RELIGION FOR THE NON-RELIGIOUS
Folks in Scotland are trying something different -- multi-faith services on a regular basis for people who believe in God but who aren't part of any particular religion. Is this an authentic way to faith and a way to meet real needs or just mushy spirituality designed not to offend the theologically illterate? How do you vote?
* * *
AN AFTERMATH OF THE HOLOCAUST
Sometimes I imagine that if I don't know much about a subject maybe others are unaware of it, too.
So today I want to educate you a little about what's known as the Claims Conference, and tell you of a recent statement by a State Department official renewing the American commitment to support the work of the conference on behalf of victims of Nazi persecution. Here's the way the Claims Conference describes itself:
"The Conference on Jewish Material Claims Against Germany (Claims Conference) represents world Jewry in negotiating for compensation and restitution for victims of Nazi persecution and their heirs. The Claims Conference administers compensation funds, recovers unclaimed Jewish property and allocates funds to institutions that provide social welfare services to Holocaust survivors and preserve the memory and lessons of the Shoah."
I was unaware of the conference until I began work on a book about Jews in Poland who survived the Shoah with help from Polish Gentiles. A Kansas City rabbi and I are working on that project. (If you know of survivors or rescuers who fit our profile, please let me know.)
Sometimes, as I understand it, people who receive financial support from the Claims Conference depend on the money to make ends meet. Others wind up with so little it doesn't make much difference.
But the work of the conference, more than 60 years after the end of World War II, is just one more bit of evidence of the ripple effects of war and insane ideology.
Surf around a little on the conference's Web site and see what else you might learn that you didn't know. One good place to do that is in the conference news room, which has press releases about the group's work.
The Nazi plan to wipe out European Jewry almost succeeded. The effort to support survivors continues, as well it should. (Speaking of the Holocaust, if you missed my July 19 blog entry about an exhibition on the 1936 Nazi Olympics, please go back to that and take a look.)
To read my latest Kansas City Star work, click here.
Today's religious holidays: Lammas (Christian); Fast in honor of Holy Mother of Lord Jesus (Orthodox Christian)
AND a P.S.:
I'll be teaching a weekend writing class Oct. 6-8 at the Kirkridge Retreat and Study Center in Bangor, Pa. Come join us. For a description of the class, click here. It's called "From Pain to Hope through Writing." In it, we'll spend some time thinking about what Christianity means by hope and then we'll go to those places of personal or collective pain in our lives and write about them, remembering what it means to have hope. We'll also share some of that writing with each other. Writing about pain can be a healing process as we write toward the light. The weekend begins with a Friday evening dinner and session and ends with lunch on Sunday. An Autumn weekend in the Poconos spent with words. What could be better? Hope to see you there.
Worship of a generic, "interfaith" god may make people feel good about themsleves, but it's a complete waste of time otherwise. The participants are talking to themselves, not God.
Posted by: Ron | August 01, 2006 at 08:16 AM
This sentence in the interfaith worship article jumped out at me; "Rather than being based around stories about Jesus Christ, Muhammed or Buddha, the sermons will focus on universal themes such as love, how people can conduct their lives in a peaceful manner, support one another and respect the planet."
It strikes me as a both/and, not an either/or - if you want to talk about love, living peacefully, and supporting each other, wouldn't you want to tell the most powerful, time-tested stories we have? Those of Jesus, Buddha, and Muhammad?! (excepting militant fundamentalists of all stripes...)
To the interfaith worship in general, I'm torn... Knowing for myself the purpose of walking a specific path, but recognizing the harm done to many people by exclusivist churches/mosques/etc., I guess I err on the side of encouragement. If a group of people in Scotland are saying they need this service, who are we to say they don't? -howie
Posted by: howie | August 01, 2006 at 09:32 AM
To someone interested in the worldly benefits of religious fellowship, an interfaith generic worship may serve the purpose. However, a number of secular fellowships are available, many of which have a generic spiritual element. Why seek to create a "church" when what you're looking for is a social club?
For someone seeking a deep spiritual relationship, you have to be abandoned to your faith. In a world where tolerance and pluralism is more politically correct than sanctification and consecration, it's not a popular choice to acknowledge one God.
I can understand why people don't want to be confined or constrained by one God. The thing is, there's no way to receive a hug without somebody's arms wrapped around you. What many feel as constraint is an expression of God's love. When you escape the constraint, you've escaped your hug. Instead of cringing at the thought of only one true path to salvation, we should celebrate that one path has been made available to us.
Posted by: SC in KC | August 01, 2006 at 09:36 AM
Regarding the aftermath of the holocaust...
When Israel escaped the bondage of Egypt, they took the gold and treasures of Egypt with them. When Israel was delivered out of the bondage of the Babylonian and Assyrian captivity, they had the financial support of their former captors to rebuild the walls around Jerusalem.
Now, Israel is receiving financial reparations for their suffering in the great abomination of the 20th century. Once again, a faithful remnant has been spared, and has been returned to their promised land. God is ALWAYS faithful, even in the midst of our suffering.
Posted by: SC in KC | August 01, 2006 at 09:46 AM
Like SC, I've found depth of purpose in walking a Christian path. But for this Scottish community (and others like it), who do not understand themselves to be called to practice their faith within a specific tradition, is it wrong to worship in the way that they can? From that angle, I can't think so.
A brief look at last year's World Almanac at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Religion indicates that around 50% of us consider ourselves monotheists of one kind or another, and surveys routinely show that 90% of Americans "believe in God" - hardly an unpopular choice.
Risking pushing the metaphor too far, an unwanted hug is IS constraining and not an appropriate expression of love. In a case between two people, assuming it were given unknowingly, the hugger would recognize they'd overstepped a boundary and apologize.
Posted by: howie | August 01, 2006 at 10:25 AM
I don't think you're pushing the metaphor too far at all. In fact, you've just hit the nail on the head. If the hug is unwanted, it IS constraining. However, when the hugger is God, what are you going to do about it? People renounce their faith, and the faith of their fathers, over just this issue.
I remember going to my aunt Earlene's house, and ALWAYS getting a hug that threatened to break ribs. It didn't matter how hard I tried to hide behind my mom, Earlene would wheedle her way in there and - BANG, SQUEEZE, GROAN - I've been hugged again.
The only way to avoid that crushing hug is to avoid aunt Earlene. The thing is, you can't avoid God forever.
Don't mistake me, I'm not talking about denominational or liturgical constraints. I'm talking about the "rules" of any given faith. Christianity, for instance, requires that you believe in and worship the trinitarian God, Father, Son, and Holy Spirit. It requires you to accept Jesus Christ as not a way, but the ONLY way to salvation. It requires you to repent of your sins and live a life regenerated by the Spirit. BANG, SQUEEZE, GROAN!
Still, it's a small price to pay for an intimate relationship with the Creator of the universe. In fact, you begin to really enjoy those rib crushing hugs. You begin to depend on them to hold you up when the world shakes under your feet. You count on them to keep you together when you're about to fly apart at the seems. You rely on them to guide you when you've lost your way.
I don't see aunt Earlene as often as I used to, and her arms aren't as strong as they used to be, and I'm quite a bit bigger around the ribs than I used to be. I'm so glad that God's arms never weaken, that He's always there, and that I'm always His little boy. SQUEEZE!
Posted by: SC in KC | August 01, 2006 at 11:15 AM
As someone who has a very spiritual belief in a higher power, but who has little faith in religion, let me explain my point of view. A Universalist approach is by no means an attempt "not to offend anyone." I truly believe that all people are good at heart and God is love. My belief is not a rejection of a higher power; it is an acknowledgement of the fallibility of humans. Just because we reject your interpretation of a higher power, does not mean that we are Godless. I think all humans are born with an intrinsic feeling that there must be a higher power.
The problems come when humans try to codify their own personal beliefs in this higher power, which are inherently affected by historical context and personal biases, and force those beliefs onto others. I personally do not think that something which is beyond human comprehension can be explained through human words and human emotions. Do you really think that God has human feelings such as “jealousy” and “wrath?” I view religion as a purely human construct to help us understand our intrinsic belief in a higher power.
I have a hard time putting faith in something that is largely determined by a person's geography and by a person's parental beliefs. Religion is a vehicle on the journey toward spiritual belief in a higher power, but that vehicle can easily lead us in the wrong direction. In fact, people often lose sight of their true goal, and think that wherever the vehicle takes them is the right destination. When the vehicle begins to cause more harm than good, it is time to abandon the vehicle.
I grow tiresome of individual’s telling me what I feel is watered down and what I practice is not real. I grew up Christian and I assure you that what I feel now is more real than anything I felt while reading the Bible. Even while I was a practicing “Christian” I was told that I was going to hell because I was not the right denomination.
The Bible is a great text which has been tainted with human hatred disguised as Godly wrath. If you look through history most religions have used variations on the “Carrot and Stick” approach to attempt to dictate human actions (such as keep the poor in poverty). Again, I feel that heaven and hell (as well as the devil) are purely human constructs which help facilitate our beliefs. Here is a great story on heaven and hell.
The Sufi mystic Rabi’a was seen walking through town with a torch and a bucket of water. When asked what she was doing, this was her reply:
“I want to put out the fires of Hell, and burn down the rewards of Paradise. They block the way to God. I do not want to worship from fear of punishment or for the promise of reward, but simply for the love of God.”
I do want to make clear that I am not against anyone’s own personal beliefs. If your being a Christian, or Muslim, or whatever helps bring you closer to God, I am happy for you. At the same time I urge you to examine whether or not your vehicle interferes with your end destination.
Posted by: openmind | August 01, 2006 at 11:24 AM
openmind,
I love your description of Universalism. I've never heard it described better.
In all honesty, however, I just can't relate to how anyone takes comfort from an impotent god that we created. I can't find the joy in living for self. I can't find the hope in justifying self. Sure, you avoid the pitfalls of hell, but at the cost of heaven. It seems sad.
But hey, maybe I'm full of bull. Maybe I just don't get it. I'm willing to live and let live, but I hope it's okay with you if I say a prayer for you. If you pray, please pray for me as well.
Posted by: SC in KC | August 01, 2006 at 11:42 AM
I dig your story, SC. Your first paragraph says it. I just have a heart for people who are reached by God in ways other than the way Aunt Earlene reached you. If there are groups of people seeking God, but who have been "crushed" in one way or another, I'm inclined to support their new steps of faith such as the Scottish services.
As a Christian, I don't think my path is THE ONLY way to God/salvation, and I do not stand alone - www.crosswalkamerica.org
Posted by: howie | August 01, 2006 at 11:54 AM
Hey JC, thanks for the nice remarks. I think that a common misconception about Universalism is that it is all about the “self.” While there may certainly be people who have this point of view because of selfish reasons (just as there are those who are Christian for selfish purposes, i.e. they don’t want to go to hell or they want to go to heaven), in its pure form Universalism is all about loving and helping others (as is Christianity at its heart) and rejecting hate in all forms.
Additionally, I do not think that most Universalists would agree that God is impotent. We just have differing views on how God works. I believe that God has given every being in this world free will to do what they choose with it. In fact, much like the Holy Spirit of Christianity, I have come to realize that God “is” us in the sense that we cannot separate ourselves from God. There is no line between “God” and “me” and “you” or anything like that, there just is (to be honest, I consider myself more of a Buddhist Universalist). From this perspective, God works through us and our love, so to speak. In essence, we create our own “heaven” and “hell” through how we live our lives.
At their heart, I think all religions are describing the same experience; they are just using different words. It’s like looking two people looking at a cow. One says “that’s a cow” and the other says “No, that’s an animal.” They will continue to argue until they realize they are both saying the same thing. I am willing to let live as well, and I would be glad to take any prayers that you have to offer. I am also willing to dish a couple out too :)
Posted by: openmind | August 01, 2006 at 12:20 PM
Howie, you say you're a Christian, but don't believe Christianity is the only path to God/salvation. What do you base this belief on? What you "think" is completely irrelevant. The Bible clearly states that God is a jealous God, and faith in Jesus Christ is the only path to salvation. You can't be a Christian and believe in universalism, no matter how much this offends your human intellect.
Posted by: Ron | August 01, 2006 at 02:25 PM
Open mind, you are doing the same thing as Howie. You believe that "heaven and hell are a human construct," and that "all people are good at heart."
This is exactly the oppositie of what the Bible teaches. It's no wonder that everyone here talks past each other on most issues. Those who don't accept the Bible as authoritive will always substitute what they "think" for what the Bible says. It's just human nature to think we know a better way (or path).
Posted by: Ron | August 01, 2006 at 03:23 PM
Ron - how do you know what the Bible says is right?
Much of Scripture is confirmed for me in experience, tradition, community, and rational thought. Yet I worship a living God, not a book written by our ancestors about their experiences of a living God. The authors of our Scripture were great, but not perfect. I try to be open to what the Spirit might still be saying to us.
The four sources of knowledge cited above have led me at this point in time to the understanding that if God desires everyone to experience salvation (I would say in this life; others might say in heaven/afterlife) then nothing we do will change that. How could my beliefs be stronger than God's desire to save? A God who is Love cannot save some rather than others, and cannot close the door or offer a "last chance" to anyone - even after death.
There are threads of this line of thought in the Bible, such as John 10:16, but they are inconclusive. We've had centuries of experience with God since those documents were written; if I, as a human, can imagine a universally saving love, and begin to practice it, how much greater must God's love really be?! -howie
Posted by: howie | August 01, 2006 at 03:26 PM
Ron - just got your second comment.
You're right about talking past - but please recognize that the Bible's authority is not an all-or-nothing proposition. Probably you don't hold parts of Leviticus as having equal authority as the Sermon on the Mount.
Don't strawman those of us who are not inerrantists as people who "substitute what they 'think' for what the Bible says."
"It's just human nature to think we know a better way (or path)." - TRUE - Cases in point: slavery, women's equality, and democracy. Can you make a convincing case for "what the Bible says" on any of these points?
Posted by: howie | August 01, 2006 at 03:31 PM
Ron, I am sorry you disagree with me. I do think that one point you made is a problem I have with some Christians (not all).
"All people are good at heart."
This is exactly the opposite of what the Bible teaches.
I am not sure that all Christians would agree with your interpretation of the Bible.
Also, I realized I called SC JC, my apologies.
Posted by: openmind | August 01, 2006 at 03:43 PM
Check this out. Apparently women should cover their head in Church And the covering is not just the hair because it says:
And every woman who prays or prophesies with her head uncovered dishonors her head—it is just as though her head were shaved.
Now, I wonder if this is cultural, and if this is cultural, then what else is cultural?
1 Cor 11
--------
Propriety in Worship
2 I praise you for remembering me in everything and for holding to the teachings, just as I passed them on to you.
3 Now I want you to realize that the head of every man is Christ, and the head of the woman is man, and the head of Christ is God. 4 Every man who prays or prophesies with his head covered dishonors his head. 5 6 If a woman does not cover her head, she should have her hair cut off; and if it is a disgrace for a woman to have her hair cut or shaved off, she should cover her head. 7 A man ought not to cover his head, since he is the image and glory of God; but the woman is the glory of man. 8 For man did not come from woman, but woman from man; 9 neither was man created for woman, but woman for man. 10 For this reason, and because of the angels, the woman ought to have a sign of authority on her head.
11 In the Lord, however, woman is not independent of man, nor is man independent of woman. 12 For as woman came from man, so also man is born of woman. But everything comes from God. 13 Judge for yourselves: Is it proper for a woman to pray to God with her head uncovered? 14 Does not the very nature of things teach you that if a man has long hair, it is a disgrace to him, 15 but that if a woman has long hair, it is her glory? For long hair is given to her as a covering. 16 If anyone wants to be contentious about this, we have no other practice—nor do the churches of God.
Posted by: Culture Club | August 01, 2006 at 03:48 PM
Library of Congress stuff on slavery
http://lcweb2.loc.gov/ammem/ndlpedu/collections/slavery/thinking.html
Posted by: Culture Club | August 01, 2006 at 04:02 PM
Howie, because of this blog, I'm beginning to realize you are right. I guess I've lived a sheltered life. I thought all Christian denominations believed in original sin, the total depravity of mankind, vocation (as oppopsed to equality), salvation through Jesus Christ alone, etc. Democracy is a fine form of government, but God is a dictator when it goes to spiritual matters.
"So then He has mercy on upon whomever he wills, and he hardens the heart of whomever he wills...But who are you, a man, to answer back to God?" Romans 18, 20.
I am a Missouri Synod Lutheran and all of the above are taught faithfully at my church. I have never attended a Prebsyterian Church, or a Methodist Church, or a Congregationalist chuch, etc., which must be why I never realized these basic doctrines have been rejected by other Christian denominations. Because of this blog, I'm happy to know this, but I'm very sad to hear it.
Posted by: Ron | August 01, 2006 at 04:09 PM
howie,
I guess the big distinction here is those that believe Scripture to be the divinely inspired authoritative word of God, and those that don't.
The apostle Paul wrote, in 2 Timothy 3:14-17..
"But as for you, continue in what you have learned and have become convinced of, because you know those from whom you learned it, and how from infancy you have known the holy Scriptures, which are able to make you wise for salvation through faith in Christ Jesus. All Scripture is God-breathed and is useful for teaching, rebuking, correcting and training in righteousness, so that the man of God may be thoroughly equipped for every good work."
The prophet Jeremiah wrote in chapter 30, verse 2...
"This is what the LORD, the God of Israel, says: 'Write in a book all the words I have spoken to you."
Jesus explained the Scriptures in Luke 24:27...
"And beginning with Moses and all the Prophets, he explained to them what was said in all the Scriptures concerning himself."
...and again in verse 45...
"Then he opened their minds so they could understand the Scriptures."
So apparently, Jesus Himself considered the Scriptures something to be understood and applied.
The human penmen are to Scripture what Mary was to Jesus, the human medium acted upon by the Holy Spirit to conceive the 'logos', or purposed Word of God. The original autographs of Scripture were no more written by man than Jesus was conceived by Mary. Both are the perfect, definitive, infallible, inerrant, and authoritative revelatory vehicles by which God presents Himself to us for relationship.
It is up to us to properly transmit those Scriptures and, through effective and prayerful hermeneutics, to interpret and apply them. It is this attitude of God-focus that is the distinctive mark of a Christian. It is only when we become self-focused that we fall into apostasy.
Posted by: SC in KC | August 01, 2006 at 04:17 PM
"Cases in point: slavery, women's equality, and democracy. Can you make a convincing case for "what the Bible says" on any of these points?"
I would like to make a case for these, if you will permit me.
First of all, slavery. The Bible tells us in the book of Exodus that slavery is a bad thing...
"The Israelites groaned in their slavery and cried out, and their cry for help because of their slavery went up to God."
Exodus 2:23
The book of Deuteronomy tells us that we should try to liberate slaves...
"If a slave has taken refuge with you, do not hand him over to his master. Let him live among you wherever he likes and in whatever town he chooses. Do not oppress him."
Deuteronomy 23:15-16
In both the Old and New Testaments, we are called to treat slaves well...
"Do not rule over them ruthlessly, but fear your God."
Leviticus 25:43
"And masters, treat your slaves in the same way. Do not threaten them, since you know that he who is both their Master and yours is in heaven, and there is no favoritism with him."
Ephesians 6:9
Moreover, Scripture tells us how slaves should behave...
"Teach slaves to be subject to their masters in everything, to try to please them, not to talk back to them, and not to steal from them, but to show that they can be fully trusted, so that in every way they will make the teaching about God our Savior attractive."
Titus 2:9-10
What is important to remember is that WE are the slaves. Every one of us is enslaved to sin. Take a moment to think of all the people you know who are enslaved to greed, lust, pride, anger. Slavery is bad, we should treat our fellow slaves with grace, and we should, even in our enslavement, seek to be good witnesses for Christ...
"For the grace of God that brings salvation has appeared to all men. It teaches us to say "No" to ungodliness and worldly passions, and to live self-controlled, upright and godly lives in this present age, while we wait for the blessed hope—the glorious appearing of our great God and Savior, Jesus Christ, who gave himself for us to redeem us from all wickedness and to purify for himself a people that are his very own, eager to do what is good."
Titus 2:11-14
As for women's "equality", I don't think my wife would stand for it. She enjoys the Biblical admonitions that all men are called to uphold. She enjoys that I must love her as Christ loves the church, that I am to take responsibility for the home, that I am to provide for and protect her. In the immortal words of Jerry Clower, "Mama don't want you messin' with the deal she's got!"
Democracy is an illusion, and Scripture points this out all too well. Even when we vote, the vote only represents what we are enslaved to. Democracy represents the best in human governance, but humans are fallen. Our best, therefore, merely represents our depravity. To externalize it, think of it this way: What would a nation of murderers vote for? Probably, they would vote for laws that allowed what the majority wanted, which is murder. Democracy fails when the governed lack a moral compass. The Bible points out that the only perfect government is one in which a perfect constituency is governed by a perfect leader. Christ is that perfect leader, and the resurrected Church is His constituency.
Posted by: SC in KC | August 01, 2006 at 06:38 PM
Speaking of oppression, when you read the words here in James 5, does it make anyone think of anything going on today?
1 Now listen, you rich people, weep and wail because of the misery that is coming upon you. 2 Your wealth has rotted, and moths have eaten your clothes. 3 Your gold and silver are corroded. Their corrosion will testify against you and eat your flesh like fire. You have hoarded wealth in the last days. 4 Look! The wages you failed to pay the workmen who mowed your fields are crying out against you. The cries of the harvesters have reached the ears of the Lord Almighty. 5 You have lived on earth in luxury and self-indulgence. You have fattened yourselves in the day of slaughter. 6 You have condemned and murdered innocent men, who were not opposing you.
Posted by: Just Thinking | August 01, 2006 at 09:20 PM
It makes me think of the unrighteous, who play today with no regard for the payment due tomorrow. They revel in their worldly pleasures while others suffer. They give no thought to those they hurt with their depravity and licentiousness.
"Do not think that I have come to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I have not come to abolish them but to fulfill them. I tell you the truth, until heaven and earth disappear, not the smallest letter, not the least stroke of a pen, will by any means disappear from the Law until everything is accomplished. Anyone who breaks one of the least of these commandments and teaches others to do the same will be called least in the kingdom of heaven, but whoever practices and teaches these commands will be called great in the kingdom of heaven. For I tell you that unless your righteousness surpasses that of the Pharisees and the teachers of the law, you will certainly not enter the kingdom of heaven."
Matthew 5:17-20
Jesus goes on to implore us, later in this same sermon...
"Do not store up for yourselves treasures on earth, where moth and rust destroy, and where thieves break in and steal. But store up for yourselves treasures in heaven, where moth and rust do not destroy, and where thieves do not break in and steal. For where your treasure is, there your heart will be also."
Matthew 6:19-21
Posted by: SC in KC | August 01, 2006 at 10:08 PM
Every time I read a thread like this, I see the same thing over and over again. It always degrades into an argument over particulars and neglects the big picture. It mystifies me that this never gets discussed.
The recurring theme that is seen throughout Scripture is that God created man, man falls, God works to save man from the fall - the crucifixion and resurrection of Christ being the apex of God's work. Reconciliation is always done at God's initiative, not man's. In addition to this, God repeatedly lays exclusive claim to truth throughout Scripture.
We can debate the particulars until the end of time with no conclusion, but the general theme of the Bible is undeniable.
This has some very important implications. If Christianity is for real, then all other faiths must be false. If all paths lead to God, then Christianity must be false because it makes that exclusive truth claim. It's all or nothing. Period.
Posted by: cheese whiz | August 01, 2006 at 11:03 PM
The reason I asked about James 5 is that I see something in this for our nation, not necessarily on an individual level but on a national level.
I've heard so many stories about people who are harvesting our food and tending our fields; that's why this verse reminded me of the rich and greedy running this country who push hard to take a penny a pound away from pickers.
Did anyone else think that when they read James 5:
4 Look! The wages you failed to pay the workmen who mowed your fields are crying out against you. The cries of the harvesters have reached the ears of the Lord Almighty. 5 You have lived on earth in luxury and self-indulgence. You have fattened yourselves in the day of slaughter. 6 You have condemned and murdered innocent men, who were not opposing you.
Posted by: Just Thinking | August 01, 2006 at 11:18 PM
CheezWhiz - I don't we're quite in an argument yet, and I don't think this conversation is "degraded."
SC - Thanks for the overview. I think the Scriptures you quoted support my point that the Bible does not have a singular message on slavery (Ex. 2:23, it's abhorrent, and Titus 2:9-10, it's a legitimate economic arrangement regulated by Biblical law). So after much discernment and with the guidance of the Spirit, we see more clearly now which Scriptures are authoritative on slavery.
----
I'll admit to enjoying the role of contrarian, and at times it gets the best of me and I get beyond "getting-to-know-each-other" dialogue. Apologies if I've stepped on toes. I fancy myself a philosopher, so strong positions and strong questions are fun for me!
Mostly, I'm trying to get others to stop speaking for me. CheezWhiz says "Period." and attempts to end the discussion, SC says "Christianity requires..." and proceeds to list some things that I as a Christian don't think are "required," and Ron attacks with "You can't be a Christian and believe in universalism" when I've just claimed I'm precisely that.
(I would say "universal salvation" - I'm not sure what "universalism" is, but I've taken them to mean the same in this conversation).
I'm not seeking an argument - I'm happy to receive and celebrate and yes, respectfully question, others' faith statements! But when someone claims to be speaking for all Christians in a public arena, I have to challenge that, because as often as not they don't speak for me. Christ's love broke laws, broke boundaries, broke cultural conventions, and subverted every expectation of power, authority, and kingship people had. We still have those expectations today... but despite the best efforts of the church to lock Jesus in a box (or a book), that love is alive and kicking and doing new things. That's the Christ I know; that's the story of my salvation. -h
Posted by: howie | August 02, 2006 at 09:25 AM