All religions are the same, right?

June 10, 2010 By

I love the lede on an Associated Press story this week about a California seminary’s plans to train leaders of three different faiths:

CLAREMONT, Calif. — A rabbi, a minister and an imam walk into a classroom, and it’s no joke.

The venerable Claremont School of Theology has taught Methodist ministers and theologians for more than a century, but in the fall they’ll try an unorthodox approach: cross-training the nation’s future Muslim, Christian and Jewish religious leaders in classrooms scattered around Southern California as they work toward their respective degrees.

However, I’m not as crazy about the rest of the story.

The 1,200-word piece makes clear that the plan has drawn questions and concerns, but it takes on a cheerleading tone as it brushes aside opponents as “more conservative elements” — never defining exactly, or even vaguely, what that means. The story quotes five named sources, all of them excited about Claremont’s plan.

The basic gist: We live in a pluralistic world where all religions are the same, and everybody except for the usual vague people referred to as the “more conservative elements” recognizes that.

You can just hear the cheers, can’t you? Rah-rah-rah!

So here is the first reference to “more conservative elements”:

The experimental approach launched Wednesday is intended to create U.S. religious leaders who not only preach tolerance in an era of religious strife, but who have lived it themselves by rubbing shoulders with those in other Abrahamic faiths.

The idea has already met resistance from more conservative elements in some religious communities; its architects say that only underscores the need for such an approach.

Who are the more conservative elements in some religious communities? What is their standing in the historically progressive context of Claremont? Wish I could tell you. However, the story doesn’t say.

The second reference to “more conservative elements” provides a few clues:

But organizers have not been able to avoid acrimony entirely. Some more conservative elements in the Christian and Jewish communities have pushed back, worried the approach may dilute their own faiths. One Jewish Academy faculty member took a leave of absence when he heard of the project’s inception.

The United Methodists have withheld funds and the University Senate, a body within the United Methodist Church that oversees schools and colleges, hampered the project’s momentum last April when it called for a review of the curriculum.

The United Methodists traditionally give about $800,000 to Claremont each year, said Campbell, the school’s president.

“There are some elements within Methodism that felt we shouldn’t be doing this,” he said. “The issue is whether the United Methodists will put money into the school for education of only United Methodists.”

Call me crazy, but I wouldn’t have minded a quote from one of these three: (1) the unnamed Jewish Academy faculty member, (2) a United Methodist leader who supported withholding funds or (3) a University Senate member. Maybe I’m totally off my rocker, but I wouldn’t even have minded the story quoting more than one of these folks.

Even better, AP could have included the perspective of Stephen Prothero, Boston University religion professor and author of “God Is Not One: The Eight Rival Religions That Run the World — and Why Their Differences Matter.”

The book by Prothero, a regular contributor to CNN’s new Belief Blog, has been the subject of much recent discussion, from Beliefnet and The Boston Globe to the Austin American Statesman and The Washington Post, just to name a few. In an interview with The News & Observer in Raleigh, N.C., Prothero said:

I hope people consider seeing both the good and bad of religions and the similarities and differences. Religion is tremendously important and horribly misunderstood.

We keep racing to pretend that all religions are the same — both among multiculturalists who want to say they’re all good, and atheists who say they’re all bad. That doesn’t help us understand the world we live in.

It’s worth noting that the “more conservative elements” language apparently appeared first Wednesday in a front-page Los Angeles Times story. To his credit, however, Times religion writer Mitchell Landsberg (the subject of recent criticism by GetReligion) includes input from those elements:

Claremont’s administration sees the multi-faith expansion as the wave of the future in American theological training. But it is straining relations between the school and more conservative elements of the United Methodist Church, which this year was expected to provide about 8% of Claremont’s $10-million budget. The church suspended its support for the school earlier this year pending an investigation.

Marianne E. Inman, president of the church’s University Senate, which oversees Methodist seminaries, declined to comment on Claremont’s plans, referring a reporter to a January statement in which she took the school to task for failing to consult with the church body on budget matters and on “a substantial reorientation of the institution’s mission.”

Mark Tooley, a conservative Methodist who is president of the Institute on Religion and Democracy, a Washington-based ecumenical organization, was more outspoken in his criticism.

“Claremont seems to be moving away from its responsibility to the United Methodist Church,” Tooley said. “It almost seems that they’re trying to fulfill the stereotype that many in the church have of liberal Methodism on the West Coast.”

In the AP story, the third reference to “more conservative elements” actually doesn’t use that terminology, but it’s close enough:

Project leaders have agreed to teach the classes on separate religious campuses to address concerns among some conservatives that too much integration would dilute the study of their own beliefs. Originally, the planners had envisioned a “university within a university.”

Professors will be able to cap the number of students from other faiths in their classes.

So there you have it. A rabbi, a minister and an imam walk into a classroom, and the world’s largest news organization fails to provide substantive coverage of the arguments for and against a multi-faith theological education.

Unfortunately, that’s no joke.

Print Friendly

Filed Under: Academia, Announcements, Islam, Judaism, Mainline, Middle East, Religion, World Religions
  • Passing By

    The unquestioned assumption of the AP article seems to be that religious differences equal religious strife.

    So how much religious strife is there in the U.S.? Are the non-instrumental Church of Christ folks invading Catholic Churches and wreaking pipe organs? Are Catholics burning Churches of Christ to the ground? Actually, there was a spate of church arson across east Texas, but it turned out to be a couple of young guys who used to attend a Baptist Church. It’s interesting, though: in looking through the articles on those guys, a religious connection is notably absent, other than a Baptist history.

    You know, our local paper ran some old pictures of the city back in the 30s-50s, including a picture of “church row”. Right in the middle was a synagogue and there was no crowd of rioting Christians with pitchforks burning it down. That was in the bad old days.

  • http://ingles.homeunix.net/ Ray Ingles

    It really would have helped to hear more about the objections to the program. Did students have to actually declare another creed (seems unlikely), or simply learn about other faiths?

    Is the objection to learning about other faiths? If so, why?

  • Deacon John M. Bresnahan

    Part of American secular and liberal rigid religious dogma is that all religions are really the same. Unfortunately, that grossly erroneous dogma infects how much of the media covers and how “higher” education usually treats religions. One can only hope Stephen Prother’s research and book will educate a few reporters.

  • http://www.suprarational.org Ron Krumpos

    Orthodox, institutional religions are quite different, but their mystics have much in common. A quote from the chapter “Mystic Viewpoints” in my e-book at http://www.suprarational.org on comparative mysticism:

    Ritual and Symbols. The inner meanings of the scriptures, the spiritual teachings of the prophets and those personal searchings which can lead to divine union were often given lesser importance than outward rituals, symbolism and ceremony in many institutional religions. Observances, reading scriptures, prescribed acts, and following orthodox beliefs cannot replace your personal dedication, contemplation, activities, and direct experience. Preaching is too seldom teaching. For true mystics, every day is a holy day. Divine revelation is here and now, not limited to their sacred scriptures.

    Conflicts in Conventional Religion. “What’s in a Word?” outlined some primary differences between religions and within each faith. The many divisions in large religions disagreed, sometimes bitterly. The succession of authority, interpretations of scriptures, doctrines, organization, terminology, and other disputes have often caused resentment. The customs, worship, practices, and behavior within the mainstream of religions frequently conflicted. Many leaders of any religion had only united when confronted by someone outside their faith, or by agnostics or atheists. Few mystics have believed divine oneness is exclusive to their religion or is restricted to any people.

    Note: This is just a consensus to indicate some differences between the approaches of mystics and that of their institutional religion. These statements do not represent all schools of mysticism or every division of faith. Whether mystical experiences vary in their cultural context, or are similar for all true mystics, is less important than that they transform each one’s sense of being to a transpersonal outlook on all life.

  • Jerry

    To what extent does a news story always need to reflect a wide range of opinions?

    If, for example, and not randomly:-), should Terry’s piece http://www.therepublic.com/view/story/religion-faith060910/religion-faith060910/ have included with equal weight those who disliked John Wooden’s theological outlook and thus did not mourn his passing?

    I used an extreme example to illustrate the general principle that not every story needs to hear from all sides nor does every story need to give equal weight to all perspectives.

    Of course, this specific story does need some balance, but I’m not sure how I feel about your specific complaint about the imbalance.

  • http://www.biblebeltblogger.com Frank Lockwood

    Yeah, I rolled my eyes when I read this.

    The United Methodist Church is not generally categorized as one of the “more conservative elements” in our society, and the United Methodist Church is withholding money.

    The writer makes it look like it’s just a fringe element in a few right-wing religious organizations that has concerns about the wisdom of this approach.

  • http://www.tmatt.net tmatt

    JERRY:

    I write a column. A personal column.

    You will not see us arguing for strict issues of balance for columnists. Right?

  • http://GetReligion.org Bobby

    Excellent point, Frank. Another reason to explain people’s thoughts and beliefs rather than assign political labels to them without explanation.

  • http://GetReligion.org Bobby

    Positions is probably a better word than thoughts in my last comments since most of us can’t read people’s minds.

  • Jerry

    Terry, I was teasing you a little.

    But more to the point, there’s a real opportunity to excoriate AP for not quoting the opposition and giving them equal billing in their report on the Pope http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5iuz4s1IwxwGDdLNyekMC48YWPdGgD9G8HJ281 because, after all, that seems to be a standard here.

  • http://getreligion.org Bobby

    To what extent does a news story always need to reflect a wide range of opinions?

    Jerry, in regard to your question, the answer is probably going to vary from story to story. I think a story that intends to “tell it straight” needs to reflect, as fairly and as fully as possible in the finite space, the relevant voices and arguments to help readers understand the issue. In the story critiqued, only sources on one side of the issue were quoted. And those on the other side were categorized and brushed aside as “more conservative elements.” That was the point.

    As for the AP pope story to which you linked, I read it and didn’t get the impression the piece was pushing one side or the other. It seemed like a pretty straight report on the event, and also impressed me as the shell of an advance wire story that would be updated (presumably with some of those opposing voices) during and after the event.

  • http://www.mikehickerson.com Mike Hickerson

    My question was: how does differ from what’s already happening at, say, Harvard Divinity School? HDS has student groups that represent Christians, Jews, Muslims, Buddhists, Hindus, and more; multiple chaplains from a variety of religions; ministry education sites that include Christian, Jewish, Unitarian, Swedenborgian (!), Buddhist, and a variety of other institutions. I would expect that similar representation could be found at other divinity schools. Is there something different with Claremont’s project? The comparison to Hartford Seminary is a good start, but is Claremont really a trailblazer in this area, or are they following an established interfaith path?

  • Clint

    Bobby, great post, thanks for putting it online.

  • Bern

    Pace Professor Prothero, but it is religions and people, not God, that are not one. (Tower of Babel, anyone?)

    Yes, more on the who and why of “some conservatives”–the piece is quite biased without that. I did find the extensive quoting of the imam informative, but it stood out in what is basically a rah-rah piece for the idea.

  • http://www.suprarational.org Ron Krumpos

    Those who believe the kinship of faiths should join the social network of the Parliament of the World’s Religions. Look at http://www.peacenext.org/profile/RonKrumpos and I would be happy to be one of your first friends there.