Pluralism run amuck

The Rev. Ann Holmes Redding is an Episcopal priest who announced last year that she feels called to be both a practicing Christian and a practicing Muslim and, in fact, has understood herself as an adherent of both faiths for now over two years. I first saw mention of this story a few months ago when it started making national headlines. Despite the seeming inconsistencies between identifying as both Christian and Muslim, Rev. Redding asserts, "At the most basic level, I understand the two religions to be compatible. That's all I need." Though she received a Ph.D in New Testament from Union Theological Seminary in New York and was ordained a priest in 1984, Redding insists that her draw toward Islam is "the calling of my heart" and that it is entirely compatible with being a Christian.

Unfortunately for Redding, the Episcopal Church does not agree. It appears that Bishop Geralyn Wolf, presiding bishop of the diocese of Rhode Island (in which Redding was ordained) will most likely defrock her from the priesthood in the coming months. Redding is currently suspended from all pastoral duties while she determines whether she wants to continue claiming a Muslim identity.

Redding herself is unrepentant. According to this news story from the Seattle Times, Redding said, "'I'm saddened and disappointed that this could not be an opportunity' for the church to broaden its perspective and talk about what it means to adhere to more than one faith." She feels that the calling she has received to practice both faiths is a gift to adherents of both.

This case raises questions that should be equally troubling to both Christians and Muslims. After all, what does it mean to be a confessional Christian or a confessional Muslim at all? The sacred texts and belief systems of the two religions are clearly mutually exclusive. I cannot speak with any authority at all on the positive theological affirmations of Islam, but I can say with certainty that the Christian belief in a triune God and the Incarnation of Jesus Christ as the fully human and fully divine Savior of the world are non-negotiable tenets of what it means to be a Christian. Insofar as Muslims are not willing to claim those beliefs (and they are not), they are can simply not be Christians.

I was born and raised a Protestant Liberal in a denomination that, over time and probably from a lack of a strong theological tradition, largely adopted a Protestant Liberal identity. Over time, I have come to reject that dominant stream of contemporary Methodism for exactly the kind of problems we see in the case of Redding. This is pluralism run amuck. It does violence to the integrity of both the Christian and Muslim faiths by respecting the distinctive claims of neither. And worse, it posits a third alternative (call it secular humanism, cultural relativism, or whatever) that seeks to trump all other religious identities with implicit claims of a kind of sophisticated superiority that regards religious exclusivism as simply not "progressive" enough.

But what, then, does it claim as the theological authority that allows it to make such a bold claim? Help me out, if you can. I admit I am mystified.