Indulgences Have Their Place

Where's John Tetzel When You Need Him?

How such stories are newsworthy in a secular newspaper is a bit beyond our collective pay grades.  A newspaper (with a website) repeated the story of a tenured teacher at Wheaton College--a private evangelical liberal arts school in the US.  But, there we are.  We venture to say that most New Zealanders have never heard of Wheaton, and if they have they probably think it is an additive used in a bakery.

We bypass ruminating on why Stuff might think this newsworthy in NZ.  But we understand why it may be considered important amongst Christians.  What is going on?

A professor at Wheaton College, an evangelical Christian school in the west of Chicago, has been suspended after making a post on Facebook saying that Christians and Muslims "worship the same God".   In her post, Dr Larycia Hawkins, who is a Christian and an associate professor of political science, included a photo of herself wearing a headscarf.

Let's follow Hawkins's train of thought:

I don't love my Muslim neighbor because s/he is American. I love my Muslim neighbor because s/he deserves love by virtue of her/his human dignity.

No problem so far.  Did not Christ's apostle instruct us thus: "And let us not grow weary of doing good, for in due season we will reap, if we do not give up.  So then, as we have opportunity, let us do good to everyone, and especially to those who are of the household of faith." [Galatians 6: 9-10].  Moreover, the great summary of the Law includes the universal command that we are "to love our neighbour as ourselves".  That command presupposes the universal oneness of the human race in some vital ways.

The same law demands universal love for males, females, children, unborn children, elderly, all races, murderers, racists, sexually perverted, and so forth.  We would seek to do good to all, extending the love and generosity of the Saviour of the world, along with judicious appeals to repent of sin and believe upon the Lord Jesus Christ as the true God-provided indulgence for sin.

But, we move along.  The good professor went on to say,

I stand in human solidarity with my Muslim neighbor because we are formed of the same primordial clay, descendants of the same cradle of humankind I stand in human solidarity with my Muslim neighbor because we are formed of the same primordial clay, descendants of the same cradle of humankind--a cave in Sterkfontein, South Africa that I had the privilege to descend into to plumb the depths of our common humanity in 2014.

OK.  Fair enough.  I had no idea that the Garden of Eden was located in South Africa, but then again the Jaapies are well known for claiming everything as their own, so no harm done there.  Just a little indulgent tolerance required from the rest of us.

Then comes a subsequent commitment yet to another article of faith:

I stand in religious solidarity with Muslims because they, like me, a Christian, are people of the book. And as Pope Francis stated last week, we worship the same God.

Whoa.  Muslims, like Christians, are "people of the book".  Now we pause here to raise the possibility that Dr Hawkins is guilty of slight carelessness in her grammar.  Maybe she meant Christians are like Moslems because we are all people of "a" book--which would be to say we have this in common, apart from our same humanity and being alike made in God's image--we both have a holy book which we regard as the rule for belief and practice.

If that were what Dr Hawkins is meaning, it is a rather trite observation.  Granted that Mao's young revolutionaries at least had this in common with Christians: both had an authoritative text (Mao's Little Red Book in the case of the Red Guards--Mao Zedong's zealous cadres of young people who carried out the destructive Cultural Revolution--whilst Christians have an authoritative text called the Bible).  But so what?  The two books are so divergent in content and teaching that they provide no foundation for solidarity or commonality.  As would the observation that Christians at least had this in common with the Nazis--both alike have an authoritative written text.  Mein Kampf, on the one hand; the Bible on the other.  True, but irrelevant.

We are sure, however, that Dr Hawkins is not a sloppy grammarian.  She intended to use the definite article.  She was asserting that both Christians and Muslims are people of the one-and-the-same book. How bizarre.  The Koran is the Bible, and the Bible is the Koran.  Or, more likely, she was proposing that whilst the books are different, the teachings and messages of both are the same.

At this point we suspect that Dr Hawkins believes neither the Bible to be the authoritative Word of the One Living and True God, nor that the Koran contains the dictated revelations of Allah to Muhammad. Seeking to praise both revelations as equivalent, she has damned both.

But then comes the final and most important article of her confession of faith: she asserts that both Moslems and Christians worship the same deity, the same divine being: "we worship the same God" she says.   How we wish Dr Hawkins could have been atop Mount Carmel all those years ago.  What violence and bloodshed might have been averted.  There was that extremist, radical, crazy man, Elijah, yelling abuse at his co-religionists, the prophets of Baal.

And Elijah came near to all the people and said, “How long will you go limping between two different opinions? If the Lord is God, follow him; but if Baal, then follow him.” And the people did not answer him a word. (I Kings 18: 21)

What is clear is that the crazy man, the extremist, did not understand that whilst he was a worshipper of Yahweh, the God of Israel, and whilst the prophets of Baal--all 450 of them--were worshipping the ancient Canaanite god, both Yahweh and Baal were the same god.   After all, "Baal" means Lord; therefore, they have the same name; therefore, they are the same.  The Syrians and the Israelites were worshipping the same God.  What Dr Hawkins has put together, let not man put asunder.  Certainly not Elijah.  Maybe Dr Hawkins, if she had been there,  would have been kind enough to provide a few indulgences, so Elijah could have made it up with the Baalites.

There was another mountain we wish Dr Hawkins could have been atop.  How much better it would have been had Dr Hawkins been able to be on the Mount of Transfiguration.

And after six days Jesus took with him Peter and James, and John his brother, and led them up a high mountain by themselves. And he was transfigured before them, and his face shone like the sun, and his clothes became white as light. And behold, there appeared to them Moses and Elijah, talking with him. And Peter said to Jesus, “Lord, it is good that we are here. If you wish, I will make three tents here, one for you and one for Moses and one for Elijah.” [Matthew 17].

Dr Hawkins would have been able to instruct more faithfully not just Peter, but the Lord of Glory Himself.  She would have forcefully pointed out that whereas everyone else was welcome, Elijah had no place on that mountain.  Better that his place be taken by a true prophet, one like Dr Hawkins, for example.

If that had been possible it would have spared the Church so much trouble and so many mistakes.  More indulgence, please.  Much more.