ, just before getting my bags and boarding the plane? I don't think so. For me to attempt such a thing would have said more about my desire to win a convert -- about me, in other words -- than about him, and what he really needed. Better he drive away from that conversation knowing he'd spoken with a Christian, and found a caring person who was not pushy, but willing to listen. My hope and prayer is that I was such a person that morning. For only that kind of caring openness will give the Holy Spirit something to work with in this man's life, in the future.

"Always be ready to make your defense to anyone who demands from you an accounting for the hope that is in you," says 1 Peter, "yet do it with gentleness and reverence" (3:15-16). Oftentimes those who preach on this verse lay heavy stress on the first part of the verse, but the second part completely escapes them. "Gentleness and reverence" -- those were the hallmarks of Paul's speech to the Athenians, referencing their "unknown god." May they be the hallmarks of our own interfaith dialogues as well.

Mary Boyd Click responds: What a provocative piece, Chris! Although a fair number of Athenian philosophers rudely debated Paul's speech and others blew him off until another opportune time, like the devil leaving Jesus in the wilderness (Luke 4:13), it is impossible to blow off the questions you raise. What is the difference between engaging in interfaith dialogue and bearing witness? Is it possible to do both? (Yes, I think so.) How does one cozy up to people in our culture in order to gain their listening ears as Paul did, without selling out to the dominant culture, accommodating to it? What would Paul say if he were to observe the religiosity of our day and age? If he spent a day in Las Vegas, or a day on Fifth Avenue, or a day in the Visitor's Gallery of the House of Representatives, would he observe "how religious" we are? I think so.

The text moved me to look up the origin of the word "religious." It comes from the Latin re-ligare, meaning to connect back once again (Ayto, John. Dictionary of Word Origins, Arcade Publishing, New York, 1990], p. 438). I find it so interesting that today when people outside the church try to evaluate what happens inside the church, they don't like using the word "religious," and some don't even want to use the word "spiritual." Instead they make comments like, "I just couldn't connect." Or more positively, "I really connected with what was said." Religion of any persuasion is an effort to re-connect with our god(s) and with one another. When Paul entered Athens he had his work cut out for him because as Will Willimon once wrote, the Athenians never met a god they couldn't worship. Are we any different?

Paul's speech had a pretty good opener, addressing the idol of the "unknown" god at hand. He held their attention by quoting their own philosophers and appealing to their own pagan gropings for any deity "that worked," like people pumping tokens into slot machines praying for a payoff. These Athenians were an intellectually sophisticated group. They quickly sized Paul up and then cut him off at the climax of his speech. Just as he was beginning to tell them about the resurrection of Jesus, they dismissed him. "Next!" "Let's move on!" "Enough of him!" Only two people remained behind, Dionysus and Damaris who later became disciples. He may have felt like a failure in Athens, but the church over the years has seen merit in his attempt to dialogue and bear witness to his faith.

So what would Paul say about how "religious" North American Christians are? Would he observe how adept we are at using the language and motivations of faith to connect us not to God or one another, but to our hungry habits of consumption? In their book Christianity Incorporated: How Big Business is Buying the Church, authors Michael Budde and Robert Brimlow make a poignant case that Christianity and capitalism take turns scratching one another's backs (Budde, Michael and Brimlow, Robert. Christianity Incorporated: How Big Business is Buying the Church [Brazos Press, 2002]). If Paul, or anyone wants to see how religious we are, all one has to do is "follow the money." (I dare say this is a touchstone in most Catholic parishes as well as in the Protestant ones.)

Budde and Brimlow relate the following: When John Paul II visited Mexico, the church sold his image to advertisers trying to sell french fries. There's a detergent whose promoters brag that it can clean the Shroud of Turin. For a while Michael Jordan was the "Gatorade God" whose motto was "sacrifice nothing." Budde and Brimlow argue that the church has become a "chaplain to capitalism." Commenting on their book in 2002, Publishers Weekly wrote that the church "is left with an impaired ability to critique culture or form disciples who witness the kingdom of God." "The intriguing question," writes Budde and Brimlow, "is not whether capitalist culture will continue to shape hearts and imaginations more thoroughly than the Way of the Cross, but whether churches will produce people able to tell the difference between the two." Paul's speech in Athens was a model hermeneutic, but it was also a serious witness to the new life offered us in Jesus Christ and the death that is inevitable if the church voluntarily sells out to the gods of our dominant culture.

As I am writing this article, I have received a phone call from James Dobson's "Focus on the Family" group. It is a recorded survey and I am asked to respond "yes" or "no" to the following questions: "Are you aware of current efforts on Capitol Hill to filibuster and oppose President Bush's solid nominees for various offices? Are you in favor of this tactic? Did you vote in the last election? Are you a Republican? Are you a Democrat? Do you favor a woman's right to choice on the issue of abortion?" I asked myself, "What does any of this have to do with my faith and Dobson's supposed focus on the family?" I used to be very fond of James Dobson's publications and initial perspectives, especially his advice on dealing with adolescents. Our family even named our dog, "McGee," after the wonderful series of "McGee and Me" videos. However, I'm concerned that "Focus on the Family" has lost its focus and is more concerned about passing legislation than engaging in shared dialogue and a witness with integrity. In other words, I believe we lose the spirit of Christ when we employ power tactics to coerce others to follow "our way." In the long run, it will only come back to haunt us politically and spiritually.

Jesus advised us to "be in the world, but not of it." Is there any more complex position that requires more diligence in our behavior and discussions with others that this? It calls for subtlety in discernment. It calls for generosity and openness as opposed to cocksureness of attitude. It calls for hospitality and grace alongside a faith that seeks understanding. The strength of a Christian's convictions is readily apparent in the way we live and wear our faith in conversation with others.

I imagine that Paul's manner was as important as his message. He neither condemned nor condoned Athenian beliefs. Although he was left talking to the wind on Mars Hill, the pneuma carried his witness down through the centuries as a model for us today. Perhaps Christianity would have a better reputation today if Paul's model of tolerance and witness with integrity had been imitated.

Also Chris, perhaps Christendom might "still be a unifying construct" if the church through the ages had not repeatedly "sold out" as Christians strived to remain a dominant majority power employing whatever means necessary. The history of Christians in conversation with other Christians and other faiths reveals a shameful trail of blood. Religious wars plagued Europe in the 1560s to the 1650s and before that the crusades left an indelible association of Christianity with violence. Since 9/11 there has been a resurgence of and interest in religion, alongside a resurgence of and revulsion of religion because of its seeming inevitable association with violence. We would do well to study again Paul's missionary style, which sacrifices neither honesty nor integrity, while embodying the spirit of Christ's own openness and hospitality. As Christianity falls from the glorious days of Christendom, the church would do well to re-discover the cleansing and renewal that can come from being a remnant, from being a minority instead of a majority. If the future has in store for us Pope Benedict XVI's vision of a church with "a full and visible unity" we must not waste time in learning the lessons of grace, humility, inclusiveness, outreach, tolerance, and dialogue with all God's children. If we, or the new pope, fail to embody those Christian characteristics in our witness to the gospel, then the vision is only a cover up for the ever re-occurring human struggle for power.


Related Illustrations

Christ does not save all those who say to him, "Lord, Lord." But he saves all those who out of a pure heart give a piece of bread to a starving man, without thinking about him the least little bit. And these, when he thanks them, reply: "Lord, when did we feed thee?"... An atheist and an "infidel", capable of pure compassion, are as close to God as is a Christian, and consequently know him equally well, although their knowledge is expressed in other words, or remains unspoken. For God is Love.
-- Simone Weil (who was a Jewish convert to Christianity)

***

I keep a folder in my credenza marked "Holy War." It bulges with Shias and Sunnis in fratricidal conflict: teenaged girls in North Africa shot in the face for not wearing a veil, professors whose throats are cut for teaching male and female students in the same classroom, the fanatical Jewish doctor with a machine gun mowing down thirty praying Muslims in a mosque, Muslim suicide bombers bit on the obliteration of Jews, of the young Orthodox Jew who assassinated Yitzhak Rabin and then announced on CNN to the world that "Everything I did, I did for the glory of God," of Hindus and Muslims slaughtering each other in India, of Christians and Muslims perpetuating gruesome vengeance on each other in Nigeria.

There is a large folder in my desk marked "Timothy McVeigh," blowing up the Federal building in Oklahoma City killing 168 people in part as revenge against the U.S. Government for killing David Koresh and his followers.

We didn't realize it at the time, but the first strike at New York's World Trade Center in 1993 was a religious act of terror. The second one in 9/11, claiming over 3,000 lives, was another act of religious terror. Meanwhile, groups calling themselves the Christian Identity Movement and the Christian Patriot League arm themselves, and Christians intoxicated with the delusional doctrine of two 19th-century itinerant preachers not only await the rapture, but believe they have an obligation to get involved politically to hasten the apocalypse that would bring to an end the world. Christians can invoke God for the purpose of waging religious war....

"To be furious in religion," said the Quaker William Penn, "is to be furiously irreligious."
-- Bill Moyers, at the Walter Cronkite Faith and Freedom Awards, October 20, 2004, New York City

***

A story is told of former Chairman of the Federal Reserve Board, Arthur J. Burns, a Jew, who joined an informal White House prayer group in the late 1970s. The prayer group was predominantly composed of Christians. No one quite knew how to involve Arthur Burns in the group. At the end of each prayer session, one of the members would ask another member to close the meeting with prayer. But Arthur was never asked, perhaps more out of respect than ignorance or prejudice. But then one week a newcomer unknowingly asked Burns to close the meeting with prayer. Many of the people there were a bit surprised and wondered what would happen. Burns, without missing a beat, reached out his hands and bowed his head, and the other participants instinctively clasped each other's hands and bowed their heads. Burns prayed, "Lord, I pray that you would bring Jews to know Jesus Christ. I pray that you would bring Muslims to know Jesus Christ. Finally, Lord, I pray that you will bring Christians to know Jesus Christ. Amen."

***

Harvey Cox, in an article originally printed in The Christian Century in August 1998, explores the significance of the 14th chapter of John, with its seemingly contradictory statements in verses 2 and 6, for interfaith dialogue. Noting that the world religions at once create and threaten the dream of a single human family, he urges us to maintain both the pole of energizing Christian particularity and that of inclusive universal vision, to keep discussion testimonial rather than abstract, and to undertake the challenging but necessary work of remaining in contact with proponents of the universality/particularity pole that is opposite our own preference. He goes on to outline four ways in which the example and guiding presence of Jesus can enhance inter-religious dialogue.
-- www.religion-online.org/showarticle.asp?title=150

***

Religious diversity is something our parishioners deal with daily, and often find themselves woefully under-equipped to address. In December 2003, Macleans.ca, the website of Canada's weekly newsmagazine, featured an article titled "Mommy, is Santa Jesus' Uncle?" that opened with the difficulty its lapsed Christian author had explaining her own heritage to her child, then went on to explore the compounded awkwardness experienced by acquaintances of other religious traditions and by interfaith families. "How children handle conflicting narratives about God is an interesting issue" notes author Patricia Pearson. " 'My daughter accepts that there are at least two versions of God,' says a Jewish friend whose ex-partner is Christian. 'She doesn't seem bothered by that, though I'm not sure how she processes the difference between what I believe and what her father believes. She just seems comfortable with dualities, the way that she accepts that her parents have different houses.' Another Jewish friend has told her daughter that 'everyone has their own way to get to God.' She has made it clear Daddy believes in Baby Jesus being the Son of God, since he is a Catholic, whereas she does not. 'The most important thing,' she says to her daughter, 'is what you believe inside yourself.' "

The article appeared in the Life section of www.macleans.ca on December 22, 2003.

***

Among the resources now available to help people navigate today's complex religious landscape are the two volumes of How to Be a Perfect Stranger, offering advice for non-adherents on what to expect and how to blend in at worship services, holiday celebrations and rites of passage in many different Christian denominations and other faiths. Order from www.skylightpaths.com/books/012.htm

***

Winifred Gallagher's book, Working on God (Random House, 1999), is an accessible and evocative portrait of the contemporary spiritual landscape. Lapsed, skeptical, and yet questing, like so many today, Gallagher set out to explore the possibilities within and beyond the Christian, Jewish, and other religious traditions in North America. "This is a book for people who aren't sure about religion," she states in her introduction. "These 'neoagnostics' are well-educated skeptics who have inexplicable metaphysical feelings. They regard religion as belief in the unbelievable. Yet they sense something important that eludes their most trusted tools of intellect and learning. Defined by ambivalence and longing, their credos are various: 'There may be something,' perhaps, or 'I'm spiritual, not religious.' Neoagnostics are America's most subdued, neglected religious group, yet they are one of its most powerful. They are everywhere, especially at the top" (p. xviii).

Gallagher further notes, "No matter the label, religion at the year 2000 concerns questions about how to live at a time of unparalleled change and expresses dissatisfaction with conventional secular solutions -- and often those of old-style institutional religion. The most publicized example is least attractive to neoagnostics: recourse to moral and theological certainties, whether by ultraorthodox Jews or evangelical Christians ... Another approach, called millennial religion in these pages, regards questions themselves as religious expressions, and in response, offers practices or processes as well as formulations. Both question-oriented millennial religion and the answer-oriented kind differ from the traditional American socially oriented sort that preceded them by their resolute focus on the reality of something else, which is often simply called spirituality" (p. xvii).

***

"Bearing Faithful Witness," a study resource of the United Church of Canada, explores United Church (and, more broadly, Christian) -- Jewish relations both historically and at present. Materials include an informative 68-page document, three- and six-week study outlines intended for lay groups, and a worship service. Download from www.united-church.ca (under the Justice, Global, Ecumenical Relations tab). A newer document, "That We May Know Each Other," explores United Church-Muslim relations, and can also be downloaded from this site.

Another United Church document exploring ecumenical possibilities is "Mending the World," an "ecumenical vision for healing and reconciliation" approved as a "lens through which to assess United Church mission and ministry." One of its central tenets is the necessity of "making common cause with all people of good will, whether they be of faith or not, for the creation of a world that is just, participatory and sustainable." "Mending the World" is also available at www.united-church.ca.

***

The following discussion paper was shared with our local ministerial, whence we (with permission) circulated it to our Presbytery with this introduction: "As you well know, in our ministerial associations we have variations in theologies, perspectives and collegiality. While there's no sure fire cure in sight to the brokenness in the body of Christ, one of our colleagues, Pastor Dave Wicks from the Brethren in Christ Church in Kindersley circulated the following to us as a discussion paper that had arisen from another ministerial he'd been a part of. It's a starting point for analyzing the group dynamics of your ministerial association and could be shared or discussed in hopes of deepening your relationships and effectiveness in cooperative ministry."

Ministerial Cooperation (Discussion Paper)

"How good and pleasant it is when brothers live together in unity. It is like precious oil poured on the head, running down on the beard, running down on Aaron's beard, down upon the collar of his robes. It is as if the dew of Hermon were falling on Mount Zion. For there the Lord bestows his blessing even life evermore." Psalm 133

Objective:
To establish informal guidelines to help us determine what our expectations are in the level(s) of cooperation we work in without denying who we are, betraying those we represent or compromising what we believe.

1. Communication: sharing information concerning plans, projects, activities basic level of courtesy
Examples: new staff, building projects, outreach programs, (people?)
Conditions: none, theological compatibility not necessary

2. Fellowship: sharing what we have in common
A. Personal friendship ... on personal not theological basis
Examples: social connection
Conditions: enough common ground to feel comfortable
Demonstrate our unity by meeting on common ground
B. Corporate Fellowship: demonstrate our unity in the Christian faith
Focus on things we hold in common
Examples: Legion Service, Lent, Christmas, Charities
Conditions: enough common ground to feel comfortable, Minimal expectations

3. Cooperation: working together to accomplish a specific (predetermined limited in time and scope) objective for community
Examples: Grief Seminar, Boat people
Conditions: set boundaries of involvement and expectations; Avoid sectarian advancement, ethics, courtesy, code of conduct; Clear responsibilities, time, resources; Enough common ground to make it workable

4. Integrated Ministry: Ongoing, long range integrated ministry
Full participation, common identity
Examples: Common Youth Ministry, Suicide Intervention, Rescue Mission
Conditions: Theology and Ministry Philosophy in common
Common goals, mission over identity or "benefit"
Clear guidelines on responsibility

***

"Rome's Radical Conservative" (NY Times Op-Ed on Benedict XVI by Michael Novak) can be found at http://www.nytimes.com/2005/04/20/opinion/20novak.html?th&emc=th

***

For an example of religious harassment today, see what's happened at the Air Force Academy: http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/wireStory?id=685514&CMP=OTC-RSSFeeds0312


Worship Resources
By Julia Strope

Theme: Every day Christians are in conversation with individuals of other faiths and other religions. We can always articulate our experience with Christ and share our hope.
1 Peter 3:13-22 and Acts 17:22-31

CALL TO WORSHIP
From Acts 17:22f

Leader: Welcome to this place of exploration and adventure!
God is here and we are here, conversing with one another about things of the body and the soul.

People: We are here to listen for God and to thank God for life and its beauty.

Leader: While we are together, we remember the stories of Creation and how God fixed the heavens in place and made boundaries between land and water.

People: Yes! We look at Nature and know the God who made us all. In God we live and move and hope!

Leader: Some poets say we are God's children and adults --

People: We are made in the image of God and we are co-creators with the Divine!

Leader: We continue to explore what that means -- to be made in Divine Image -- and to walk the paths set before us with ingenuity.

People: Yes! We know God and God lives through us. Hallelujah!

PRAYER OF CELEBRATION/ADORATION

From Acts 17:22f
Holy One --
How grateful we are that you know us and invite us to be in dynamic relationship with you! All around us we see signs of your imagination. All around us we see a world that invites our active participation for justice and peace. We open our hearts and minds to your empowering presence. We welcome your guidance and grace. Amen.

HYMN SUGGESTIONS

Canto de Esperanza/Song Of Hope tune: ARGENTINA
Christ Is Made The Sure Foundation tune: WESTMINSTER ABBEY or REGENT SQUARE
Love Divine, All Loves Excelling tune: HYFRYDOL
O For A Thousand Tongues To Sing
Today We All Are Called To Be Disciples tune: KINGSFOLD
Lord Of Light, Your Name Outshining tune: ABBOT'S LEIGH
O God, We Bear The Imprint Of Your Face tune: SONG 1 (The lyrics to this three stanza hymn go nicely with the Acts 17 and the I Peter 3:15 texts. It is available in The Presbyterian Hymnal, 1990, 385.)
Lord, I Want To Be A Christian African-American
I'm Gonna Live So God Can Use Me African-American
Help Us Accept Each Other tune: BARONITA
As A Fire Is Meant For Burning (1992, GIA).
Called As Partners In Christ's Service tune: BEECHER
As A Chalice Cast Of Gold tune: INWARD LIGHT (These lyrics speak of the humility necessary as we articulate our faith in "mixed company" [Acts 17] of other religions and other Christian faiths; stanza one uses the image of ore from Psalm 66; it is available in The Presbyterian Hymnal, 1990, 336.)

CALL TO CONFESSION

As a household of God, we take time to look within ourselves and at our community. We name what we see and feel, first together and then in the deep silence of our own beings.

COMMUNITY CONFESSION

From 1 Peter 3
Living God --
We hear scriptures tell us not to be afraid and not to worry.
Even when we feel "put upon,"
we are to be eager to do what is good.
When people ask to us explain why and how we have faith,
we are to do it with gentleness and respect.
We know that we are not always compliant with the scriptures,
so grant us awareness, we pray, and vitalize our souls.
Free us from the attitudes that defeat your goodness in us.
And give us courage to live by the teachings of Jesus. Amen.

WORD OF GRACE

From 1 Peter 3:21
Christ lives and we too are alive! Washing our bodies does not cleanse us; God cleanses and frees us from our pasts; God's love empowers us for the present!

CONGREGATIONAL CHORAL RESPONSE

Alleluia, Alleluia! Give Thanks tune: ALLELUIA NO.1 stanza 4

Come, let us praise the living God,
Joyfully sing to our Savior,
Alleluia....

OFFERTORY STATEMENT

From John 14:15-21
The world knows the living Christ through our actions, including our giving of money, our use of talents, and our deeds of compassion. Most of all, "offering" time is the opportunity to decide again, "Here I am, God, use me."

PRAYER OF THANKSGIVING

God of Everywhere --
Thank you for physical life and spiritual abundance
in Athens and Rome, in America and Mexico....
With these moneys, give our faith a voice on this street corner; with these tithes, provide necessities for persons who have none.
Amen.

A 21ST CENTURY AFFIRMATION

From Acts 17:16f
We know God
who created the world and
who continues to create in and through us.
We know Jesus of Nazareth
who lived and taught principles of change and of justice.
We experience Christ living among us, changing minds and hearts.
We experience Holy Spirit empowering us to appreciate beauty,
to care for the earth and
to do intentional acts of kindness.
As a community of faith, we know our faith roots and
we explore ways to be faithful in a global village.
Thanks to God who gives us life and peace!

INTERCESSORY PRAYERS

(written after reading God's Politics by J. Wallis, In Search of the Good Life by R. T. Peters and The World is Flat by Tom Friedman)

Recorder of time and deeds --
Bits of memory keep us in touch with yesterdays -- Oklahoma City, Columbine, Atlanta, Twin Towers, Salk vaccine, aspirin, queens and princes, bread for 25 cents a loaf....
Bits of memory tell us that peace is a possibility among neighbors;
Bits of memory remind us that war does not distribute wealth and
resources providing all peoples safety in homes and
well-nourished children.
With eyes open, we see profit taking precedence over peoples'
welfare and nations' well-being. With senses alert, we
see whole towns decimated as corporations seek lower
costs to themselves. With uneasy hearts, we see our
addiction to oil destroying land and life.
And so we pray for the leaders of North America: transform the ethics by which decisions are made so that there is justice and compassion for all life.
We pray for the leaders in China and Japan: may greed not be their downfall or ours.
We pray for the leaders of Iraq and all the lands that claim Mohammed as their prophet: give them dreams of collaboration.
We pray for the leaders of Israel: may the scriptures about a peaceable kingdom overpower current need for ownership.
And we pray for ourselves: release us from our greed and our dependence on things.
Let your reign begin now all around this planet, we pray.

Beauty Maker --
The colors and shapes of spring are breath-taking. The rains and blue skies call us outside to plant, to rearrange our yards and to play under the sun. We know that we all breathe the same air, drink from the same aquifers, and eat from the same soil. We pray that we -- and individuals in powerful positions -- protect the earth's systems that support all life.

God of hearth and wholeness --
We yearn to feel good, to feel appreciated, and to do work that satisfies. We want strength to endure the pain we cannot dismiss from our bodies and psyches. Heal us from the inside out and keep us in your loving care. Protect our children from destructive drugs and abusive people. Encourage adult partners to enable the best in each other. We pray for your people everywhere. Amen.

BENEDICTION/CHARGE

From Psalm 66
We see what God has done and we are thankful;
We sing our joy and our sorrows;
We tell others how God works with us
and why we are optimistic about time and eternity.
Go from this sanctuary as God's silver and gold, purified by fire,
sparkling goodness and peace wherever you are.
Go, cradled by Holy Presence,


A Children's Sermon

He abides with you

Object: two balls of different colored Playdoh

Based on John 14:15-21

(Note: Consider giving each child a small piece of white and red Playdoh while you tell the lesson. This way each child can participate.)

Good morning, boys and girls. How many of you like to make things with Playdoh? (let them answer) I really like to play with it also. One of the fun parts is mixing colors. Do any of you enjoy mixing colors? (let them answer) I have a red ball and a white ball of Playdoh. What color will I get if I mix the two together? (let them answer) Pink. Once I mix the two can I separate them again? (let them answer) No, I can't. But as I look at the pink ball I always remember that white and red were mixed together to make it. This means the two are inseparable. They can never be separated back into only white and only red.

This mixing of colors reminds me of this morning's lesson. Jesus told his disciples that he would leave the world and the world would no longer see him. However, people who love and believe in Jesus will have the Spirit of Jesus live in them. How can this be? Imagine that you are the red Playdoh. Imagine that Jesus' spirit is the white Playdoh. What happens when you mix the two? (let them answer while you mix the red and white) Jesus' spirit becomes a part of you. This is just as the Bible says. If you love Jesus, his spirit will always be with you and he will be in you. As long as you love Jesus no one can take his spirit from you. The next time you mix Playdoh colors think of the spirit of Jesus that is with you. Remember, as long as you love Jesus, the spirit of Jesus will live in you.

* * * * * * * * * * * * *

The Immediate Word, May 1, 2005 issue.

Copyright 2005 by CSS Publishing Company, Inc., Lima, Ohio.

All rights reserved. Subscribers to The Immediate Word service may print and use this material as it was intended in sermons and in worship and classroom settings only. No additional permission is required from the publisher for such use by subscribers only. Inquiries should be addressed to permissions@csspub.com or to Permissions, CSS Publishing Company, Inc., P.O. Box 4503, Lima, Ohio 45802-450