Interfaith Movement: Past, Present and Future Affect on the Christian Church Carol Kinney 12/6/2011
Student ID 928059
ICS2015
On Martin Luther King Day of this year, a church wanted to honor Dr. King’s memory by hosting a prayer service, as many churches around the country might have been apt to do. However, a closer look at what and who were involved in this prayer service is unorthodox to Christian churches. Old Church, “the oldest church in Brooklyn,” set up prayer stations around the sanctuary and invited people of other faiths to come and silently walk the stations, designed toward six different religions, and pray (Meeter). Leaders from the Jewish, Christian, Buddhist, Muslim, Hindu and Sikh religions came together in this Reformed Church’s sanctuary to pray at their own and each others’ stations. Daniel Meeter, pastor of the church, said “We wouldn't do this for a religious holiday; we figured it was a national holiday, and we're all citizens." Additionally, the church, under Meeter’s direction, has sought out other ways to integrate this predominately Caucasian, Reformed Church in America congregation with the racially and religiously diverse community that surrounds it, such as teaching yoga set to Bible stories during Vacation Bible School to the children of the community. Meeter is not the only Christian pastor to use these methods to reach people in the world. Many pastors, Christians and churches are embracing the Interfaith Movement and welcoming practices of praying and worshipping with people of other faiths. This is evident in a 2009 poll conducted by The Pew Forum on Religion and Public Life when twenty-two percent of Christians reported that they believe in reincarnation, twelve percent attend and participate in religious services of other faiths, and a growing number of Christians from every denomination admit practicing astrology, yoga, along with other mystical, supernatural, Eastern and New Age practices. While there are many socio-economic, philosophical, and psychological forces in play that influence the development of a syncretistic Christianity, a major force has been the
Interfaith Movement. Given the influence the movement has had on all Christians, it is important to study the movement’s historicity, the impact that the movement has on Christians resulting in syncretistic practices, and where it will take the Christian church in the near future. In examining these three areas of the Interfaith Movement, it is also necessary to view it in light of the Bible. Contrary to what some may think, the Interfaith Movement was not borne within the past twenty-five or so years. Interfaith relations have always been a part of history, as long as there have been organized religions, but the modern version can be pinpointed to one date: September 11, 1893 (Niebuhr). On that date, The World’s Parliament of Religions in Chicago, held simultaneously with the World’s Fair, with “local Protestants . . . gathering to invite representatives of 10 different faith groups worldwide” to discuss their “beliefs and practices (Niebuhr).” Two speakers, Swami Vivekananda (Hindu) and Anagarika Dharmapala (Buddhist), each encouraged all of the people gathered, from all religions, to respect each others’ faiths and participate in meaningful conversations with one another in the interest of world peace (Niebuhr, Interfaith). While this can be seen as a positive move in the right direction to apply the Golden Rule, a way for each religion to start mending the mistakes of the past committed by each of the religious groups, Vivekananda had a hidden agenda behind his pleas of mutual cooperation between the religions. According to the late Dr. Stephen Neill, Vivekananda, a Hindu reformer, felt that, due to the brutal tactics of the Christian missionaries at the time, the work of the missionaries had “constituted a subtle threat to their whole way of life and to the age-long traditions of India (303), and even justifiably so. Vivekananda, was so turned against Christianity because of the
missionaries, he pushed for “the purification of Hinduism by a return to the . . . Vedas, but was also bitterly anti-western and anti-Christian (Neill).” Neill explains when the invitation came from the Protestant leaders in Chicago to come and speak, Vivekananda saw this as a chance to address the Christians in the West to stop proselytizing in the world and leave the major world religions to themselves, in cohabitation with each other. In his closing remarks, Vivekananda says that he does not think that proselytizing should come from any religion, yet from the very day that the Parliament ended until July of 1902, he spent time in America being a missionary for Hinduism in the United States (Complete Works). His chosen vehicle to spread Hinduism in the West was yoga, and in 1900, on his second visit to the United States, an American gave Vivekananda a generous gift: 160 acres of land in California to build an Ashram to promote the yoga that he had introduced at the Parliament of World Religions (Chattopadhyaya 267). Due to overwhelming reception of yoga of the Americans in the West, the Interfaith Movement begun by Protestants in Chicago was now being propagated by the Hindu monk, Vivekananda who sought a more pure form of Hinduism. A reporter for the Appeal-Avalanche in Memphis wrote the following after Vivekananda had delivered a lecture at La Salette Academy, a Catholic school: “Vive Kananda is advancing theories of religious thought which find ready lodgment in the minds of some of the most advanced thinkers of this as well as other cities of America. His theory is fatal to the orthodox belief, as taught by the Christian teachers. It has been the supreme effort of Christian America to enlighten the beclouded minds of heathen India, but it seems that the oriental splendor of Kananda's religion has eclipsed the beauty of the old-time Christianity, as taught by our parents, and will find a rich field in which to thrive in the minds of some of the better educated of America (As reported in the Complete Works of Vivekananda, Vol. 3).” Another significant milestone for the Interfaith Movement happened in 1900, along with Vivekananda’s California Ashram Estate. Riding on the pluralistic sentiments of the Parliament
of World Religions, the International Association for Religious Freedom was established in Boston, as an organization with a purpose “to open communication with those in all lands who are striving to unite pure religion and pure liberty (iarfus.org, philosophy).” The group promotes freedom of religion in other countries, regardless of religion, and has grown to include member chapters throughout the entire world and representatives from all major religious groups. Giving credit where credit is due, on the sole premise of the original intent of the group, promotion of religious freedom is not a bad thing for Christians to do, as it benefits the world in ethical and moral ways. However, the establishment of this association, helped to contribute to the syncretistic practices that are being seen in Christian churches today. The establishment of the International Association for Religious Freedom paved the way for more organizations of its kind. In 1924 and 1933, “proceedings from the Religions of the Empire Conference and the World Fellowship of Faith First International Congress, set the stage for the foundation of the World Congress of Faiths in 1936 (Katz). At this first Congress, it was not the intention to “create a new synthetic religion”, as members of various world religions gathered to extol the benefits of their own religion and converse with one another to “generate understanding and a sense of unity between the religions of the world (Braybrooke),”however it was one speaker that stood out in expressing the growing sentiment toward the pluralistic society that we have today. According to Rev. Braybrooke, Sarvepalli Radhakrishnan, former president of India and devout student of Vivekananda’s Veda Hinduism, said “Fellowship of faiths which implies appreciation of other faiths is no easy indulgence of error and weakness or lazy indifference to the issues involved. It is not the intellectual's taste for moderation or the highbrow's dislike for dogma. It is not the politician's love for compromise or being all things to all men, nor is it simply a negative freedom from antipathies. It is understanding, insight, full trust in the basic reality which feeds all faiths and its power to lead us to the truth. It
believes in the deeper religion of the Spirit which will be adequate for all people, vital enough to strike deep roots, powerful to unify each individual in himself and bind us all together by the realization of our common condition and common goal.” Through Radhakrishnan’s statement, all religions bound together by “our common condition and common goal” we know begin to see where the Interfaith Movement is heading from here. Despite the denial of a “synthesized” religion, by claiming that all of the world’s religions have a common goal, does in fact, bind them together in a way that was never intended. Additionally, the “realization of our common condition” is seen differently by Hindus, Buddhists, Muslims, Jews, Christians and the other world religions, so how can the religions unite to accomplish a common goal? Is it not the goal of Christianity to promote Christ and the goal of Hinduism to promote the Hindu gods? Clearly the direction that a statement such as that made by Radhakrishnan in 1936, pushed the Interfaith Movement toward the syncretistic practices we are encountering today. After the initial founding of organizations such as International Association for Religious Freedom and World Congress of Faiths, The Interfaith Movement’s next achievement was to bring its message to the World. In 1945, The United Nations was formed and the Interfaith Movement became more “dynamic” with the ability to reach people involved in “politics and civic society (Katz).” It was the United Nations work between the world’s religions that inspired Juliet Hollister to form the Temple of Understanding in 1960 (Katz). Hollister’s inward work on behalf of the Interfaith Movement, which came with endorsements from influential world leaders such as Eleanor Roosevelt and the Dali Lama, landed her on the front page of Life (Temple of Understanding, History). The cover story’s headlines “Juliet Hollister’s Wonderful Obsession lead into “a mission to draw people together to build a movement embracing all
faiths.” It is Hollister’s who organization that is credited with being the first to provide Interfaith Education to youth and adults. Most of the work that the Temple of Understanding does is to promote a healthy, respectful dialogue between different religions, especially in the New York City area, where the Temple is located. Another contribution that the Temple has given to the Interfaith Movement was to create retreats to encourage that dialogue. The Temple hosts “Welcoming the Stranger” retreats at which participants are encouraged to share their beliefs and rituals of their religions with one another. This is a turning point for the Interfaith Movement and from there things moved along quite quickly. In sixty-seven years, the movement went from a few Protestant leaders in Chicago inviting some people from other religions to a meeting, to a fully organized movement promoting all of the world’s religions, encouraging dialogue and the sharing of worship rituals with one another. Because of the work of these interfaith organizations, the World Conference of Religions for Peace, “the world’s largest interfaith organization in the World” was founded in 1970, and several subsequent organizations were beginning to sprout up in major metropolitan areas around the world (Katz). The eighties saw the Hindu monks in Chicago rallying support for an anniversary celebration of the Parliament of Religions (Katz). Since the Hindus have much to be thankful for the Parliament’s contribution in helping them spread their religion around the world, this makes much sense. In 1993, “the largest interreligious conference in the World” took place for the first time (Katz). From that point forward, the Interfaith Movement never lost momentum. In 1999, the Parliament of World’s Religions met again in South Africa, drafting a constitution on behalf of the Interfaith Movement. In the constitution, the Parliament presents a strong
basis for humanitarian aid and effort, peace among the various world religions, sustainability of the environment which draws upon common ethical truths amongst the religions (“A Call to Our Guiding Institutions), which at the first glance can seem very appealing since these commonalities can certainly be found in nearly all of the sacred texts of each religion. However, an issue of concern is directed at the “A Call to Religion and Spirituality” section of the group’s constitution. Worded in a manner that is similar to Hindu claims of Ultimate Reality (Halverson 100): “We center our lives in an Ultimate Reality, which our traditions call by various names (the Absolute, Allah, Brahman, Dharmakaya, God . . . ), drawing hope and strength therefrom . . .” (Preamble). Additionally, part of the educational agenda provision in the constitution, the Interfaith Movement took a pledge to “integrate learning about different cultures, religions and spiritual practices into the standard educational process;” under the arts section “the sacred stories . . . of the world’s religious and spiritual traditions are broadly disseminated . . .;” and a hope for a new more unified world here on earth accomplished only through human efforts in the World Vision section. While a majority of the “Call” can be seen as agreeing with basic Christian principles, the syncretistic language of this interfaith constitution should raise a major red flag for Christians. That red flag can be summed up with just one small sentence: “you shall have no other gods before me (Exodus 20:3).” The modern movement may have started out with the best intentions from the Protestant leaders in Chicago to show the world that Christians were realizing mistakes that they had made in historical missionary attempts around the world, and to show genuine concern for the people of the world, however the Interfaith Movement that has developed does much more to promote the views of other religions, especially Hinduism,
than Christianity. This is in direct opposition to the very first commandment given by God to his people and is the central theme of the entire Bible. When the Christian church, as a whole, begins to see all religions on equal footing, then the entire life of the church is at stake from worship to mission. John Piper says “If the pursuit of God’s glory is not ordered above the pursuit of man’s good in the affections of the heart and the priorities of the church man will not be well served and God will not be duly honored (18).” In other words, if the Western Christian church is involved in a movement that sees other religions and their gods as equal to Christ, that all of the world’s religions’ gods are but one part of an “Ultimate Reality,” and which promotes syncretistic religious practices instead of those set apart by the Bible, then it cannot be part of God’s plan to bring the nations of the world to worship the one true God through mission. When churches, such as Daniel Meeter’s, bring elements of other religions into the sanctuary of God, it is reminiscent of the Israelites syncretistic worship practices prior to the Babylonian Captivity period (Russell 195). The Interfaith Movement can be commended for building upon the Christian principles of the Golden Rule through its care and concern for the world’s peoples and the Earth and it can be argued that many of the world’s religions have similar ethical teachings. However, the first commandment cannot be ignored by the Christian Church since it is the basis for Christianity. Piper says that God is not interested in having his people accept the truths of other religions and gods, there is only one truth for our God: “For my name’s sake I defer my anger, for the sake of my praise I restrain it for you. . . For my own sake, for my own sake, I do it, for why should my name be profaned? My glory I will not give to another (Piper 22, c.f. Isaiah 48:9-11).”
God will not share his glory with any other gods, yet when Christians intermingle worship practices of other religions with that proclaimed by God’s Word, that is exactly what they are attempting to do. As previously stated, Meeter is not the only one to do this. The Pew Forum’s poll results show the impact of the Interfaith Movement throughout the West. For many, it is the very vehicle of Hindu missionary efforts in the West that is making its way into churches. Nanette Sawyer, an ordained Presbyterian minister, says that she was able to feel “God’s presence in her life” through the efforts of meditation that she learned through a “Hindu meditation master (Emergent Manifesto).” Doug Pagitt’s church, Solomon’s Porch in Minneapolis, MN, offers a “yoga and prayer” service every Sunday prior to worship service. Countless other Christians are seeking yoga as a means of exercise, meditation and a spiritual practice in their homes and churches (Cullen). What is interesting to note is that yoga purists, which some adherents of Hinduism and Buddhism, do not appreciate that Christians are using the “5,000 year-old practice . . . to fit Christ’s teachings” and using it “as a tool for evangelizing” (Cullen). While yoga is at the forefront of this trend toward syncretism, it is not the only means by which the Interfaith Movement has influenced modern Christianity. Interestingly, it is the infamous events of September 11, 2001, the one-hundred and eighth anniversary of the Parliament of World Religions, which caused many Christians to accept the ethics, values and theology of the Interfaith Movement. Harvey Cox, Divinity Professor at Harvard, tells the story of “a pastor, a rabbi and a sheikh” (2) in New York City post 9/11. The three have joined a union, which began as a healing conversational breakfast once per month, but has developed into a relationship between the three that has involved participating in the worship practices of each other’s religious ceremonies. Cox sincerely relays the sentiment of
these three religious leaders to find peace with each other for their often warring religions, based upon the idea “inclusive spirituality holds the keys to healing that needs to take place (2).” He asserts that Jesus taught his followers to pray for God’s Kingdom to come to earth, for “God’s reign and peace” (130) to prevail, but then says “But Jesus never met a Hindu, a Buddhist, or a Muslim. He left no clear precedent for how to live with people of other religions.” Dean Halverson may argue that Cox has not studied his Bible very much, as Halverson has clearly outlined a response to all of the major world religions, according to biblical texts and narratives (Compact Guide). For many Christians, the Interfaith Movement represents much of the same feelings that were presented at the Parliament of World Religions in 1893. Sincere desire to apply the Golden Rule has encouraged them to seek ways to care for all of the world’s people regardless of their religion. This is biblical and commendable. However, in their quest for peace and understanding, they have abandoned the first commandment for a humanistic approach that resembles that of Hinduism. For Christians to partake in a movement that advocates human effort over the redemptive work of Christ does nothing to help evangelistic efforts as spelled out in the Bible, but that is nothing in comparison to worshiping the gods of other religions. To fully participate in the religious practices of other religions, even to the extent of bringing those practices into the houses of God, denies the entirety of God’s desire to bring the nations to him in worship (Piper 17-43). And a movement that gives all religious deities equality denies every part of the Christian God. Not every part of the Interfaith Movement is necessarily bad; there are some very important biblical truths to be found within the movement. However we, as Christians, cannot overlook the parts of the movement that are idolatrous and offensive to
God. Isaiah 48:9-11 says “For my name’s sake I defer my anger, for the sake of my praise I restrain it for you. . . For my own sake, for my own sake, I do it, for why should my name be profaned? My glory I will not give to another.” Based upon the history and agenda of the Interfaith Movement, and when weighed against the truth of God’s Word, this movement is not a movement that should be embraced in our congregations. Christianity will not die if Christians do continuously move toward a syncretistic religion, however the complete verse of Isaiah 48:9 speaks volumes to those who choose that direction: “For my name’s sake I defer my anger, for the sake of my praise I restrain it for you, so that I may not cut you off.” God defers his anger for his sake, not ours, but there will come a time in which the Western Christian church which chooses the Interfaith Movement will be cut off.
Cited Sources: 1999 Parliament of World Religions. “A Call to Our Guiding Institutions.” Retrieved from http://www.parliamentofreligions.org/_includes/FCKcontent/File/CalltoGuidingInstitutio ns.pdf. 29 Sept. 2011. Braybrooke, M. World Congress of Faiths. “The Beginning: 3. The 1936 Congress.” Retrieved from http://www.religion-online.org/showchapter.asp?title=3378&C=2773. 19 Nov. 2011. Chattopadhyaya, R. (1999). Swami Vivekananda In India: A Corrective Biography. Motilal Banarsidass Publishers Private Limited. Bangalore.
Coogan, M.D. Ed, et. Al. (2001). The New Oxford Annotated Bible, New Revised Standard Edition with Apocrypha and Deuterocanonical Books 3rd Ed. Oxford University Press. New York. Cox, H. (2009). The Future of Faith. Cullen, L (2005). Time 166(10), 75. “Stretching For Jesus.” Retrieved from Academic Search Premier. Bernsten Library Data Base. Northwestern College. MN. Emergent Manifesto. (2007). Ed. Pagitt, D. and Tony Jones. Baker Publishing Group. Grand Rapids, MI. Retrieved from personal collection of electronic books. Halverson, D.C. (1996). The Compact Guide to World Religions. Bethany House Publishers. Minneapolis, MN. International Association for Religious Freedom, U.S. Chapter. “Philosophy.” Retrieved from http://home.iarfus.org/home/about/philosoph/. 06 Dec. 2011. Katz, B. Interfaith Settlement Foundation. “A Brief History of the Interfaith Movement.” Retrieved from http://interfaithsettlement.org/about_us/history_of_the_interfaith_movement. 5 Nov. 2011. Meeter, D. (2011). “Unusual Help Church Connect With Community.” RCA Today. Reformed Church Press. Grand Rapids, MI. Retrieved from www.rca.org/ssl page.aspx?pid=3764. 7 Sept. 2011
Niebuhr, G. (19 Aug. 2008). “The Interfaith Movement.” Retrieved from http://www.america.gov/st/diversityenglish/2008/August/20080819131356cmretrop0.9265711.html. 26 Sept. 2011. Piper, J. (2003). Let the Nations Be Glad! The Supremacy of God in Missions.” Baker Book House Company. Grand Rapids, MI. Pew Forum on Religion and Public Life. (2009). “Many Americans Mix Multiple Faiths.” Retrieved from http://www.pewforum.org/Other-Beliefs-and-Practices/ManyAmericans-Mix-Multiple-Faiths.aspx. 16 Nov. 2011. Russell, M. (1890). A Connection of Sacred and Profane History. John Childs and Son Printers. London. Solomon’s Porch. “Calendar of Events.” Retrieved from http://mysolomonsporch.ccbchurch.com/app/w_calendar.php. 8 Dec. 2011. Temple of Understanding. Written History and Education. Retrieved from http://www.templeofunderstanding.org/wwa_written_history.html. 25 Nov. 2011. Vivekananda, S. (1907). The Complete Works of Swami Vivekananda. Electronic book of letters written by Vivekananda with the Introduction written by the Editor, no name given, just initials N of RK-V. Retrieved from http://www.ramakrishnavivekananda.info/vivekananda/appendices/appendices_frame.htm 21 Nov. 2011.