Religion as Performance Art
Sometimes I like to watch the Interfaith services on CTV held at First
Christian Church
here in Eugene Oregon. It is attended by Sikhs, Jews, occasional Buddhists,
Hindus,
Baha'is, some New Agers, a few Unitarians, a miscellaneous Taoist or Confucian,
Sufis,
and, believe it or not, at least 2 or 3 Christians.
This strange observance grew out of feelings of great sorrow about the events
of 911,
back in 2001, sorrow, not anger at the heinous crimes committed by Muslim
fanatics,
not serious questioning of the premises of "liberal ' religion which says that
all faiths
are but different paths to one God, and certainly not out of any concern about
the
theological views of followers of actual religions who might come together in
grief
to share their feelings.
The result has been illuminating. Mostly what you get during these services
is one of two things:
(1) a lot of performance art, singing, sometimes modern dancing, instrumental
music,
occasionally some sort of little dramatic 'play,' and the like, or
(2) LCD -Lowest Common Denominator- readings of prayers, of homilies, of
sermonettes,
of essays by departed masters, and so forth, all focused on some objective that
everyone
agrees is good, like world peace, ending hunger for the downtrodden, or
religious toleration.
We can skip the second part. I have heard all the platitudes about world
peace, etc.,
that I have ever wanted to hear and think that one more, or a thousand more,
would
not accomplish one damned thing. But about religion as performance art,
that is a topic that deserves comment.
I also sometimes watch 3ABN, the 7th Day Adventist channel. It also features a
good deal of performance art even if its message is strictly a 'fundamentalist'
form
of Christian faith. Regardless, there is much performance art, and sometimes
it is quite good. A choir with instrumental accompaniment, for example,singing
in an outdoor setting on a mountaintop, little kids enacting something of
the Christmas story, or a singer's heartfelt rendition of a hymnal favorite.
As a certified prophet of El Shaddai, the Goddess Ishtar, Buddha, Ahura Mazda,
Shiva and Shakti, the Tao, and so forth, including Ben Franklin's casual
approach
to religious faith, I have often thought that a new religion really should pay a
good deal of attention to performance art. People need a warm and caring
audience
to demonstrate their skills at music or film making or theater. This is
especially true
for the young and it is no accident that any number of pop stars had their
start
in a church, performing for fellow believers. A religion should encourage
the discovery and cultivation of new talent in the arts.
At all age levels, and welcoming a variety of kinds of arts from various
cultures.
This could take any number of forms, maybe with one church noted for its drama
projects
another for its orchestra, another for its fantastic visual artists, and so
forth. This ties
in with another view of mine, that religion ought to be educational, it should
offer
people access to the world of ideas, to reliable information about all those
subjects
that have direct impact on their lives as members of a faith community,
including
the effects of software culture.
In all of this, and my concern is both that of a radical ecumenist as well as a
Christian,
there nonetheless needs to be focus, a focus that can be defended
intellectually as well
as being something heartfelt and in touch with spiritual experience.
About the intellectually defensible part of this idea, maybe it would be a good
idea
to make a medieval Christian practice integral to faith. This concerns the
'scholastic'
practice of debate of religious ideas as integral to education. Hence Thomas
Aquinas,
whose books include every possible objection to Christian faith he could
identify.
I really like that approach and like it even more because it is totally "other"
than what you find either at 3ABN or in Dan Bryant's Church of Multiculturalism,
aka, the Baha'i version of Christianity, otherwise known as First Christian
(wink, wink)
Church of Eugene.
In my new Church, based on following Jesus as Albert Schweitzer followed Jesus,
as Luther followed Jesus, as the Apostle Paul followed Jesus, the prime
theologian
will be Bart Ehrman, who calls himself an Atheist and who rejects Evangelical
religion
of which he once was a part -and also has no use for the kind of 'liberal'
religion one finds
at Dan Bryant's establishment.
Dr. Ehrman does not need to join, although that would be very welcome, but he
needs to
be our theological reference point, necessary for a faith based on truthfulness
and willing to take on even the most difficult intellectual challenges.
Ehrman? Yes, indeed, because he is so utterly well informed and challenges
Christian
views and assumptions up and down the line, boldly, no compromises, just the
truth.
I happen to disagree with many or even most of his conclusions; its just that he
is utterly honest, he raises all the questions that we all need to deal with
and answer,
and knows the history of Christian faith and the Bible like few others in the
world today.
Want to believe something? Sure go for it. But in the context of the First
Baptist Church
of Ishtar and El Shaddai in Jesus' Holy Name, it must first pass the Ehrman
test:
"Is is really true?"
We will need agreement about which scriptures to use but for sure they will
include
the Bible, the Tripitaka, the Gathas, etc, and -unlike Dan Bryant's holy books-
they should include all those passages where other religions are criticized
and sometimes condemned. Yes, Virginia, the Bible includes a lot of passages
that criticize other religions - as do many Hindu writings, Buddhist writings
and so forth. We should acknowledge this truthfully and try to figure out
what we should do that is productive with these criticisms. To ignore them
would be to fundamentally misconstrue each and every religion on Earth.
All (all) authentic religions at least partly define themselves in opposition
to other religions.
Which takes us to a gigantic problem with Leftist ersatz ecumenism, there is no
rational theology of exclusion. Without that you get absurdity,
Suppose a group of Satanists wanted to join Bryant's monthly interfaith
services?
Or people from the Church of the Flying Spaghetti Monster? Or a group of
rogue Scientologists? Or a cabal of Muslims seeking to restore the Hasshasshin
of the middle ages that gave the world the Order of Assassins and the word
"assassin"?
"O, Bryant would never allow that to happen?" I sure hope not. But on what
grounds?
As things stand there are no grounds, only a sort of fairly tale belief that if
we all
sing kumbaya, often enough, all will be well and we will all worship
Herbert Marcuse together as our lord and savior and live happily ever after.
I think we can do better than that, a helluva lot better.
Billy Rojas
Prophet in Residence
:-)
--
--
Centroids: The Center of the Radical Centrist Community
<[email protected]>
Google Group: http://groups.google.com/group/RadicalCentrism
Radical Centrism website and blog: http://RadicalCentrism.org
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Centroids: The Center of the Radical Centrist Community" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email
to [email protected].
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
