On Faith Panelists Blog: Religion is Being Redefined - On Faith at washingtonpost.com

On Faith Panelists Blog: Religion is Being Redefined - On Faith at washingtonpost.com

Kenneth E. Bowers, a Baha'i Faith represenatitve and an On Faith panelist wrote the blog post linked above on Tuesday the 17th. I did not notice it until today but I am glad I did. While its a short peice, I like allot  of what Bowers has to say. Also, I really like a represenative of a somewhat obscure but popular religion being featured as well. Beyond a few powerful yet controversial statements that Bowers makes, statements that we will get to in a moment, reading this post gave me an intellectual itch to scatch, so to speak. Not, knowing much about the Baha'i faith, I spent a little time familarizing myself with it and found a religion with a rich heritage and a great way of looking at the world. 

Rising up within nineteenth century Persia, the religion has a modern flavor. Monotheistic in essence, it accepts the world's mutilplicity of religious faiths as reflections of  a single divine force or power that uses these seperate faith renditions as a chorus of a single composer. Such as the symphony is made up of its various parts and musical instruments, it all works together to present a unified musical ensemble. So, the world's main religions reveal a single truth about a unified and singular divine; at least, that is what I understood the Baha'i religion to say and I must admit that the approach is very appealing and refreshing.  

Equally refreshing is that many of the values and social principles of the Baha'i faith call for justice and a complete elimination of predijuce and inequality. Humanity is called upon to live in peace and unity, both religiously and politically. World peace is a prominent doctrine. The equality of man and woman as well as a harmony between religion and science are both fundamental beliefs as well. 

Given the time this faith was born it is amazingly progressive. While its monotheistic emphasis or its theism in gneral may turn many people off, its unlying principles are very in tune with post modern notions of justice. I see in it a wonderful opportunity and platform for religions to meet on equal footing and engage in respectful dialog. It is no wonder to me that millions follow this faith worldwide and that many see it as the answer to religious plurality. 

As promised, there are several statements in the above mentioned blog post that I would like to briefly comment on. First, Bowers sees globalization and the free and exhaustive exchange of information in today's world as an antidote to religious fanaticism and dogmatism. He states the following:

"It is natural that, exposed to an array of choices, many would either change religious identity, opt not to commit to any one religion, or even abandon religion altogether." 

I wish that he would have elaborated on his source here for these powerful projections. I suspect that there is some truth to his proposals, although I certainly would not take his word for it. Two of his statements here assume prior religious understanding/belief: changing religious identity and abandoning religion altogether. I'm not so sure that his certainity here does not overlook the power of one's native faith or religious system. Opening one's mind to other religious ideas and systems will no doubt challenge a person, but it often has the opposite effect in that it can threaten one's ideas and thus invoke a departure from religious sampling. Additionally, doing research on the religious faith and ideas of another group of people or culture does not always mean that a person is searching for an alternative religious system or theory. So, while I like his statement and am inclined toward it, I am not convinced that the current information age is going to overcome fundamentalism or that the existence of religious pluralism will necessarily render the "my faith is right" mentality obsolete. I think this is more wishful  thinking than rational thought. 

Here is another statement that Bower makes that I think demands attention:

"...many have not so much abandoned faith as the narrow definitions of faith that often come with membership in a specific religious tradition. They see something universal and common to all religious expereince, and are therefore ready to accept such divesity as a necessary, even desirable, aspect of life. They appreciate faith and spirituality, but choose not to confine themselves to one particular choice."

Once again, I like this statement. But, one has to wonder if Bower is looking at the world through the eyes of a religious historian or an echatalogical prophet of his own doctrinal beliefs. Religion is being redefined here but is it not being redefined toward that which is consistent with the beliefs and eschatology of Bower's Baha'i religious belief system? Certainly, this religious mentality is consistent and conducive with Bower's beliefs but I am not sure that the world's religious population is becoming more tolerant and on a path to merge ecumenically anytime soon. 

There are some merits to Bower's thoughts here so I am not trying to dimisss him altogether. Obviously, I am a proponent to religious pluralism or this site would not exist. But, I am not sure that I am as optimistic that the world is on the verge of getting along in spite of religious differences or that the Baha'i  faith, although fascinating in itself, is the absolute platform for unity that the world is going to simply adhere too. 

Perhaps, the day will come that the world operates under a single dictum or religious mandate. Even Christianity has such a persuasion in its eschatalogical view of the world. If religious harmony is to ever be achieved, it will definitely take some unifying force or require some platform or system of belief to triumph emphatically to the absolute exclusion of all others. Perhaps, and hopefully, a syncretistic logic similar to that porposed by Bower will eventually be the answer. It's a lofty ideal and would definitely stop all the killing and religious wars and bigotry that even today, in this post modern age, characterize such a large portion of religious faith. I nodd my head with Bowers in hope that he and his ideas are at least headed in the right direction.   

Prayer doesn't belong in schools - NJVoices: Star-Ledger Editorial Page

Prayer doesn't belong in schools - NJVoices: Star-Ledger Editorial Page:

Prayer doesn't belong in schools

The above story highlights a controversy that has raged my entire life as well as my entire school career. Prayer in public schools was a topic that was frequently brought up in church when I was a child and it definitely was a much stronger political hot button than what it is today. Stories such as the one above serve to remind me that the controversy has not went way.

The idea that removing school sanctioned prayer from the public schools would ultimately lead to a godless secular society is a common argument whenever this topic arises. For much of my life, I accepted it as true. However, as I have become more aware of the religious pluralism in America, I have also had to rethink my position on this issue.

Let me make it clear that I think religious prayer is important irrespective of the venue in which it is practiced. Most religions have some form of prayer as a part of its practices. This prayer should not be inhibited or censored by the government or state in any way. Furthermore, one form or ritual of prayer should not be held in higher regard than another. Students across our nation should be free to practice whatever form of prayer they feel compelled to engage in, or be free from doing so should they not want to participate. If freedom is genuine, then it must extend to all person's the right to practice whatever religion they choose and be free to not engage in religious practices should they so choose.

Allot has changed in this country since I was a child. In my elementary school, I would venture to say that the majority of students came from Christian homes where prayer was a regular part of their lives. Today, however, in many places across our country, this can not be said. While the majority may still have Christian proclivities, there is a growing and significant minority within many of our communities where this simply is not the case. Children from Buddhist homes, Muslim or Hindu homes, and a myriad of other religious traditions are represented in almost every school system in our nation. Is it fair to subject these students to school sanctioned prayer that is Christian in nature and thereby exclude the prayer practices of others? How can school officials, teachers, ect, engage in such without adding a seal of approval and acceptance upon one form of prayer and by virtue of exclusion, denounce another? Would these same leaders be open to a Muslim prayer or a Buddhist meditation prior to a game or some school function? I highly doubt it.

The religious freedoms of this country mean nothing if they do not extend to and protect the least of all religions among us. As we become more and more of a religious melting pot, as the religious face of America reflects the variety in the religious practices of everyone as a whole, we must become more conscientious and careful in how we practice our freedoms so as not to inhibit or violate the rights of others. Additionally, respecting the rights of others should never be misinterpeted as compromise, at least, not in a negative sense. Cooperation builds community and being sensitive to the religious rights of everyone in a given community extends the value of relious practices rather than purely secularizing a community.

No doubt this discussion will rage on. What do you think? Do you see the regulation of prayer at public events and in public institutions a means of secularizing our society? How do we reconcile the fact that our Congress opens with prayer and yet our school days can not begin with it? What changes does our society need to make in order to show respect and give different religions their respective rights to practice as well as freedom from discrimination? Finally, is the charge of secularization a particulary bad one? Join me at Disqus to discuss these issues as well as others.

Many Poses, One Portrait: God defined by the World's Religions

My growing understanding of God as transcendent is fascinating to me. I think I am beginning to understand what Ghandi is saying here:

"After long study and experience, I have come to the conclusion that all religions are true; all religions have some error in them; all religions are almost as dear to me as my own Hinduism, in as much as all human beings should be as dear to one as one's own close relatives. My own veneration for other faiths is the same as that for my own faith; therefore no thought of conversion is possible." (M. K. Gandhi, All Men Are Brothers: Life and Thoughts of Mahatma Gandhi as told in his own words, Paris, UNESCO 1958, p 60.) [retrieved from Wikipedia article on Universalism]

If God transcends all human understanding, defies human language to define and articulate; if the human mind is limited in its ability to comprehend what God is, then how naive is it to believe that one religion is in and of itself capable of embodying all the truth that is God? Wow! Now there's a question for you!

As my personal understanding of the relevance of religion continues to expand, I am beginning to believe that not only are all the world's religions representations of this single transcendent being/force etc, but all of them are necessary to depict all that God is. Just as Ghandi says that all religions have errors, including his own in this indictment, all religions have some facet of truth which when unified, gives us a clearer and more comprehensive portrait of who God is; albeit, even this is an obscure portrait of the divine. However, with such an understanding, it behooves me to search for truth in all faiths, building as comprehensive a composite of the divine as possible.

I recently began reading a book that I've had on my shelf for sometime entitled, Listening to the Past by Stephen R. Holmes. This book seeks to validate the role of historical theology (Christian) and the importance of tradition in the development of Christian dogma. One thing that drew my attention to the book was a statement made on the back cover:

"...theology is an irreducibly communal task."

The idea that come to mind when I read this small statement is obviously not contextually accurate to what Holmes is trying to get at in the book. But, the statement is nonetheless applicable to the idea here that all religions bear the task of revealing the divine. It is, indeed, a communal task; from the world's inception to the present, the balance of man's search and pursuit of God as expressed in the world's religions is a communal effort to explain and reveal the One that transcends all things yet is immanent in all things as well.

I am sure that I have not done these thoughts justice. I do, however, hope that it has invoked some communal resolve to continue our quest to know God through the various faith perspectives of our fellow human inhabitants of this temporal space.

Life, Blogging, and Other Things...

Staying sane when your apple cart is turned upside down!

I am sorry that I've not posted much lately. Things have been rather hectic in my personal life. Currently, our family is renting and the house we've lived in for the last two years is simply not big enough for us anymore. Consequently, we are moving. Now, I must admit that I hate to move. I am a person of routine and moving simply messes any routine up completely. It's so hard for me to keep a good attitude when having to do something that I despise.

Fortunately, though, the Lord has shown us favor and what appeared to be a daunting task is turning out to be a miracle. Yes, I'm a liberal, but I do still believe in miracles! You can't define me that rigidly. Only a week into the search for new lodging, we found a perfect place that is not only much larger than where we now live, but its $100 a month cheaper! (Its been a long time since I've constructed this many sentences with exclamation points) My usual discomfort for the process of moving has been greatly mitigated by these developments.

The expense of this move is coming at a bad time and bearing its cost is very uncomfortable, especially with Christmas so close. Even though we are saving money per month on the rent, the transferring of utilities and such is not free. Nor is the rental of a truck and moving accessories, as well as new blinds and curtains and paint and stuff that normally accompany a move into a new place. To be honest, we really did not know how we were going to pull it off but having to sign a new lease here, etc, made it incumbent upon us to make the move.

Here is where the real miracle takes place. This past Saturday morning, less than a day after we signed the new lease and at a time when we were definitely feeling the pressure of it all, we got a package of Christmas presents for the kids and a Christmas card in the mail from a person who is like a mother to my wife and a grandmother to my children. She is a middle-aged lady who just recently lost her life's companion and soul mate for 30+ years to cancer. When I say recent, I am talking about less than a month ago.

In the card, this lady confirmed her love for our family, reiterated the fact that her late husband looked at my wife as his daughter (he left two daughters behind) and our children as his grandkids. She stated that she had received a little bit of money after her husband's death and wanted to share it with all her daughters, including my wife. To our complete and utter amazement, we unfolded an enclosed check to see that it was written for 2000 dollars. Once again, the cynic in me is so likely to say that these things don't just happen often and when they do its more than likely a matter of chance. But, the faith in me knows that the Divine, whom I call Jesus, is looking out for us, knowing our needs and making preparations for them before we are even aware ourselves.

I can only thank God for the grace that he is showing to me and my family during this season of Advent. We are more aware of what we have to be thankful for today than ever. Our entire family is conscious of God and his love being bestowed upon us in all things.

Don't touch that dial!

Although I have been distracted and much of what I've wanted to post has been left on the sidelines waiting to be called into play, we will be resuming our regular scheduled programs momentarily. I have two post in the construction phase; so, I have not been altogether neglectful. Without giving too much away, let me share with you a few ideas that I will be discussing in the near future.

First, the subject of spiritual maturity has been heavy on my mind of late. How is it defined by most of the world's major religions? What criterion establishes the standard for this maturity? Is there any common ground on this subject among different religions; can you reconcile what Christianity believes about it with what the Hindu or Muslim believes? How closely can we walk together in our pursuit of it?

Secondly, I hope to pick up a social issue that has occupied a significant portion of my thinking over the past few days. My son likes to create graphic designs and is becoming quite a talented amateur. Also, he seems to have fallen into the practice of abstract art. One such creation of his recently invoked some thoughts and questions on the issue of same sex parenting.

I know this can be a delicate matter. As a heterosexual parent, I am aware that I may have certain preconceived notions and even prejudices that I am not even conscious of that may affect my ability to speak to the issue in a fair and equitable manner. Consequently, I hope to approach this subject with caution and reasonable discretion. Its my intention to run the post by several gay people of faith that I know in an effort to approach this subject in a way that will be true to my own feelings and yet respectful of others as well.

Participation in this last discussion will be paramount. It is not and never will be a stipulation that we all must agree to participate in this blog. We all come from different backgrounds, have our own ideas regarding faith, and are all in different places in our spirituality. Tension is not always a bad thing; I have learned more from people I disagree with than people just like me. This is the very reason why I have created this blog and seek to establish an environment where divergent ideas can intersect and learning from one another can take place.

Where are all the good authors when you need them?

Speaking of divergent ideas, we are still in need of people who will volunteer to join the team of authors for this blog. If you are a person of faith and are willing to share your ideas in a respectful yet definitive manner, we really want to hear from you! We have no limit set on how many can participate and no legitimate faith will be denied. If you have something positive to say about the divine, religion, faith, etc, then we really need to hear from you!


Is the mission too lofty?
I've thought allot recently of whether or not I was trying to create too lofty of a mission with this blog. Is it too much to expect religious people from divergent backgrounds to come here and play together in the same sandbox? To be completely honest, I am sure that it is not possible for many. Being more of a universalist/pluralist myself, I welcome different views; they don't threaten me or my faith like they do others. And, its certainly not my intent to try and make people see the world the way I do. Too many people like me and the world is doomed to chase its own tail in perpetuity!

But, our world is becoming more connected all the time. We can now discuss issues of faith with people from places and cultures thousands of miles away from where we sit at our computers. We have the benefit, the privilege, to partake of ideas and participate in religious discussions that just twenty years ago was completely unreachable for the common person. This opens up an entirely new world of exploration and learning for those willing and secure enough in their own beliefs to explore. A world that until recently was relegated to the arena of conjecture and speculation. We can now get the word straight from the horse's mouth, so to speak.

Doing so does not mean that you have to lay aside your own beliefs or violate some written code of loyalty. It simply means that you are open to the idea that there may be more to the Divine and more to learn than the knowledge you currently posses. If your capable of accepting this statement then your capable of entering the discussion.

Unfortunately, this will be more than some are capable of giving. Being right is very important to certain groups of religious people. Uncertainty and unexplored territory breeds fear in the hearts of some–the very idea that their body of beliefs could be somewhat incomplete, even in the slightest, is extremely threatening to some. To accept that their dogma could be enhanced or supplemented by another faith's explanation of, let's say, the Golden Rule, insinuates to them that their beliefs are not secure. If everything they have been taught is not true in the most minute detail then nothing is true and their faith is worthless to them.

Personally, I think this is an infelicitous approach to faith and one that is bound to render the adherent incapable of stretching their faith and having their ideas honed by interaction. I couldn't live this way; in fact, I used too think I had all the answers and the idea that I didn't was horrifying to me. But, I could not maintain this approach because of the premium I place upon education and learning. I know this sounds condescending to the group of people who will not be able to participate in our discussions, but if it is, my intent is not malicious and its coming from someone who has at least lived on both sides of the fence. This gives me a unique perspective and legitimacy upon which to offer my opinion and criticisms.

With all this said, I must admit that my initial ideas and ideal for this site was a bit too lofty and naive. In a perfect world, we could all get along regardless of our differences. In a perfect world, we could all agree to disagree and go on. But, this isn't a perfect world and in real life things don't always work the way we want them too. In real life, some people whose view and opinions would be valuable and helpful in some areas here will be reluctant to participate for fear that by doing so they are condoning religious pluralism or ecumenicalism to which they are opposed. Consequently, this site will be more populated with moderate to liberal religious practitioners, which is fine company, in my opinion.

Site Changes

As I updated last evening, I've decided to change the name of the site. I think this name is consistent with the ideas first introduced here and better reflects our overall intention. I'm not sure if I will change the URL or not. I don't think it would be a problem to do so since the site is so new, but a URL is just that, and its really not that important.

If you have any suggestions on this issue or any other issue related to changes or anything you would like to see added to the site, please drop me an email and let me know.

Religious Pluralism: Seeing Religions Again with Marcus Borg

Best-selling author Marcus Borg, Professor in Religion and Culture, uses an interdisciplinary approach to examine the role and importance of religions and religious pluralism in contemporary life in this presentation at UCSD.

Living with Religious Pluralism

Religious pluralism has long been an interest of mine. Being raised in a conservative pentecostal church, I was led to believe that people unlike us were not saved. Our discrimination even encompassed Catholics as well as Protestants of non-pentecostal denominations. Faith for us was extremely discriminatory and we took the "there are few who find it" of Matthew 7:14  seriously. We were an exclusive few that had the whole truth. Any idea of diversity or divergent approaches to faith were quickly dispelled. 

As an adult, however, I have come to value diversity and believe that there are many ways to arrive at the same place. Each of us are unique individuals with our respective ideas and logic, invested with reason and rational minds that process the world around us in different ways. There are many ways to look at the world and various worldviews that are equally as valid as any other. It is an extremely impious and supercilious attitude that concludes that there is only one way to approach the divine and eternity. 

Christian scriptures record Jesus saying:  "I am the way, and the truth, and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me." (John 14:6) This is one of a number of so called "I am" statements in the book of John where Christ claims certain exclusive functions regarding the divine and eternity.  One must deal with these claims to exclusivity en route to a viable understanding of religious pluralism. Do we reject these claims? Can we reinterpret these claims? 

The rise of a global community forces people of different faiths to coexist together far more so than ever before. Exclusive claims have a far greater potential for harm and discrimination today than at any other time in the history of the world. Different cultures are meeting and being intertwined at an unprecedented rate. It is commonplace in our world to go to school, work, and live next door to people whose religious ideas are completely different than ours. Many of our preconceived notions about these faiths and their adherents are being destroyed. As a result, people are confused about how they should act towards those different from them. 

In light of all these developments, I think that we should reevaluate our faith and its truth claims. Especially those of us whose religion makes universal truth claims such as those stated above regarding Jesus. This certainly does not mean that we abandon our faith. But, in order to live peacefully with those around us, we must learn to coexist in a way that does not harm our fellowman nor do any harm to our respective faiths. There are a  number of criterion that should govern us in this pursuit. 

The single greatest value needed in this endeavor is respect. We must learn to respect the right of others to express and live out their faith in the world. This respect implies tolerance; tolerance of different opinions, different values and lifestyles, different religious priorities and practices. We do not have to understand or even agree but we must afford others the right to be who they are and to believe what they choose to believe because to do so is to protect one's own freedoms in these areas. 

Another response to religious diversity is love. Obviously, this is not romantic love but love that prefers others above oneself. Love that is patient and understands that all are God's children regardless of what they believe. Christian love, in particular, teaches us that love does not strive contentiously, is not arrogant and rude, always insisting on its own way. It is a love that values everyone the same without limits regarding religious persuasions. Love that is gracious and merciful; love that gives of itself to others and seeks to understand and meet the needs of others. 

Accordingly, in this climate of religious pluralism, we need to learn to listen and to do so intently. When we listen to one another closely we may find many areas where we agree rather than disagree. Listening helps to avoid assumptions which often lead to misunderstandings and unwarranted animosity. Listening implies that we can actually learn from those different from ourselves; it serves to neutralize pride that can dig chasms between people that are unnecessary. Listening implies an honest effort to truly understand what the other person is saying. 

Dialog is another necessary commodity in our effort to deal with religious pluralism. We must be willing to sit down at the table and really communicate with each another. This opens the possibility within each party of the prospect of change. Rather than always taking an either/or approach, through in depth dialog, we can sometimes embrace a both/and avenue.  It may get a bit sticky here, but genuine communication in this arena implies that we are willing to accept the idea that there are aspects of our faith that can be enhanced by a deeper dialog with those of different faiths. 

Religious pluralism is here to stay. We can fight it but in doing so we are actually fighting our fellowman. Consequently, we must learn to live with it, deal with it in a proactive way. We must learn to engage it in an effort to not only understand the beliefs of others but to more fully understand our own beliefs. This will help us identify those areas of our faith that are negotiable and those areas that are not. An ancient Jewish proverb states:"[i]ron sharpens iron, and one person sharpens the wit of another." (Proverbs 27:17)