Christianity Local and Universal
August 26, 2012 | Patrick Preheim | Psalm 117; Romans 15:1-13

For Mennonites in Saskatchewan this has been a significant weekend of building relationships among people of different faith traditions.  On Saturday was the Spruce River Folk Fest which has been a joint effort by Mennonites and First Nations to raise money for the Young Chippewaen Band.  It has also provided a place for informal socializing.  At the Shekinah Retreat Centre this afternoon there will be a Mennonite-Muslim gathering where conversation and learning presentations will take place.  As Allan and I considered this morning’s worship service we decided it was appropriate to address the topic of interfaith relations.  I will pepper some of the more theological reflections with provocative stories of interaction between Christianity and other faith traditions. 

I begin with the quotation I included in the bulletin because it provides an excellent spring board to the conversation.  I will read it aloud, but it is meaty enough I thought a printed copy would aid digestion.  Hans Küng is a Catholic priest and theologian who participated in the 2nd Vatican Council.  He is an emeritus professor of ecumenical theology at the University of Tübingen and still authors books.

“According to Hans Küng, the rich variety of religious expression should not be addressed with a supercilious shrug of the shoulders—this shirks the responsibility of tough thinking about an urgent and difficult matter.  Nor is it possible to flatten out the great religions to a least common denominator—the important differences must be frankly admitted.  We have to bite the bullet and acknowledge that these religions are, in their own right, different but legitimate salvific paths...But, for Küng, what this approach does not mean is an abandonment or even minimizing of Christian uniqueness...This is where Christology comes in.  What is the role of Christ in all of this?  Küng answers that Christ is not the “constitutive” but rather the “normative” mediator of salvation.  This means that though salvation can come independently of Christ, he is nonetheless the model of salvation, for everyone.  Jesus of Nazareth is ‘ultimately decisive, definitive, archetypal for man’s relations with God, with his fellow man, with society.’ (Fortress Introduction to Contemporary Theologies, ed. L. Miller and Stanley J. Grenz, pp.196-197). 

That, my friends, is serious theology and makes me wonder how I survived three years of seminary.  I appreciate Küng’s perspective at a variety of levels.  It is not relativistic.  Küng does not gloss over differences by saying that all paths lead up the same mountain.  Rather, he suggests that there may be a legitimate stream of salvation in every tradition—so long as it conforms to the pattern of Christ.  He is willing to allow local manifestations of Christ as a part of the world wide sovereignty of God.  As a part of interfaith dialogue, then, Küng calls upon professing Christians to own our faith and clearly understand how Christ makes a difference for us.  Only as we understand the distinctive aspect of Christianity in our lives can we enter into dialogue and mission.  Let me give a story of what this theology looks like on the ground.

Matteo Ricci, an Italian Jesuit, is an extraordinary figure in the history of Christian mission.  He was one of the first Westerners to win entry into the closed and xenophobic society of 16th century China...

Ricci first entered China in 1583…After intensive study of Chinese and immersion in the classic texts of Confucianism [the dominant religious underpinning of Chinese culture], Ricci was able to present himself as a scholar, a status that was eventually confirmed by the respect of his Chinese peers.  He…published works on such topics as astronomy, science, and philosophy.

Ricci’s mission strategy was based on the view that before Christianity could make any progress in China it must win the acquiescence of the educated elite.  To do this it must eschew any taint of foreign imperialism and present itself in terms of Chinese culture...

By the time Ricci won permission to live in the imperial city of Beijing, he had achieved renown as a Confucian scholar.  His study had convinced him that the ethical precepts of Confucianism…were reconcilable with Christian morality.  Furthermore, he argued that in its origins Confucianism recognized a supreme Creator, who could be identified with the Christian God...

Remarkably, Ricci’s interpretation of Confucianism...won general respect and even the agreement of some of his Chinese peers.  Among these he was able to count many significant conversions.  At the time of his death in 1610...Ricci was buried in a special tomb, a rare honor for any Chinese, and unheard of for a foreigner...

[At the time of his mission work] Ricci had won provisional acceptance from Rome for [his] policies.  However, the matter was ultimately decided otherwise.  A papal decree of 1704 [nearly 100 years after his death]...utterly rejected Ricci’s efforts to reconcile the gospel with Confucianism.

This was a fateful decision for the fledgling Christian community in China.  Henceforth that ancient society would remain effectively closed to evangelization, and Christianity would never make the inroads for which Ricci had prepared the way.   (Robert Ellsberg, All Saints, pp. 207-208)

So which papal decree had it right:  the one which permitted Ricci to pioneer the mission strategy of inculturation or the one which advocated the supremacy of Western culture and interpretation?   This is a tough question and the kind we get when we open the can of worms entitled “mission”, or even “interfaith dialogue”.  We are not the first to struggle with this nor will we be the last.  Not surprisingly we find the tension within the Biblical story.

Paul’s words in Romans 15 hit this problem straight on.  The Christian churches in Rome were struggling with the level of conformity to Jewish laws required of Gentile converts.  In all of Romans and specifically in Chapter 15 Paul is making the case that the chosen-ness of the Jewish people does not exclude God from also embracing the Gentiles.  To drive this point home Paul cites four scriptures from the Hebrew Bible:  v.9 quotes Psalm 18; v.10 quotes Deuteronomy 32; v.11 quotes Psalm 117; v.12 quotes Isaiah 11.  Paul’s use of scripture is fascinating and potentially disturbing at several levels.

First, he chose to quote Greek translations rather than the Hebrew.  Given that the Greek and Hebrew translations differ dramatically in at least one of the passages he cites, the choice of the Greek text is significant.  (Some of those who have sat with me in Bible studies will know that at times I am finicky about various translations of the Bible.  Well, I am only following Paul’s example!)  Secondly, Paul utilized scripture that use the term nations / gentiles (ἔθνη), but he reinterpreted them.   The passages he cited reflect a tension between the Jews and Gentiles with divine conquest being the route by which the Gentiles would praise God and abide in God’s kingdom.  Paul has embraced the non-violent Christ as the conquering presence which allows Gentiles access to God.  This non-violent interpretation is quite different than what we read in Deuteronomy 32 or Isaiah 10.  I don’t have a problem with Paul’s biblical interpretation, but we must acknowledge that with the Spirit’s guidance he is bending his scriptures to fit new circumstances.  For the sake of the gentile mission Paul redefines established Jewish theology.  This is, simply put, radical!

Küng, Ricci, and the Apostle Paul would all agree that to be Christian entails a distinctive world view with a distinctive lifestyle, and yet each of these would agree that the distinctive will take on local expression.  Is the church called to practice this loosing and binding in today’s world?—very possibly.  These ponderings bring me to the story of Sweet Medicine.

Sweet Medicine was born into the Cheyenne nation in the early 1800s.  As a young man he was given visions so compelling that he was named chief at a very young age.  Some of the visions were prophecies of the future arrival of European settlers, and some of the visions had to do with the ordering of Cheyenne society.  Leadership was a significant part of the visions.

Sweet Medicine established a council of Forty-four chiefs who would represent the tribe in all matters.  Sweet Medicine said that the forty-four chiefs were to be pacifists and complete servants of the people.  Gordon Yellowman Sr., a current Cheyenne chief and story teller, describes what it means to live out the vision of Sweet Medicine today.

Being a chief is an honorable thing, but it's also a very humble thing because you have now the responsibility and duty to take care of your people from the youngest to the oldest. That sometimes can be very burdensome because we may not be able to meet or exceed the people's expectations in caring for them….That is our role as a Cheyenne chief...He always puts his people before him. He never puts them behind him. That is still practiced to this day.

I'll give you an example of what I meant by that. When we're at a gathering or we're at a traditional meal, having a dinner—whether it's a funeral, a social gathering or during ceremonies—the chief is always last to eat.   [H]is people eat before him..starting with the children to the adults to the elderly. [Only] after all of the people have eaten [will] he [take his food]... 

You have to be a strong person to really become a sound leader for your people. I was always taught that. Respect your people and always continue to talk to them. Always continue to greet them. Always continue to love them. In turn they may respect you a little…Respect is earned in an honorable way and that is also one of our teachings.

This servant leadership and peace-keeping among the chiefs trickled through the generations, and many of Cheyenne leaders extended their goodwill beyond the tribe.  In the 1860s Chief Lean Bear was summoned to Washington D.C. where Abraham Lincoln presented him with a peace medal.  With peace medal around his neck and presidential papers in hand Lean Bear approached a column of U.S. Calvary who had been marauding other First Nations.  Apparently news of President Lincoln’s commendation of Lean Bear had not made it to the plains, and the cavalry greeted the chief with a volley from their rifles killing him on the spot.  Surely the Cheyenne would now fight, right?  Not so, chief Black Kettle persuaded the bulk of the tribe to not seek retaliation. (Turtle Island Storyteller Gordon Yellowman, Sr; turtleislandstorytellers.net  &  “The Cheyenne Way of Peace:  Sweet Medicine” in Peace be With You, edited by Cornelia Lehn, pp. 53-55)

Were all Cheyenne pacifists?  No.  But when I hear visions of Sweet Medicine and the way many chiefs have implemented them I hear words of Jesus go through my head.

• Mark 10:42-45:   So Jesus called them and said to them, ‘You know that among the Gentiles those whom they recognize as their rulers lord it over them, and their great ones are tyrants over them. But it is not so among you; but whoever wishes to become great among you must be your servant, and whoever wishes to be first among you must be slave of all. For the Son of Man came not to be served but to serve, and to give his life a ransom for many.’  A bit like letting others eat first.
• Matthew 5:44-46   I say to you, Love your enemies and pray for those who persecute you, so that you may be children of your Father in heaven; for he makes his sun rise on the evil and on the good, and sends rain on the righteous and on the unrighteous. For if you love those who love you, what reward do you have? Do not even the tax-collectors do the same?  A bit like walking away from the slaughter of a beloved chief.
• John 15:12-13:   ‘This is my commandment, that you love one another as I have loved you. No one has greater love than this, to lay down one’s life for one’s friends.  A bit like a chief suffering for and loving his people.

Setting these verses alongside Sweet Medicine and the chiefs who walked in the light of the visions he was given brings us around full circle to Hans Küng.  It may actually be that God so loves the world that he provides visions of the Christ among the various tribes of the world.  The best way to test this question will be through dialogue. 

Let us be courageous and listen to First Nation Elders, and let us also share about the vision of Christ we have been given.  Let us be courageous and listen to Muslims at Shekinah this afternoon, and let us also offer the Christ that is within us.  Let us be courageous and listen to those God brings into our daily routine, and let us also speak the truth of our Christian journey.  And may name of God and Jesus Christ be honoured in it all.  Amen.

Children’s Time
Legend has it that at the time of the 5th Crusade Francis of Assisi became involved in a mission to the Sultan Al-Kamil.  Francis was intent on ending the crusade, and some histories report that he tried unsuccessfully to convince the Christian leadership to end the madness.   All versions of this story agree that he approached the Sultan to end the crusade either by converting the Moslems to Christianity or at the very least through a negotiated end to hostilities.  Donning his beggar’s cloak the unarmed Francis allowed himself to be captured by the opposing army.  He gained an audience with the Sultan and the theological conversation lasted several days.  Francis focused on the suffering, crucified, and raised Christ as the centre piece of his argument.  On account of Christ’s suffering Francis was unafraid to suffer.  On account of Christ’s death he was unafraid to die.   The resurrection of Christ extended the steadfast love of God to saint and sinner alike; to all who would chose to receive this good news.  The words of Francis impressed Al-Kamil, but he was even more taken with the integrity of Francis.  Here was someone who took his vow of poverty more seriously than the gift of gold he offered.  Here was a Christian who loved the enemy enough to not carry weapons.  Here was a Christian who was unafraid of life, death, and that which comes after death.  The Sultan did not become Christian, but he did release Francis.  The integrity of Francis impressed the Sultan sufficiently that though he had vowed to kill any captured Christians neither Francis nor the Christian army he later defeated were put to death.  Francis was granted safe passage and the captured crusaders were released in exchange for territory.  These terms, it should be noted, were far more generous than the actions of victorious crusaders. (“God Uses the Weak” in Peace be With You, edited by Cornelia Lehn, pp. 34-36; various internet resources on the 5th Crusade).