Trustworthy (Scout's Honor!)

The following post is an assigned response to a 2013 article by Paul Louis Metzger entitled, Trustworthy Rivals: On an Alternative Path to Multi-Faith Discourse in which he asks the question, “Which would you rather be toward those of other faiths? A trustworthy rival, a mean-spirited and scheming enemy (like a former spouse), or a platonic and possibly even unscrupulous bedfellow? Can you think of other options?” This is an important question to consider…for everyone’s sake.

In our conversation about diplomacy, whether on the international, interpersonal, or inter-faith (or multi-faith) levels, we have considered the importance of listening carefully before speaking. We have talked a lot about the ethical and relational character of the ambassador, specifically, those called “Ambassadors for Christ” (2 Corinthians 5) who work to adequately communicate God’s message of reconciliation—in fact, that is where we started nearly two years ago. So, how should we respond when talking with members of other faith or anti-faith groups? Let me start with the via negativa or the “should nots” of religious diplomacy.

• First, we should not be ready to rise up from talking at some offense and plunge the hidden dagger of our arrogant agenda into our opponent’s heart.
• Secondly, we should not use relationships as a ruse, in essence, “fattening them with friendship” so we can consume them in a moment of defenselessness like the Sawi tribe did to outsiders in Don Richardson’s biography, Peace Child.
• Finally, we should not merely accommodate their positions like some kind of simpering, cloying, Gríma Wormtongue-esque sycophant always looking out for themselves if they can’t exert power over others.

We can disagree without being disagreeable, as Dr. Metzger wrote, “While the various faith traditions set forth competing truth claims at key points, such competing claims do not lead adherents of the diverse traditions necessarily to discount and demean one another.”

Dr. Metzger suggests that we aim for the title “Trustworthy Rivals” in our multi-faith encounters. The adjective “Trustworthy” is good and might get us invited back for another cup of tea, but "Rival" is not what I am looking for. It seems to place the opposition we are facing on the wrong actor. While I understand his reason for choosing the word “rivals” (for we go through our convictions, not around them) it leaves me hoping for something better.

Other adjectives might include, “Sympathetic” in the sense of “the act or capacity of entering into or sharing the feelings or interests of another…” without polluting the sacred space of relationship with our stuff and yet “Sharpening” each other’s understanding (Proverbs 27:17).  “Faithful” might also work very well as a relational anchor that allows us to remain despite resistance from them or pressure from others urging us to disengage and draw back.

So how do we get beyond labeling other religious groups as "enemies" or mildly better "rivals" without compromising our convictions? Might I suggest that Brother or Sister might work, since we share the same genetics, the same needs, and the same condition (mortality) on the same planet? Just because we are related doesn’t mean that we have to agree, but it should move us to their side to problem-solve together. Perhaps we should do as some others have suggested and call them “friends”. Certainly, we can be friends if we identify ourselves honestly from the beginning and we learn to listen. Or, maybe Neighbor might work best.

What do you think?