Most likely, the last words of the skyjackers as they crashed United Flight 175 and American Flight 11 into the World Trade Center were, “Allahu Akbar!” “God is great!”
Though this act is still fresh in our memory, it is not without precedent in human history: The Crusades to free the Holy Land from the hands of infidels, the Holocaust of the Jews that was partially legitimized through the Nazi republishing of Martin Luther’s anti-Semitic writings, and the white supremacist Ku Klux Klan are just a few examples of the use of religion to justify terrible acts of inhumanity.
For the faithful, this news is disturbing. We hate to think that something so good – religious devotion – can result in beliefs and behaviors that are so contrary to common decency. And yet, if we are honest, we cannot hide from the fact that religion can be used to justify evil.
Yes, religion – private and public – has often been used as justification for people to commit acts of violence and hate. Yes, religion – private and public – has often blinded people from recognizing injustice and has numbed people into accepting oppression while waiting for some form of heavenly relief. Yes, religion – private and public – has often been used to thwart, rather than assist, efforts to establish understanding and tolerance. Many people have been so disgusted by virulent forms of religious zeal that they have turned completely away from traditional religion, considering it more a curse than a blessing. (8-9)
Thankfully, religious devotion does not have to lead to such malevolent ends. “Religious devotion does not have to become militant extremism. Indeed, religious devotion, rightly informed by the positive richness of religious tradition, can and should be a most healthy antidote against the militant hate that still infects the world.” (12)
The Breadth and Depth of God’s Love
In The Wide, Wide Circle of Divine Love: A Biblical Case for Religious Diversity, Professor W. Eugene March makes a case for a generous orthodoxy that maintains the distinctiveness and truthfulness of the Christian faith while openly demonstrating love to all people.
March argues his case from the Bible. Numerous threads in the biblical story demonstrate God’s concern for the entire world. At the conclusion of Noah’s story, God makes a covenant with the entire world (Genesis 9:9-17). God’s election of Abraham is for the purpose of bringing about blessing for the entire world (Genesis 12:3). The prophets often address nations other than Israel, demonstrating that God’s concern extends beyond the chosen people Israel and into the world.
Take note: for an eighth- or sixth-century Judahite to be told by one of God’s prophets that outsiders, idol worshipers, enemies, mattered to God was extraordinary. To hear that the Lord could bring them into divine service by a mere whistle was mind-boggling. To learn that the nations were included in the positive aim of God – that the people would come to receive the blessings of God’s instruction and love – was both a revolutionary notion and no doubt profoundly disturbing for the supernationalists of the time. Though God seemed to be exclusivistic, divine action was intended for the inclusion of all. (64-65)
The message of the Bible is that God’s love is deeper than nationality. Though God chooses to use a particular nation as the locus of his redemptive purposes, God’s love extends to all. “God did not first create Israelites or Moabites or Egyptians or Babylonians to say anything about Americans or Koreans or whoever. God did not first fashion Jews or Christians or Muslims or Taoists or Hindus. God created human beings. From the standpoint of wisdom, no religion or culture owns God. God is not ours, but all are God’s” (83).
The Rule of Love
In order to guard against possible abuses of religion, we must not only seek to conform to a “rule of faith” – a creed or statement of belief – but we must also seek to practice a “rule of love.”
From the beginning, Christians have sought to understand life from a perspective informed by God’s revelation in Jesus. This is essential to the nature of faith. Faith apprehends and affirms divine truths and seeks to understand life in their light. It is for this reason that the early creeds were written – in order to preserve the sacred deposit of truth that defines Christian belief.
But clinging to a “rule of faith” is not enough. We must also seek to express our faith through a commitment to “a rule of love.” Jesus taught that the two greatest commandments are to love God and love others (Matthew 22:37-39). Every other commandment in the Hebrew Bible “hangs upon” these two fundamental rules. According to Jesus they are elevated over all other commands. Every other religious belief and practice must lead to this end – the love of God and the love of others. Any religious belief or practice that undermines, eclipses, or negates this end is misguided. “Any belief that causes one to violate either part of this twofold Rule of Love should be viewed with suspicion as inadequate, mistaken, or perverse” (127).
This is not simply an isolated teaching in the Bible. The apostle John argued for the importance of love in Christian witness (John 13:34-35). Paul, the great theologian, made it clear that great theology and deep devotion have absolutely no significance unless they are accompanied by divine love (1 Corinthians 13:1-8).
Simply put, in light of the clear insistence in the Bible on God’s love, a love that exercised both compassion and judgment, and the love manifest in the life and ministry of Jesus, all interpretation is to be exercised in the context of love. Teachings drawn from scripture and creed that are counter to divine love are suspect even when they may literally be supported by the tradition. The Rule of Love is not always easily employed, but it is a constant reminder that every historical and theological context stands within God’s care and under divine sovereignty. (118)
The most important fruit of Christian faith is active love for all: “The only thing that counts is faith working through love” (Galatians 5:6). Our beliefs are important, but they must result in love. And because love is the intended fruit of our beliefs, the scriptures make it clear that faith actually plays a secondary (or better, an instrumental) role in relation to love. Like Jesus, we must not allow our faith to get in the way of love.
Jesus disregarded traditional belief barriers associated with sex, status, and sickness. He knew that people believed lepers to be unclean and untouchable, but he reached out anyway and touched a leper and extended healing (Luke 5: 12-14). Jesus knew that common opinion held tax collectors to be unworthy of inclusion, indeed worthy of exclusion, but he called Levi anyway making him one of the twelve apostles (5:27-39). Jesus knew what people believed about men and women talking together in public, but he allowed a woman, “a sinner,” to touch him in public anyway, “kissing his feet and anointing them with ointment.” When criticized, Jesus pronounced forgiveness for the woman and commended her great love (7:36-50). Belief certainly has a place, but for Jesus at least, the Rule of Love was paramount. (127)
Put another way, orthodoxy (right doctrine) must never be divorced from orthopraxy (right practice) – orthopraxy directed and guided by the divine love revealed to all in Jesus. The language March incorporates to preserve this union – the rule of faith and the rule of love – is a helpful reminder that our commitment to the rule of faith must never be separated from our commitment to the rule of love. Another way some churches have stated this is to connect the “great commission” to the “great commandment.” As important as the fulfillment of the great commission is, it is simply an expression of the great commandment. Our ultimate call is to love God and love others. We do this in numerous ways, including sharing our faith, but this is not the only way. Even when our faith is ignored, rejected, or condemned, we still owe love to others. Nothing exempts us from living out the rule of love.
Divine Hospitality, Humble Receptivity, and Authentic Dialogue
How does this work out in real life? March asks us to consider two important questions in regard to our relationship to others: (1) How can we be a good neighbor to all people? (2) What can we learn from others?
Christians are called to demonstrate the divine hospitality of God. “Accept one another as God in Christ has accepted you” (Romans 15:7). How has God accepted us? Fully, freely, graciously, completely, patiently, at great expense and with great suffering. In the parable of the Good Samaritan, Jesus taught us that everyone is our neighbor. A good neighbor is good to all people – no exceptions whatsoever. Our choices regarding interacting with those who do not share our “rule of faith” should not be reduced to debate, disregard, or destruction. We must remember the divine hospitality of Jesus who welcomed all people – especially those whom the “religious” leaders rejected.
For example, at the feeding of the 5000, Jesus loved everyone present by providing for their need for food:
One of the noteworthy aspects of this great event was the absence of any invitation list. Jesus did not ask for identity cards. He did not require a declaration of actual allegiance to him or even the intention to believe in him. He did not inquire whether the people gathered were clean or sinless, or consider any number of other criteria that might have been used. He did not try to limit the crowd for the sake of cost control. No, Jesus just blessed the food and had it distributed to the hungry. As he did so, perhaps he remembered the words of the prophet Isaiah: “Ho, everyone who thirsts, come to the waters; and you that have no money, come, buy and eat!” (Isaiah 55: 1). (91)
We must make every effort to reflect the hospitality of God to others – all others. We must not put up walls or create boundaries, even for our own personal comfort or convenience. An active rule of love will find us standing with open arms toward all. We will close them only to embrace, not to exclude. Accepting others does not imply that we completely approve of all they say or do. This is certainly not how we experienced – and continue to experience – God’s welcoming of us in Christ. Until we embrace this importance distinction, our acceptance of others will always be half-hearted at best. And it certainly will not reflect the radical acceptance displayed by Jesus.
The second question, “What can I learn from others?” is necessary in order to maintain a humble, teachable spirit. Though they were occultists, the Magi in Matthew 2 certainly teach us something about Jesus. In many places, the Proverbs bear great similarities to ancient pagan wisdom literature. Job was not an Israelite and yet he was a model of godliness and innocent suffering. Melchizedek was a priest without any connection to Israel and yet Abraham received blessing and instruction from him. When Jesus offered an example of divine hospitality he chose a Samaritan for his role model. Likewise, Ruth the Moabitess demonstrated the steadfast love of God to Naomi.
Examples could be multiplied. We should never assume that we have nothing to learn from others – whether they share our faith or not. We possess the truth – or better, are possessed by the Truth, Jesus – but we don’t know everything. Paul could say without hesitation, “we know but in part” and “we see in a mirror darkly” (1 Corinthians 13:9, 12). Paul would never lay claim to absolutely perfect knowledge – “the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth.” To him, there was always room to advance in Christian maturity. This is evidenced in the book of Acts: As the church grew it had to learn and reform in light of Gentile response to the gospel. The introduction of foreigners brought new life and new ways to what was once primarily a Jewish community. The church’s interaction and engagement with a larger, wider, and more diverse audience brought new light to God’s people.
Our willingness to learn from others is not at odds with our desire to share our faith with others. Indeed, we need to acknowledge our partial – though true – knowledge in order to really engage with others. “Dialogue is without purpose if one really knows all there is to know” (130). If we claim to be know-it-alls, we will negate any real possibility for true interaction with others.
Contrary to the dire warnings of some conservatives, authentic dialogue in a pluralistic environment does not negate the possibility of speaking with conviction.
Dialogue does not begin with the assumption that every opinion or idea is equally correct or valuable. Rather, dialogue begins with the conviction that what I believe is true and worth sharing with others. But serious conversation with others equally assumes that what they believe about life is worth hearing. Their beliefs provide a reality over against which to explore my own convictions and commitments, clarifying and adjusting in light of deepened insight. (133)
Our beliefs should never justify lack of love toward others. We must learn from the abuses of religion in the past – abuses primarily driven by “a rule of faith” divorced from “a rule of love” – in order to keep from making the same mistakes in the present. By maintaining the direct and vital connection between the rule of faith and the rule of love we will be better equipped to present a consistent and compassionate witness of authentic Christian devotion.
A Generous Orthodoxy
The challenge of the present hour is to hold and maintain a “generous orthodoxy” that is as wide as God’s love. This will involve a commitment to “the rule of faith” (orthodoxy) that finds expression through “the rule of love” (generous). Jonathan Sack is right: “The choice is ours. Will the generous texts of our traditions serve as interpretative keys to the rest, or will the abrasive passages determine our ideas of what we are and what we are called on to do?” (139)
Jesus taught us that we must choose to give priority to the biblical passages calling for love to God and love to others. It is these texts that should color the rest; rather than a concern for absolute precision and “correct” language justifying our lack of love for others.
The “generous texts” are so important! That is what this book has tried to highlight. God can be pictured as a little god of clan or tribe or nation, or in our age, a god who cares just for me, the solitary individual, the only one who counts. But the wider biblical characterization of the Divine is so much richer. Creator, ruler of nations, protector of freedom and justice, source of human wisdom, open to all and inviting to all – that is the way God is portrayed in the Bible. Indeed, Jesus does embody the very way of living truth and came into our midst to demonstrate that way for us. It is a gracious way, a loving way, an affirming way, that can be shared with all. Therein lies its truth. (139)
As Christian evangelists we have the wonderful privilege of telling others of the extraordinary love God has shown in Jesus Christ and inviting them to openly respond in faith. We do not do this from any position of superiority – whether intellectual, moral, or spiritual. We are not necessarily brighter, better, or more spiritually sensitive than others. We are simply the amazed recipients of even more amazing grace.
The story that the Bible tells is of a divine love almost incomprehensibly wide, extended to all, excluding no one. God's love powered the creation of all that is and continues to shape the world and those that inhabit it. The Bible is quick to point out that humans do not regularly respond to God's wondrous love in ways pleasing to God, but that does not limit or destroy that love. The real old-time religion is about that love, and it challenges our prejudices and fears by inviting us to risk all – especially any sense of privilege before God – for the sake of that love. (120)
© Richard J. Vincent, 2005
5 Comments
Leave a comment