I am regularly challenged by two camps on what appears on the surface to be my conflicting relationship with 'religion.'
It seems I must regularly justify to high church friends how I can participate in and edit for CWR magazine and CWR blog, whose stated mission it to proclaim authentic Christianity without the religion. These friends challenge my negative use of the term, 'religion.'
Another group of friends who are either low church, 'nones' or 'dones'--those who follow my work with CWR--question how I can nevertheless participate in Orthodox services, which I experience as life-giving and fruitful but they may regard as 'dead religion.' They challenge any positive use of the term 'religion.'
I heard both objections again this week, and it came to a head with a very sincere question (in kind tones) from an old friend who was stumbling over Brian Zahnd's positive use of the term 'religion' in his book, Water to Wine, and in his recent podcasts, even though he is an esteemed columnist in the CWR magazine.
The obvious answer is that the word 'religion' carries two senses, one negative and one positive. Neither sense should be ignored and neither should be totalized. Here, then, was the clarifying question I was asked and my two-pronged response.
Dear Brad
I haven't communicated with you for some time but am hoping you can offer some wisdom and direction for me! I have been an avid follower of your blogs and also have read all of your books to date. I also have been following several people on podcasts. ... Bryan Zahnd, Greg Boyd, CWR, to name a few.
God has been teaching me many things and I have grown in my understanding of doctrines like the Trinity, non-penal substitution theories, views of hell, non-violence and God's unconditional love and forgiveness. But recently I have been confused by Bryan Zahnd's church podcast and his emphasis on what he calls "Religion." I have been excited to embrace a warm and simple loving relationship with God the Father and am focusing on Jesus and His revelation of His Father while He was here on earth. But it seems to me that Brian is saying that to know God and be transformed by Him, it is essential that I go back to a relationship with God based on creeds, rituals and formalized prayer! CWR seems by its very name to encourage a more personalized approach to my relationship with God! As I have followed CWR's articles, blogs and Greg Albrechts' personal journey I have appreciated the simplicity of their approach to the Christian Life.
I would really appreciate some help here. I know that you have chosen to move into the Eastern Orthodox Religion. Does this shift into a more ritualistic approach to your spiritual walk somehow move you beyond the wonderful prayer life you wrote of in Can You Hear Me? How does adopting the regular use of the ancient creeds and formal prayers, etc. that Bryan suggests not become "RELIGION"... rituals and attempts to somehow get God's attention differ from what people have did in years past that just became "dead religion"?
I hope I am making my confusion "clear"! I wish that I could sit down and talk face-to-face with you because it is hard to express what I am struggling with! If you could respond to me I would really appreciate it because you have been a real mentor in my life over the years.M.
These are the kind of questions we love. Open-hearted queries with no 'gotcha' element. Just a desire to love Christ more deeply and a hope for greater clarity. Here was my response:
Dear M.A couple of things will help with context. One has to do with differing uses of this word 'religion' and the other to do with the variety of expressions of prayer and worship that we find helpful.'RELIGION'
First, there is a very positive and a very negative use of the word 'religion.' Definitions are not merely what words used to actually mean. They describe the arc of a word's various uses over time.People ofevangelical and charismatic backgrounds have typically come to think of the word 'religion' in its negative sense. Let's start there:When we say, 'Christianity without the religion,' what kind of religion are we excluding? We are referring specifically to religiosity, self-righteousness, legalism, control, the demonic combination of accusation, condemnation and judgment, as well as the belief that salvation is based on merits I have gained through my own works, rites or rituals. This negative use of the word religion came through solid theologians like Bonhoeffer and Barth, who saw religion vis-a-vis revelation (God's grace initiative) and heart-to-heart relationship. Indeed, the Orthodox priest, John Romanides and my dear friend, Archbishop Lazar, refer to this type of 'religion' as a neurological disorder!Religion in this case needs to be qualified (and we do continually) as 'Christless religion.'There is also a positive and historic use of the word 'religion' that is quite different and which Brian trying to retrieve for a particular purpose: it is religion in the sense of faith practice and faith community. What James' epistle calls 'pure religion.' Brian once tweeted: "I'm not just spiritual. I'm religious, because I can't leave it to myself if I hope to be formed as a Christian." He immediately defined 'religion' in terms of faith practice and community this way: "Practices of prayer, scripture, sacrament, liturgy, etc., handed down by a wisdom tradition designed to unite people around a common faith and form them in proper worship."
Their worry, I think, (and mine) is that in the name of rejecting 'religion,'millions of 'nones' and 'dones' are doing away with faith practice altogether and walking away from faith community completely. If they've been injured by toxic religion, I honor their need for detox and for as long as necessary. But we also worry about where that foggy road will lead. We worry, rightly I think, that so many are trading Christian faith practice in for a vague and vacuous self-made spirituality that has no content--i.e. no Christ, no gospel. In other words, the reactive trend is from Christless religion to Christless spirituality. Worse, some are on the rebound, opting for faith practices and communities that are dangerous and abusive, with no rootedness in 'the faith once delivered.' In that sense, Brian's call to Christianity as a religion seems to say something like this (my paraphrase): Look, we have all these kites that have cut their own strings and they are crashing badly or entangled in trees. The solution is not further attempts to chain people down, but to ask, 'What strings did Christ himself provide so we can soar as Christians?' Scripture, baptism, the Lord's table, gathering, worship. If these Christ-established and Christ-oriented practices are labeled 'religious,' then so be it.Along these same lines, Brian also addresses the denial we are in about our own 'religious' faith practices, regardless of whether they are hierarchies or anarchies, rich and resounding liturgies or intimate spontaneous conversational prayer, classical worship or Christian nightclubs. All of these are 'religious,' they all have their unique forms, litanies and liturgies, but often the latter or 'low church' side in each of these pairs thinks and claims it isn't religious because it has less 'form' or 'ritual' or 'pecking order' (or do they?). Even the most irreligious frequently fall into the very same religious snares as the Pharisees by judging their own form (or formlessness) as a superior faith and by looking down on other forms with contempt. "Thank God I'm not like the Pharisee!" is to echo the Pharisee. I see this happen all the time from both directions--the mutual exclusion of Christianity's many body parts. When we do that, we actually become very 'religious' in the ugly sense, just when we think we're condemning it.EXPRESSIONS OF PRAYER
Both Brian and I have endeavored to broaden our embrace, not only of the Body of Christ, but of the breadth of expression in our worship. So I continue to practice all the forms of spontaneous prayer that you see in Can You Hear Me? (which, I might add, came from monastics like Teresa of Avila or Brother Lawrence). But I also know the fullness of the great liturgical prayers when prayed from the heart. There is this idea out there that somehow one can't pray liturgy from the heart--that it's a slippery slope to nowhere. But the Lord's Prayer IS liturgical, because it received from the church rather than conceived by each individual. And I pray it from the depths of my heart. In the Orthodox church, the liturgy IS the Psalms and the Prophets we've been given to sing together. They speak so richly of Jesus Christ's love, grace and mercy that we pray many of them weekly or even daily. And our favorite (by word count) liturgy is the heart-felt cry, 'Lord have mercy!'
If by ritual we mean, I pray something regularly, then I'm all for ritual, because I pray the Lord's Prayer every day. If by ritualISM or ritualISTIC we mean praying something mindlessly and without heart--or simply to impress others with our spiritual superiority--then we would reject that as 'Christless religion.' As a former renewal leader, I can attest to seeing the worst versions of mindless and repetitive ritualism in charismatic renewal services ... and I can testify that while there are some who do recite the historic prayers robotically, many more pray them with deep adoration and a fountain of tears. In other words, I think there's a richness to authentic communication, and when my own words aren't enough, this includes praying Psalm 6 and 13 and 51 and 103. Or I pray, "O Heavenly King, O Comforter, Spirit of Truth who is in all places and fills all things, Treasury of good gifts and giver of life, come dwell with us and cleanse us from every stain." The fact that I didn't come up with these words myself makes zero difference, because they live in my heart as a real invocation to the living God who fills and answers those prayers with his presence. So what makes something 'dead religion' is not what year or by whom a song or prayer was composed, but rather, whether they are sung from a cold heart or a self-righteous spirit.So do I believe in religion as Christless religiosity? NO! Nor does Brian. But do I believe in religion as Christ-centered, heart felt faith practice and community? Totally--of all kinds--and so do all the CWR folks, and from what I know of you, so do you. I hope that helps.bj
Comments