Protest against Ahok on March 31, 2017.
Image: Cahaya Maulidian / Wikimedia Commons

The southeast Asian country is home to the world’s largest Muslim population and has not allowed Saudi Arabia’s intolerant Wahhabism to take root. It’s not only tolerant and plural, but also a large functioning, stable democracy unlike any other country in the Muslim world. It’s a country whose religious expressions are not a top-down phenomenon.

Under the authoritarian President Suharto’s New Order regime from 1966 to 1998, Indonesia was equally moderate and tolerant but without religious freedom. Islamist groups were not allowed to function. While the process of Reformasi (reformation) that began after the fall of Suharto opened the gates for radicals to preach their versions of Islam and Islamist ideologies, the roughly 250 million people in the archipelago have largely shunned Wahhabism for about two decades.

However, Ahok’s conviction and sentencing based on a video that showed him speaking out of context about a verse in the Quran, could be a turning point for the country. It represents the biggest breakthrough in the ongoing efforts of the Indonesian cleric Muhammad Rizieq Shihab, who mobilised massive protests against Ahok, to turn the country towards conservatism.

It’s not surprising that Shihab, who leads the radical organization Islamic Defenders Front, locally known as FPI, is currently in Saudi Arabia. He fled Indonesia to avoid his arrest after a pornography-related case was filed against him. Ironically, his group has been opposing prostitution, gambling and bars to cleanse Indonesia of “sin.”

The FPI, which targets liberal Muslims, Ahmadiyah and Shia mosques, churches and embassies of countries that it perceives to be hostile towards Islam, was founded in 1998. It has managed to gain about 200,000 members. The number is miniscule compared to the membership of moderate and pluralistic Muslim groups Nahdlatul Ulama (NU) and Muhammadiyah, which oppose attempts to spread Wahhabism in Indonesia and claim to have 50 million and 29 million followers respectively. However, the head count estimates or claims are neither a major concern nor any consolation.

Despite being seen as a negligible minority, Islamist groups have been able to flout local laws by physically attacking minorities and collecting protection money from the entertainment industry. More importantly, they have now been able to cause the defeat of a popular official, Ahok, by making his religious and ethnic identity an issue in the recent gubernatorial election. Furthermore, they managed to get the court’s endorsement of their narrative of blasphemy, which includes the assertion that non-Muslims should not be allowed to comment on the Quran’s interpretation. In the verdict against Ahok, a judge quoted a verse from the Quran (Al-Maidah 51) which purports to suggest that Muslims should not elect non-Muslim leaders.

Tony Richie Summarizes and Reflects on Special White House Convening: “Celebrating and Protecting America’s Tradition of Religious Pluralism”

On Thursday, December 17th from 1:00-4:30 PM the White House conducted a special convening on “Celebrating and Protecting America’s Tradition of Religious Pluralism.”[1] Participation was by White House invitation only. Two Church of God ministers, Cheryl Bridges Johns and Tony Richie, were among those involved. Johns and her husband, Jackie, pastor New Covenant in Cleveland, Tennessee while Richie and his wife, Sue, pastor New Harvest in Knoxville, Tennessee. Johns is Robert E. Fisher Professor of Spiritual Renewal and Christian Formation at Pentecostal Theological Seminary. Richie is Adjunct Professor of Historical and Doctrinal Theology at Pentecostal Theological Seminary. Steven D. Martin, Director of Communications and Development for the National Council of Churches, was instrumental in effecting this significant invitation for these two Pentecostals.

The meeting was sponsored by the White House Office of Faith-based and Neighborhood Partnerships. It focused on the deep American traditions of religious inclusion, freedom, and cooperation among those with different beliefs. Officials discussed steps they take to promote and protect these traditions. Attendees had the opportunity to discuss efforts to carry these traditions forward in positive modes. Devotees from the major faith traditions participated.

The day’s sessions were moderated by Melissa Rogers, Special Assistant to the President and Director of the White House Office of Faith-based and Neighborhood Partnerships. She insisted that, “There are no second class faiths in the United States of America.” However, Rogers also admitted “We have not always lived up to our ideals.” Remarks setting a tone of sober discussion with serious political overtones were made by Cecilia Muñoz, Assistant to the President, Director of Domestic Policy Council; Amy Pope, Deputy Homeland Security Advisor and Deputy Assistant to the President for Homeland Security; and Vanita Gupta, Principle Deputy Assistant Attorney General and Acting Assistant Attorney General for the Civil Rights Division, Department of Justice.

Robby Jones, Chief Executive Officer of the Public Religion Research Institute, presented recent data describing the United States as an increasingly plural nation in terms of its religious population. He submitted that religious diversity is in line with our nation’s history. However, the US has never before experienced the high level of diversity it does now. Yet most people (including atheists) still have small friendship circles including only or almost only their own faith group. The least levels of interaction in the US appear to be in the geographical South (the Bible Belt) and Midwest (the Heartland), apparently because of lower levels of religious diversity than the overall national average. Nevertheless, white Evangelicals appear to be a prominent group expressing mistrust and suspicion of religious others. Tennessee is frequently cited as a key battleground state in the fight for freedom of religion. Accordingly, both challenges and opportunities arise. In a word, more interreligious interaction is needed at communal and individual levels.

Has Christianity ever found itself in a world full of competing religions and cultures? What can we learn from how those followers of Jesus acted in their times? Should we hope for the same kinds of outcomes?

We are presently concerned with the relationship of our faith to the other religions of the world, especially with Islam and a newly radicalized Hinduism. Except for Islam and a radicalized Hinduism, this is nothing new for Christians. Jesus was born into a religiously pluralistic world; much more, the first Christians, as acknowledged by D.A. Carson in his The Gagging of God, “not only lived in a pluralistic world, but they operated from a base of perceived inferiority.”¹

For a visitor from the middle of the third century, it is déjà vu. All of the religions of that time are here and every one touting tolerance while displaying an intolerance of its own. There is an added feature not around in the third century, Islam and its Moslem adherents.

One of the Severan emperors, Alexander Severus, went one step further in the pluralist direction. In his own private chapel, he placed busts or statues of Apollonius, Abraham, Jupiter, Jesus, and Orpheus side-by-side.² Whatever his intent, it suggested that he saw Jesus and Abraham on a par with Orpheus and Apollonius. That parity attitude exists in the 21st century when pluralists suggest that Christianity, Buddhism, Islam and Hinduism are just different ways of approaching the same God and, therefore, are of equal value. The ghost of Alexander Severus hovers over this postmodern 21st century. Back in 1993 Richard Unds assessed the postmodern golden rule as “Grant to all religions the same presumption of truth as you grant to your own religion. All religions are created equal.”³ Evidently, Severus thought that way himself; same situation, different century.

With the fourth century, a new order came with a triumphant Christianity—almost. With Julian’s ascension to the throne persecution against Christians broke out anew. Julian, in a gesture toward the Jews, started rebuilding the Temple on their behalf. Natural calamities hampered the project and it was abandoned in A.D. 363 upon Julian’s death. Jovian, Julian’s successor, restored to the Church its privileges. His successor, Constantius, closed all pagan temples.

An Ethical Approach

More of a practical guide than a theological statement, “Recommendations for Conduct” outlines “A Basis for Christian Witness”. This is the most consistently biblical section, and primarily upholds mission as a participation in the mission of God and obedience to the example of Jesus and the early church with a strong emphasis on ethical behavior and responsibility.³ The document also details “Principles” of Christian conduct in bearing witness to the gospel: “Acting in God’s love,” “Imitating Jesus Christ,” “Christian virtues,” “Acts of service and justice,” “Discernment in ministries of healing,” “Rejection of violence,” “Freedom of religion and belief,” “Mutual respect and solidarity,” “Respect for all people,” “Renouncing false witness,” “Ensuring personal discernment,” and “Building interreligious relationships.” True to its subtitle, it also suggests “Recommendations” for guiding relationships between Christians and others as Christians respond to God’s call to do mission: “study” the critical issues involved, “build” relationships of respect and trust, “encourage” Christians to strengthen their own religious identity and faith, “cooperate” with other religious communities for justice and the common good, “call” on governments to respect religious freedom, and “pray” for all neighbors.

“Recommendations for Conduct” ends with an “Appendix” describing the background and process of its origin and development over the last five years. As a participant from beginning to end in that process, I understand that this background is essential for appreciating many of the nuances of the statements of this document. Also, it would be a mistake to divorce the content and tone of “Recommendations for Conduct” from the clear purpose statement in the “Preamble”.

The purpose of this document is to encourage churches, church councils and mission agencies to reflect on their current practices and to use the recommendations in this document to prepare, where appropriate, their own guidelines for their witness and mission among those of different religions and among those who do not profess any particular religion. It is hoped that Christians across the world will study this document in the light of their own practices in witnessing to their faith in Christ, both by word and deed.

Early Response

Editor Introduction: Postmodernism, The Church, and The Future

Postmodernism, The Church, and The Future
A Pneuma Review discussion about how the church should respond to postmodernism

A Review Essay of Lesslie Newbigin’s The Gospel in a Pluralist Society.

“Pluralist!” “Postmodern!” Lately these two terms are increasingly, and sometimes carelessly, bandied about as especially descriptive of the present age. They signify such complex concepts that sometimes even defining the terminology can be difficult. To make matters even more intimidating for many of us, pluralism and postmodernism also exist in both religious and secular forms with widely variant philosophical, political, and theological schools of thought and levels of radicality. In fact, they may be descriptive of an even deeper seated condition of being post-Christian. “Post-Christian” describes a personal or societal world view no longer rooted in the language and assumptions of Christianity, though it previously originated and existed in, and thus emerged from, that environment. Importantly, a wide range of continuing attitudes from open embrace to complete exclusion exist toward Christianity itself.¹ Yet the basic meaning of pluralism and postmodernism is understood easily enough. “Pluralism” at its most fundamental level simply observes the fact “that there is an actual plurality of religious and other beliefs, practices, and so on in the world.” It proceeds from that point to varying degrees of representation either embracing or eschewing implications of that acknowledgment.² “Postmodernism” essentially identifies a disposition questioning the Enlightenment/Modernist argument for the sovereignty and ubiquity of reason as being reductionist at best and dismissive of or skewed against other important elements of reality (e.g., imagination, intuition, tradition) at worst. Again, it proceeds from that point to varying degrees of representation either embracing or eschewing implications of that acknowledgment.³ Christians are currently divided about the consequences of these paradigmatic developments. Some are hopeful about possibilities while others are fearful of pitfalls.⁴ At this point, humbly admitting that I’m not an expert or authority in these matters may be helpful; at least, it will certainly be honest. I’m more or less a typical pastor and preacher struggling to make sense out of today’s world. I suppose that is why I find Newbigin so challenging and stimulating.

Lesslie Newbigin, The Gospel in a Pluralist Society (Eerdmans, 1989), 264 pages, ISBN 9780802804266.

Lesslie Newbigin (1909-98) was truly one of the towering figures of the twentieth century when it comes to the theory and practice of Christian mission. And this book is his now classic contribution to that increasingly complex and controversial endeavor. A native of Great Britain educated at Cambridge, as a young man he was converted from agnosticism to Christianity when he saw a vision of a huge cross touching heaven and earth. A man of boundless energy and profound intellect, Newbigin then spent nearly four decades as a missionary in India, also building a lasting reputation as a great ecumenical leader. Although he himself humbly claims to be only “a pastor and preacher” he is often hailed by others as a scholar and thinker.⁵ The Gospel in a Pluralist Society is in fact a clear and cogent articulation of how contemporary paradigm shifts such as pluralism and postmodernism may inform and influence Christian identity and ministry in what is now sometimes called a post-Christian society.⁶ One would be hard pressed to find another book that takes more seriously or navigates more skillfully both commitment to historic Christianity and engagement of contemporary cultural contexts. It is a must read for anyone intending to integrate those same ideas today. At times provocative, always informative, seriously studying it promises to be potentially transformative. Therefore, be warned: one reads at a certain (worthwhile) risk!

Harold Netland, Encountering Religious Pluralism: The Challenge to Christian Faith & Mission (Downer’s Grove, IL: InterVarsity, 2001), 368 pages.

Netland capably considers all the angles for a thorough study achieving an informed, sophisticated, and faithfully Evangelical theology of religions. This is a must read for anyone seriously studying theology of religions within the bounds of Evangelicalism or beyond. In the context of refuting radical religious pluralism Netland also presents a viable alternative retaining uncompromising Christian commitment but honestly respecting other religious traditions. He is personally well-prepared for this dual emphasis by a lifetime of Christian ministry in Japan. That he has lived what he writes shows in his work. The Trinity Evangelical Divinity School professor is particularly adept at setting the cultural stage for a deeper understanding of contemporary ideological currents involved in the rising popularity of religious pluralism.

Part One puts contemporary religious pluralism into context. Netland explores changing attitudes toward other religions by Christians, “the culture of modernity” and postmodernism as they pertain to pluralism, the nature of encountering and interacting with religious others, and the religious and spiritual aspects of contemporary culture. Notably, Netland analyses the theological journey of possibly the foremost pluralist theologian of our times, John Hick, as an example of cultural and theological dialectics going into the development of modern pluralism. Part Two constructively addresses issues involved in developing a satisfactory theology of religions compatible with Evangelical Christianity. Now Netland hits head-on questions of conflicting truth claims by different religions, problems in Hick’s pluralist paradigm, and challenges for Christian apologetics in answering issues raised by religious pluralism. He suggests criteria for evaluating alternate worldviews proposed by the fact of religious diversity today. Importantly, Netland’s work is not only critical but also constructive; he finishes with a foundation for building an Evangelical theology of religions.

Netland is an associate professor of philosophy of religion, and this shows in his methodology. His arguments are often tight, well-knit constructs requiring close attention to understand. Usually the reward is worth the work. His illustrations, examples, and analogies help. Nevertheless, this is not merely a philosophical treatise. Netland treats divine revelation as paramount. His abundant, reverent use of Scripture can be followed easily enough by anyone with a basic biblical background. Regarding content, Netland really does try to touch all the bases. One noteworthy exception is pneumatology. Typical of some Evangelicals but increasingly hard to understand in light of the modern Pentecostal/charismatic movements, Netland spends major time and space on Christology, necessary in itself of course, but does not even mention notable nuances an informed experience of the Holy Spirit brings to the theology of religions table. Even when discussing Clark Pinnock, who develops a dynamic pneumatological model of theology of religions (cf. Flame of Love: A Theology of the Holy Spirit, Downer’s Grove, ILL: InterVarsity, 1996), he misses (dismisses?) the chance to talk about the role of the Spirit and the religions. Given his usual thoroughness Netland’s negligence on pneumatology is disparate and disappointing.

That being said, two things really make this book a standout work. First, Netland’s discussion of John Hick’s pluralism is very helpful indeed. Hick is probably the leading pluralist of our day and coming to grips with his work is required in theology of religions research. That Netland studied under Hick and speaks of him with high regard yet respectfully disagrees with his pluralist paradigm lends his work added depth and dimension. His discussion on Hick really does help clarify several salient concepts of Hick’s philosophy and theology. In the process, Netland persuasively shows where and why religious pluralism went wrong. Second, Netland’s concluding proposal for an Evangelical theology of religions is exceptionally clear, concise, and constructive. His definition and clarification of the theology of religions task, goals, and tools give guidance on a road seriously needing such signposts for safe navigation. His continuing uncompromising commitment to the uniqueness of Christ and to Christian evangelism and missions in the context of theology of religions is commendable.