A New Kind of Christianity - Brian McLaren [148]
Chapter 19: How Should Followers of Jesus Relate to People of Other Religions?
1. In 1932, at the dawning of a decade of terror in Germany, Karl Barth wrote in Church Dogmatics: “How disastrously the Church must misunderstand itself if it can imagine that theology is the business of a few theoreticians who are specially appointed for the task…. Again, how disastrously the Church must misunderstand itself if it can imagine that theological reflection is a matter for quiet situations and periods that suit and invite contemplation, a kind of peace-time luxury…. As though the venture of proclamation did not mean that the Church permanently finds itself in an emergency! As though theology could be done properly without reference to this constant emergency! Let there be no mistake. Because of these distorted ideas about theology, and dogmatics in particular, there arises and persists in the life of the Church a lasting and growing deficit for which we cannot expect those particularly active in this function to supply the needed balance. The whole Church must seriously want a serious theology it if is to have a serious theology” (2nd ed. [London: Clark, 1956], vol. 1, bk. 1, pp. 76–77).
2. If you ask Jews about Christianity’s track record with “the other,” they know. (See James Caroll’s Constantine’s Sword [New York: Houghton Mifflin, Mariner, 2001], if you would like a primer in Christian anti-Semitism.) If you ask native peoples, they know. (See the work of Richard Twiss if you would like a gentle introduction, and read Randy Woodley’s work, including his contribution to Brian McLaren, Elisa Padilla, and Ashley Bunting Seeber, eds., The Justice Project [Grand Rapids, MI: Baker, 2009], if you’re ready for a more bracing introduction.) If you ask the descendants of slaves, they know. If you ask Muslims, Hindus, Buddhists, and New Agers, they know. If you ask atheists, they know. If you ask feminists and gay folk, they know too. (See the work of Mel White, Peggy Campolo, Wendy Gritter, and Andrew Marin—in print and online—to gain an education in this regard.) For an American history that tells the “rest of the story” on these matters, see the excellent work of Richard Hughes, Myths America Lives By (Urbana: University of Illinois Press, 2004) and Christian America and the Kingdom of God (Urbana: University of Illinois Press, 2009).
3. I’ve spent a lot of my life equally clueless and in denial. But I received help in coming out of my denial from some of my loyal critics. When some of us began raising the questions in this book, we expected and welcomed critical evaluation; new ideas deserve nothing less. But a vocal cadre of our fellow Christians treated us to even more than we expected: damnation, mockery, insult, and bearing false witness. So we’ve had a front-row seat to watch how easily we Christians, in the name of truth, write falsehoods; in the name of love, attempt to harm; and in the name of Jesus, accuse like the devil. But I’m not complaining. All of this has been a great gift to me and my friends, because it has given us a clue as to how it feels to be identified as an enemy, threat, or outsider to the Greco-Roman version of Christianity. (Fortunately, there have been many who, I imagine, disagreed with us no less, but who sought to display a more Christlike attitude in their critique.)
4. John 12:30–32 is especially helpful in showing that “judgment” doesn’t simply mean punishment, hell, or condemnation for John, as so many readers assume. Here, it means that evil will be driven out and all people will be drawn to Jesus. It means that God will restore justice.
5. In Rom. 3, Paul makes clear that in an ultimate sense nobody does only good all the time, and all are ultimately forgiven by grace, not by works. But that in no way nullifies