Barth Conference: Islam and paganism

Having recognised that many of the positions I have come to are very consonant with things that Barth seems to have said, it was interesting to come across an blogged account of a recent conference on Barth:Via Crucis: 2009 Barth Conference: Day 1
Doubly interesting to read this intriguing comment on Islam and Christian faith articulated by Scott Jones: "Barth saw National Socialism as a 'new Islam,' a false ideology led by a false messiah (Hitler). The compelling question, it seems, is why Barth would have seen this connection between Islam and National Socialism as such an obvious one to make. Why does he see Islam as more akin to paganism than to Judaism and Christianity?
After a bit of discussion of Islam's emphasis on revelation vis-a-vis a text (the Koran), the point was made that 'nothing separates Islam and Christianity so radically as the different ways they say the same thing: that there is one God' (CD II/1, 449). There is in Islam a lack of a coming or a becoming of God. This is a point worthy of further exploration, particularly in Christian-Muslim relations."
Absolutely, though I don't think that latter is a new point; what is ponder-worthy is the kinship Barth sees between Islam and paganism (or should that be with a P?). No doubt a shocking thought for many Muslims and others. Nevertheless, I think we need to counterbalance the Abrahamic faiths lumping-together with a recognition that there is an 'odd-one-out' and it is Islam. However, I remain to be convinced the becomingness of God is the differentiator. Certainly since Maimonides (interestingly, writing in an Islamic context), Judaism has tending to understand 'ehad' more like the Islamic 'tawhid' ... and probably for polemic reasons to some degree (but I'm writing beyond my secure competence here, happy to be corrected and further informed). And I would be interested to know, too, what understanding of 'pagan' is being worked with here. The hint is that it would be Aryan revival ideology rather than the more cuddly neo-paganism of earth-centred spirituality in the post 60's west.

More tea wicca?

...that's what I said to a pagan (solitary, self-describing as Wiccan) friend of mine as we chatted about life the universe and stuff; it was a flip remark, made to amuse; but it has stayed with me as somehow eikonic of real interfaith dialogue: exchanging ideas about things we find mutually interesting albeit from different perspectives, and having a chance to laugh about the oddities and quirkiness of situations around the edges of religion, faith and spirituality. Later she said that, in the whole town, why was it that she had to talk to a Church of England priest (vicar=wicca, get it?) to find someone that understood her.
Indeed.
Maybe it was because the path she was on was one I had trodden to different degrees myself: before hearing Christ's call and responding, I had heard the call of nature (no, not that call) and reverenced sunlight on greenery, the woods, the creatures, the cycles of nature and was drawn to an awe-filled response and a desire to express that in 'religious' ways. I was breaking free of the materialistic reductionism of my cultural background but I was not at all drawn to the church of my early childhood.
Maybe it was because like my wiccan friend, I was interested in the implications of quantum physics and chaos theory, and (unlike her?) understood them reasonably well.
Maybe it was because, like CS Lewis before me, I experienced my Christ-ing not as a disenchantment from nature but as a deepening appreciation of it/her and as a way to begin to deal with the root problems of our ecocidal civilisation.
I grok many things that I read Pagans saying. I don't find many of the core things Pagans seem to be concerned about alien to my own faith.
I even grok the distancing from the Christian faith as it is seen and distressingly often experienced by many in our societies. I recall well beginning my own spiritual search with the attitude that the churches had nothing to offer sincere seekers of spiritual truth and experience.
So I hope we can have Christian Pagan encounters where we can listen to one another; laugh with one another; grow to understand one another and finally to dissolve stereotypes and mutual disinformations. It's a risky path though, because the first to tread it (and yes I know that some are already treading it), will face misunderstanding from their peers and even hostility. I know in experience something of that too. I choose carefully whom I tell of my own interest in these spiritual paths. Some of my fellow Christ-followers get rather overly scared about it. They are victims of disinformation, and sometimes perpetrators and it is not an easy fix to challenge what their personal authorities have told them. It must be the same for Pagans.
Tell me: is it?
Here are links to the other participants in this synchroblog


* J. R. Miller (Christian) of More Than Cake on A Christian Approach to Interfaith Dialogue"

* Liz Dyer (Christian) of Grace Rules on Interreligious Dialogue: Risky Business

* Matt Stone (Christian) of Glocal Christianity on Is
Interfaith Interfaith enough?

* Steve Hayes (Christian Orthodox) of Notes from underground on Interreligious dialogue

* K.W. Leslie (Christian / Pentecostal / Assemblies of God) of The Evening of Kent on Gathering with the pagans.

* Phil Wyman (Christian) of Square No More on A Christian Presenter at Pagan Pride!?

* Beth Patterson (Liberal Christian w/ Celtic undertones) of Virtual Tea House on Same Stove, Different Teapots

* Jarred Harris (Pagan/Vanic Witch) of The Musings of a Confused Man on Interfaith relationships

* Yvonne Aburrow (Wiccan Unitarian) of the dance of the elements on Only connect


And here's a link for some matters arising from this synchroblog.

MetaPagan: Synchroblog on interfaith dialogue

The myth of sacred prostitution

Clearly we'd have to look at the evidence presented and its interpretation to make a proper decision. It's reported at MetaPagan: Exploding fallacies: "In this study, Stephanie Budin demonstrates that sacred prostitution, the sale of a person's body for sex in which some or all of the money earned was devoted to a deity or a temple, did not exist in the ancient world. Reconsidering the evidence from the ancient Near East, the Greco-Roman texts, and the Early Christian authors, Budin shows that the majority of sources that have traditionally been understood as pertaining to sacred prostitution actually have nothing to do with this institution. The few texts that are usually invoked on this subject are, moreover, terribly misunderstood. Furthermore, contrary to many current hypotheses, the creation of the myth of sacred prostitution has nothing to do with notions of accusation or the construction of a decadent, Oriental 'Other.' Instead, the myth has come into being as a result of more than 2,000 years of misinterpretations, false assumptions, and faulty methodology. The study of sacred prostitution is, effectively, a historiographical reckoning."
Why am I drawing attention to it? Well, interpreting some of the NT texts relating to homo-erotic behaviour turns in part, for some interpreters, on the idea that there was such a thing as sacred prostitution and that this is the real target of the denunciations in, for example, Romans 1. Now it could be that this reappraisal of the idea is more embedded in neo-pagan apologetics and so that will have to be taken into account as a reading strategy when looking at this book.

Removing Christendom from Halloween

Its nearing the end of October and a Christian's thoughts turn to All Hallows E'en. And so to controversy. Steve Hollinghurst has some helpful things to say and the thesis he puts forward is intriguing. There are some 'makes you think' insights in there, for example. "i find it interesting to compare the Halloween witches mask with the Nazi depiction of Jews, you will find them rather similar with hooked noses, green skin and warts. and this is the bit so many folks don't get, the wearing of these masks at Halloween is not a celebration of evil or witchcraft, but actually a piece of anti-Pagan propaganda invented by Christians and stemming from medieval Christian celebrations of All Hallows Eve."

The practical suggestion Steve makes following his analysis and identification of commercialism as the new Christendom, is this: "so how about a properly informed collaboration between Pagans and Christians to remove Christendom from Halloween? leaving both faiths free to celebrate a festival centred around their beliefs about the important subject of death and the relationship with our dead ancestors?
if we do this i add one thing that should not be banished, a place to also acknowledge our fear of death, the supernatural and evil. banishing the imagery of this from Halloween won't take away the fear, it just relegates it to places where we cannot face it together and handle it constructively, if differently in our two faith traditions. so i make a plea for renewed celebrations not to lose this element at least from both the medieval Halloween and its Pagan forerunner."
I think that's right: we need to be able to do something that doesn't collaborate with the sanitising of death and fear. Our culture desperately needs ways to face such things; that's the real victim of the consumerist hijack.
Thanks Steve.
On Earth as in Heaven: Removing Christendom from Halloween:

Top 5 misconceptions about Christianity

Unmasking the Goddess: "the Top 5 Misconceptions Pagans Have About Christians:

* The church is male-dominated and Christianity is a religion for men only.
* Christianity is only popular because it's the established religion of the U.S. It will die out as our culture becomes more knowledgeable, logical, and scientific.
* Christianity is a political tool that uses fear to gain recruits and control the masses.
* Christianity is a religion based on sin and guilt; if you don't keep the rules, you're going to hell.
* Christians are trying to shove their religion down people's throats"

But the problem is; you can see why they would have those misconceptions, because they all have elements of truth in them, sometimes quite large elements. To me it says that our plausibility is in part in living differently not just saying differently.