A Charitable Orthopathy: Christian Perspectives on Emotions in Multifaith Engagement

By Richard J. Mouw and Paul Louis Metzger

Evangelicals and other conservative Christians of the twenty-first century face enormous challenges in the pluralistic public square, not least with Muslims and atheists. Contrary to biblical injunctions to "keep in step with the Spirit" (Gal 5:25b) and to love our neighbors as ourselves (e.g., Matt 22:37-40; Luke 10:25-37)--both of which involve not only behavioral but also important affective elements--we often harbor deep-seated antipathies toward atheists and adherents of other religions. While such feelings are at times justified and help us cope with conflict-related tragedies, they are also often baseless, misconstrued, and counterproductive, priming us to avoid religious others, support discriminatory policies against them, and even confront them in verbal or physical ways.
The purpose of this volume is to offer an academically informed yet practically oriented collection of essays that challenges and encourages Christians to engage their religious neighbors in a much more loving, compassionate, hopeful, and courageous--indeed, orthopathic--manner, whether in the realm of politics, in debate and conference venues, on the mission field, or in their own homes, schools, churches, and neighborhoods. As such, a set of reflection and discussion questions is included to facilitate individual and/or group study.

• Language: English
• Publisher: Pickwick Publications
• Release date: Apr 7, 2020
• ISBN: 9781532654152

Richard J. Mouw

Richard J. Mouw (PhD, University of Chicago) is a senior research fellow at the Henry Institute for the Study of Religion and Politics at Calvin University. He previously served as the president of Fuller Theological Seminary (1993–2013) and directed their Institute of Faith and Public Life (2013–2020). In 2007, Princeton Theological Seminary awarded him the Abraham Kuyper Prize for Excellence in Reformed Theology and Public Life. He is the author of over twenty books, including Uncommon Decency, Adventures in Evangelical Civility, Restless Faith, and All That God Cares About.

Book preview

9781532654138.kindle.jpg

A Charitable Orthopathy

Christian Perspectives on Emotions in Multifaith Engagement

edited by

John W. Morehead

and

Brandon C. Benziger

foreword by

Richard J. Mouw

afterword by

Paul Louis Metzger

A Charitable Orthopathy

Christian Perspectives on Emotions in Multifaith Engagement

Copyright ©

2020

Wipf and Stock Publishers. All rights reserved. Except for brief quotations in critical publications or reviews, no part of this book may be reproduced in any manner without prior written permission from the publisher. Write: Permissions, Wipf and Stock Publishers,

199

W.

8

th Ave., Suite

3

, Eugene, OR

97401

.

Pickwick Publications

An Imprint of Wipf and Stock Publishers

199

W.

8

th Ave., Suite

3

Eugene, OR

97401

www.wipfandstock.com

paperback isbn: 978-1-5326-5413-8

hardcover isbn: 978-1-5326-5414-5

ebook isbn: 978-1-5326-5415-2

Cataloguing-in-Publication data:

Names: Morehead, John W.,

1964–

, editor. | Benziger, Brandon C., editor. | Mouw, Richard J., foreword. | Metzger, Paul Louis, afterword.

Title: A charitable orthopathy : Christian perspectives on emotions in multifaith engagement / edited by John W. Morehead and Brandon C. Benziger ; foreword by Richard J. Mouw ; afterword by Paul Louis Metzger.

Description: Eugene, OR : Pickwick Publications,

2020

| Includes bibliographical references and index.

Identifiers:

isbn 978-1-5326-5413-8 (

paperback

) | isbn 978-1-5326-5414-5 (

hardcover

) | isbn 978-1-5326-5415-2 (

ebook

)

Subjects: LCSH: Emotions—Religious aspects—Christianity. | Religions—Relations.

Classification:

bv4597.3 .c46 2020 (

print

) | bv4597.3 .c46 (

ebook

)

Scripture taken from the Common English Bible®, CEB® ©

2010

,

2011

by Common English Bible.™ Used by permission. All rights reserved worldwide. The CEB and Common English Bible trademarks are registered in the United States Patent and Trademark Office by Common English Bible. Use of either trademark requires the permission of Common English Bible.

Scripture quotations are from the ESV® Bible (The Holy Bible, English Standard Version®), ©

2001

by Crossway, a publishing ministry of Good News Publishers. Used by permission. All rights reserved.

Scripture texts in this work are taken from the New American Bible, revised edition ©

2010

,

1991

,

1986

,

1970

Confraternity of Christian Doctrine, Washington, DC, and are used by permission of the copyright owner. All Rights Reserved. No part of the New American Bible may be reproduced in any form without permission in writing from the copyright owner.

Scripture quotations marked (NIV) are taken from the Holy Bible, New International Version®, NIV®. ©

1973

,

1978

,

1984

,

2011

by Biblica, Inc.™ Used by permission of Zondervan. All rights reserved worldwide. www.zondervan.com The NIV and New International Version are trademarks registered in the United States Patent and Trademark Office by Biblica, Inc.™

Scripture quotations are from New Revised Standard Version Bible, ©

1989

National Council of the Churches of Christ in the United States of America. Used by permission. All rights reserved worldwide.

Manufactured in the U.S.A.

03/30/20

Table of Contents

Title Page

Contributors

Foreword by Richard J. Mouw

Acknowledgments

Introduction

Part I: Biblical, Theological, and Social-Psychological Foundations

1. He Had Compassion for Them

2. Orthopathy in the Christian Tradition

3. The Social Psychology of Emotions and Religious Intergroup Relations

Part II: From Heteropathy to Orthopathy in Multifaith Engagement

4. Evangelicals and Gross Religions

5. Courage to Engage

6. Hope as an Affective/Cognitive Tool for Multireligious Understanding

7. Emotion, Valuation, Compassion, and Empathy

8. Loving Our Religious Neighbors

Part III: Avenues of Orthopathic Multifaith Engagement

9. The Love of Christ Compels Us

10. Emotional Evangelism, Affective Apologetics

11. Hospitality and Religious Others

Afterword

Appendix

Bibliography

Dedicated to Terry C. Muck

The Samaritan in Jesus’s story in Luke

10

does not simply love his beaten and near-dead neighbor with merciful thoughts. Nor does he perform stoic deeds of compassion. Rather, he takes pity on the Jewish man (Luke

10

:

33

). As in the account of Jesus being moved to act compassionately in Matthew

9

:

35

–

38

, compassion no doubt flows from the heart and shapes the thoughts and deeds of this Samaritan stranger. . . .

Building on the last point, we must be attentive to a holistic engagement involving orthodoxy (head), orthopraxy (hands), and orthopathy (heart) in our engagement of the religious other. Each dimension is very important.

—Paul Louis Metzger

Contributors

Brandon C. Benziger (ThM, MDiv, Denver Seminary), freelance editor and independent writer and researcher. His publications include Emotions and the Bible: An Introductory Bibliography and "From Femme Fatale to Fidelity: Affect, Rhetoric, and Character Ethics in the ‘Strange Woman’ Poems of Proverbs

1

–

9

."

Craig L. Blomberg (PhD, University of Aberdeen), Distinguished Professor of New Testament at Denver Seminary. His publications include How Wide the Divide? A Mormon and an Evangelical in Conversation; Contagious Holiness: Jesus’ Meals with Sinners; and A New Testament Theology.

W. Scott Cleveland (PhD, Baylor University), Assistant Professor of Philosophy at the University of Mary. His publications include The Emotions of Courageous Activity; The Distinctiveness of Intellectual Virtues: A Response to Roberts and Wood; and Becoming Good: New Philosophical Essays in Aid of Virtue Formation.

Elizabeth Agnew Cochran (PhD, University of Notre Dame), Associate Professor and Director of Graduate Studies at McAnuity College and Graduate School of Liberal Arts, Duquesne University. Her publications include The Moral Significance of the Religious Affections: A Reformed Perspective on Emotions and Moral Formation; Receptive Human Virtues: A New Reading of Jonathan Edwards’s Ethics; and Protestant Virtue and Stoic Ethics.

Thomas A. Fergus (PhD, Northern Illinois University), Associate Professor of Psychology at Baylor University. His publications include The Potentiating Effect of Disgust Sensitivity on the Relationship between Disgust Propensity and Mental Contamination and The Attention Training Technique: A Review of a Neurobehavioral Therapy for Emotional Disorders.

Rosemond T. Lorona (PhD, Baylor University), Assistant Professor of Psychology at Point Loma Nazarene University. Her publications include Self-Stigma and Etiological Attributions About Symptoms Among Individuals Diagnosed with an Anxiety Disorder: Relations with Symptom Severity and Symptom Improvement Following CBT and Assessing State Mental Contamination: Development and Preliminary Validation of the State Mental Contamination Scale.

Paul Louis Metzger (PhD, King’s College, University of London), Professor of Christian Theology and Theology of Culture at Multnomah Biblical Seminary/Multnomah University. His publications include Connecting Christ: How to Discuss Jesus in a World of Diverse Paths; Evangelical Zen: A Christian’s Spiritual Travels with a Buddhist Friend; and Beatitudes, Not Platitudes: Jesus’ Invitation to the Good Life.

John W. Morehead (MA, Salt Lake Theological Seminary), Director of Multi-Faith Matters and the Evangelical Chapter of the Foundation for Religious Diplomacy. His publications include Encountering New Religious Movements: A Holistic Evangelical Approach; Beyond the Burning Times: A Pagan and Christian in Dialogue; and The Paranormal and Popular Culture: A Postmodern Religious Landscape.

Richard J. Mouw (PhD, University of Chicago), President Emeritus and Professor of Faith and Public Life at Fuller Theological Seminary. His publications include Uncommon Decency: Christian Civility in an Uncivil World; Talking with Mormons: An Invitation to Evangelicals; and Adventures in Evangelical Civility: A Lifelong Quest for Common Ground.

Terry C. Muck (PhD, Northwestern University), cofounder of the Society for Buddhist-Christian Studies. His publications include Christianity Encountering World Religions: The Practice of Mission in the Twenty-First Century; Handbook of Religion: A Christian Engagement with Traditions, Teachings, and Practices; and Why Study Religion? Understanding Humanity’s Pursuit of the Divine.

Adam C. Pelser (PhD, Baylor University), Assistant Professor of Philosophy at the United States Air Force Academy, Colorado. His publications include Reasons of the Heart: Emotions in Apologetics; Eyes of the Heart: Emotions in the Christian Life; and Becoming Good: New Philosophical Essays in Aid of Virtue Formation.

Bob Robinson (PhD, University of London), Senior Research Fellow at Laidlaw College, New Zealand. His publications include Christians Meeting Hindus: An Analysis and Theological Critique of the Hindu-Christian Encounter in India; Jesus and the Religions: Retrieving a Neglected Example for a Multi-Cultural World; and "Without Ceasing to Be a Christian": A Catholic and Protestant Assess the Christological Contribution of Raimon Panikkar.

Wade C. Rowatt (PhD, University of Louisville), Professor of Psychology at Baylor University. His publications include Religion, Prejudice, and Intergroup Relations; Patterns and Personality Correlates of Implicit and Explicit Attitudes toward Christians and Muslims; and Differences in Attitudes towards Out-Groups in Religious and Non-Religious Contexts in a Multi-National Sample: A Situational Context Priming Study.

Karen L. H. Shaw (DMin, Gordon-Conwell Theological Seminary), Assistant Professor of Cross-Cultural Ministry at Arab Baptist Theological Seminary, Lebanon. Her publications include Divine Heartbeats and Human Echoes: A Theology of Affectivity and Implications for Mission and Wealth and Piety: Middle Eastern Perspectives for Expat Workers.

Michael L. Spezio (PhD, Cornell University; PhD, University of Oregon), Associate Professor of Psychology and Neuroscience at Scripps College and visiting faculty at California Institute of Technology. His publications include Theology and the Science of Moral Action: Virtue Ethics, Exemplarity, and Cognitive Neuroscience and Habits in Mind: Integrating Theology, Philosophy, and the Cognitive Science of Virtue, Emotion, and Character Formation.

Amos Yong (PhD, Boston University), Professor of Theology and Mission and Director of the Center for Missiological Research at Fuller Theological Seminary. His publications include Beyond the Impasse: Toward a Pneumatological Theology of Religions; Hospitality and the Other: Pentecost, Christian Practices, and the Neighbor; and The Spirit, Affectivity, and the Christian Tradition.

Foreword

Richard J. Mouw

W

hen I started to

type these comments, I committed a typo even before I wrote my first sentence. For the heading, I wrote Forward instead of Foreword. Actually, that was a fitting error—it might even be that my subconscious was giving me a good prodding. As I had read the essays for this volume, I was struck by the fact that we Evangelicals are making some excellent progress in exploring interfaith topics. We are clearly at a new stage in this exploration. So this volume is very much about moving forward!

Of course, some observers might say that it is about time that we Evangelicals start doing some creative thinking about interfaith matters. Already five decades ago, post-Vatican II Catholicism began producing some significant documents about the relationship of Christianity to other faith communities. And in the broader Protestant world, scholars have been at the topic of world religions for a long time. By comparison, our Evangelical patterns of productivity on interfaith topics has been quite meager.

Well, meager at least if we focus mainly on the dialogue variety of engagement. When it comes to evangelizing people of other faiths, though, we Evangelicals have been quite passionate. We have also produced considerable literature in the category of what we can label interfaith apologetics.

In the pages that follow, however, we are given excellent insights about how to engage persons of other faiths in ways that go beyond evangelistic strategies and defenses of Christianity. Here we have well-informed, and often quite winsome, reflections on the benefits of participating in mutually edifying conversations with persons of other faiths. And the scholarly quality here is impressive. Having read widely in the writings of Catholics and mainline Protestants about such matters, I can testify to the fact that these essays are up to the highest intellectual standards.

I am impressed and pleased to see the orthopathy theme woven throughout these contributions. It is exactly the emphasis that is essential to an Evangelical approach to other religions. The right thinking (orthodoxy) emphasis has always been there for us. The teachings of other faiths have been a major focus in our past—even though we have frequently been less than fair in how we have represented those teachings. Nor have we been opposed to cooperative action—of the orthopraxy variety—with non-Christians. Francis Schaeffer made much of the need for Evangelicals to find co-belligerents on an ad hoc basis in the public arena, to say nothing of how this took shape in Jerry Falwell’s moral majority alliances.

What has been lacking for us, though, has been sufficient attention to the affective dimension—particularly the qualities featured in these essays: compassion, empathy, humility, and the like. Evangelicals have made good progress in the past few decades, moving from generic preachments on the need for daily quiet times with the Lord to carefully laying out substantive patterns of spiritual formation. These essays can be seen as now carrying those newly refined insights, along with recent advocacies of a virtue ethic, into the arena of interfaith engagement.

In my own interfaith journey, I have come to appreciate in new ways the element of mystery that surrounds God’s dealings with people who are outside the boundaries of the Christian community. I have come to see that this sense of mystery is not something that we hold in tension with our deepest Christian convictions, but that the mystery of the workings of divine grace is itself one of the essential convictions. The Westminster Confession puts it nicely: Christ through the Spirit . . . worketh when, and where, and how he pleaseth. This fine book is for me yet another testimony to the marvels of the sovereign grace that sent the Savior into the world!

Acknowledgments

A

ny publishing project of

this kind warrants grateful acknowledgment at the outset of others who have helped shape its contents and encouraged its progress. First and foremost, we would like to express a heartfelt thanks to each of our contributors for their gratuitous commitment and enlightening contributions to this book: Richard J. Mouw, Bob Robinson, Elizabeth Agnew Cochran, Rosemond T. Lorona, Thomas A. Fergus, Wade C. Rowatt, W. Scott Cleveland, Terry C. Muck, Michael L. Spezio, Craig L. Blomberg, Karen L. H. Shaw, Adam C. Pelser, Amos Yong, and Paul Louis Metzger. Thanks also go to Edward Collins Vacek, Bob Robinson, Matthew Richard Schlimm, and Donald Fairbairn for helping us think through various issues related to the volume; the Louisville Institute for supporting much of John’s research on emotions and multifaith engagement these last five years; Pickwick Publications for its partnership in bringing this timely project to fruition; and Brent Adams, Darin Brush, Charles Randall Paul, Loren Sickles, and Edgar L. Stone for helping fund our typesetting fee. Our respective families deserve special mention as well, specifically for their longsuffering love and support during the three years it took to develop, edit, and write portions of the book—namely, John’s wife, Wendy, and granddaughter Rose, and Brandon’s wife, Stephanie, and children, Evelyn, Oliver, and Theodore. Finally, thanks are due in double measure to Terry Muck for his inspiration of the present volume. In many ways, his contention in recent decades that interreligious dialogue involves, to a significant degree, an emotion or attitude toward people of other religious traditions has fueled this project from its inception.¹ For this reason, we dedicate the volume, in gratitude and admiration, to him.

1

. Muck, Interreligious Dialogue and Evangelism,

140

.

Introduction

Orthopathy, Evangelicals, and Multifaith Engagement

John W. Morehead and Brandon C. Benziger

I

n July 2014, the

nonpartisan fact tank Pew Research Center published a survey entitled How Americans Feel About Religious Groups. Intriguingly, the study used a feeling thermometer to determine how various segments of the American population felt about select religious groups, including Jews, Catholics, Evangelicals, Buddhists, Hindus, Mormons, Atheists, and Muslims.¹ Scores of

0

to

33

comprised the cool and negative end of the scale,

34

to

66

were midrange, and

67

to

100

represented the warm and positive feelings. The section of the report on how religious groups rate each other—especially how Evangelicals both rate and are rated by others—is most interesting.² While Evangelicals rated Jews and Catholics fairly highly on average (

69

and

63

, respectively), they rated other religious traditions much less favorably. "When asked about other non-Christian groups, evangelicals tend to express more negative views. White evangelicals assign Buddhists an average rating of

39

, Hindus

38

, Muslims

30

and atheists

25

."³ Curiously, these were the lowest-reported ratings for all four of these groups. Moreover, while Evangelicals were rated warmly by other Christian groups, they received colder mean ratings by Jews (

34

), Atheists (

28

), Agnostics (

37

), and adherents of nothing in particular (

45

).⁴ The report, unfortunately, says nothing of Buddhist, Hindu, Mormon, or Muslim ratings of Evangelicals; however, we might reasonably speculate, given both our knowledge of Evangelical relations with these groups and the consistently negative ratings of Evangelicals by non-Christian groups, that such ratings would have fallen on either the cooler side of midrange or the chilly end of the spectrum altogether.

On the heels of a contentious election year in which Americans became increasingly divided on politics, Pew released an updated version of this survey data in February

2017

.⁵ In the almost three years since the previous report, the American public in general expressed warmer feelings for religious groups. Although Americans still feel coolest toward Muslims and atheists, the report asserts, the mean ratings for these two groups nevertheless increased as well.⁶ Somewhat anomalously, however, average ratings for Evangelicals stayed the same. In fact, "Evangelical Christians, rated relatively warmly at

61

degrees, are the only group for which the mean rating did not change since the question was last asked in

2014

."⁷ In addition, while mean Evangelical ratings of Buddhists, Hindus, Muslims, and Atheists all rose since the previous report (

47

,

47

,

37

, and

33

, respectively), they continued to be the coldest among the surveyed groups, with Evangelical ratings of Mormons tied for second to lowest (

52

).⁸

Briefly removing Atheists from our analytical purview, it is noteworthy that Evangelical sentiments for other religions are at their lowest with respect to Islam. As Harold Netland has observed, "In American Christians’ eyes, especially after September

11

,

2001

, Islam is not simply another religion: it is the Diabolical Other. Images of Muslims provoke intense passions among many American Christians that are absent when considering Buddhists, Hindus, or Mormons."⁹ Evangelicals, in fact, have had a long history of conflict and hostility with Islam, extending even to Evangelicalism’s emergence in the Great Awakening (ca.

1720

–

1750

).¹⁰ Such adversity was only exacerbated by the rise of Islamic terrorism and suicide bombings in the

1970

s and

1980

s, culminating in the attacks of

9

/

11

,¹¹ which American Evangelicals have often interpreted as Islamic attacks on Christianity.¹² Key terrorist incidents in the past, together with recent and ongoing attacks by ISIS, Boko Haram, and other Islamic groups, have fueled fear, anger, and even hatred among Christians. Thus, it is no surprise that Evangelicals and other conservative Christians tend to have little interest in—indeed, are adamantly opposed to—hospitable, conciliatory engagement with Muslims. As scholar of Islam John Azumah has recognized, "In our post

9

/

11

world, Islamic militancy seems to have become the main driving force or determining factor for Christian responses to Islam. The trauma of the attacks as well as the almost daily headlines of violence involving Muslims have had far reaching psychological and even theological impact on Christians as it has on the general non-Muslim world."¹³ Azumah finds this deeply problematic, arguing, in fact, that Christian responses to Islam in our day represent a struggle for the soul of the faith itself:

Some Evangelicals are very close to allowing radical Islam to not only define and drive their missions, but also their attitude towards Muslims and even other Christians who think differently. . . . The main casualty in the collateral damage of radical Islam is the fruit of the Spirit described in Galatians

5

:

22

–

23

, expressed in qualities such as love, peace, compassion, gentleness, kindness, etc. These biblical characterisations of Christ-likeness have, unfortunately, become virtually dirty words in some Christian circles as far as engaging with Islam and Muslims is concerned.¹⁴

As Pew’s surveys and Azumah’s observations begin to illustrate, it is clear that Evangelicals and other conservative Christians of the twenty-first century face enormous challenges in the pluralistic public square, not least with Muslims. Contrary to biblical injunctions to keep in step with the Spirit (Gal

5

:

25

b) and to love our neighbors as ourselves (e.g., Matt

22

:

37

–

40

; Luke

10

:

25

–

37

)—both of which involve not only behavioral but also important affective elements¹⁵—we often harbor deep-seated antipathies toward our religious neighbors.¹⁶ While such feelings are at times justified and help us cope with conflict-related tragedies, they are also often baseless, misconstrued, and counterproductive, priming us to avoid adherents of other religions, to support discriminatory policies against them, and even to confront or attack them in verbal or physical ways.¹⁷ In more extreme contexts, such as the intractable religious conflicts in Nigeria and the Middle East, the effects of such emotions can be much more serious.¹⁸ As social and political psychologist Eran Halperin writes in a concise overview of the relevant literature,

Research suggests that negative emotions lead to the rejection of positive information about the opponent . . . and lead individuals to oppose renewal of negotiation, compromise, and reconciliation. . . . Other studies have suggested that emotions like fear and collective angst may result in higher sensitivity to outgroup threats, more right-wing inclinations . . . as well as strengthening ingroup ties . . . and promoting risk-aversive political tendencies. . . . Research also has shown that negative emotions, mainly anger and hatred, increase support for extreme aggression and military actions at harming or even at eliminating the opponent. . . . Furthermore, although recent studies show that anger can sometimes promote conflict resolution . . . in most cases anger leads to the appraisal of future military attacks as less risky and more likely to have positive consequences.¹⁹

With such inhibiting and destructive tendencies, then, emotions such as disgust, fear, anger, and hatred can make conflict resolution, peacemaking, and civic cooperation between any opposing groups—Evangelicals and other religious groups included—particularly challenging, a reality that augurs very poorly in an increasingly globalized and pluralistic world.

A Charitable Orthopathy

Perhaps nowhere is it clearer than in their engagement of competing religious and theological traditions that Evangelicals have a passion for articulating and defending the truths of Christian orthodoxy. Orthodoxy can be defined as a biblically and theologically sound set of beliefs, usually with an emphasis on a core set of doctrines (e.g., bibliology, Christology, soteriology) and more freedom for disagreement on less central issues (the age and process of creation, views of the millennium, etc.). Related to this is the concept of orthopraxy—viz., biblically and theologically responsible practices, actions, and behaviors, ranging from the various rituals we perform (e.g., baptism, the Lord’s Supper) to the values we live out in the realm of social ethics (justice, mercy, prudence, etc.). While Evangelicals in general have valued orthodoxy very highly and are becoming better known for their commitment to matters of orthopraxy,²⁰ they have paid comparatively little attention to a crucial third component of the well-known ortho- triad—namely, orthopathy. And this is especially true of orthopathy’s social dimension, not least with respect to our religious neighbors.²¹

Though introduced to theological discourse only in the late twentieth century,²² the term orthopathy draws upon a longstanding, even if marginal, Christian tradition—based on Scripture and the example of Christ, and represented by such major theologians as Augustine of Hippo (

354

–

430

), Thomas Aquinas (ca.

1225

–

1274

), Jonathan Edwards (

1703

–

1758

), and John Wesley (

1703

–

1791

)—that takes seriously the moral significance of human affectivity (i.e., passions, affections, emotions, etc.).²³ Thus, as Thomas Dixon writes in a summary of classical Christian psychology, "In general a clear distinction was made . . . between inappropriate passions of the lower appetite directed towards worldly objects and appropriate affections, or movements of the will, directed towards goodness, truth and, ultimately God.²⁴ Or as Robert C. Roberts describes in more familiar and concrete terms, Emotions take moral predicates just about as readily as actions do. Cruel joy or hope is morally corrupt; envy is often despicable; gratitude can be praiseworthy. Anger can be unjust or righteous; fear, craven or morally noble."²⁵ In a modern theological context, then, orthopathy refers to those forms or patterns of emotions, attitudes, desires, and so forth that, according to Scripture and the Christian tradition, are appropriate or praiseworthy or righteous or noble.²⁶ It is important to stress, too, that the appropriateness (i.e., the ortho-ness) of these states and dispositions assumes that they are not irrational, involuntary impulses to be suppressed or trivialized, but rather rich cognitive and social phenomena that can be deliberately taught and formed.²⁷

It is our contention in this volume that in our concern for presenting and especially defending orthodoxy in multifaith contexts, we Evangelicals often end up neglecting—even violating—a balanced, biblical form of orthopathy, an element just as vital to Christian faith as the other standards we tend to emphasize as Evangelicals. Accordingly, it is crucial, perhaps now more than ever, that we not only examine the emotions and attitudes we harbor toward our religious neighbors, but also learn to engage such neighbors in a much kinder, humbler, and more loving, empathetic manner.²⁸ In short, we must form a charitable orthopathy. As we have already seen, there are not only pressing biblical and missiological reasons for this éducation sentimentale; there are also good social and political reasons. As Evangelical scholar of religion Terry C. Muck writes of empathy in particular:

What happens in the world when this kind of empathetic attitude is displayed toward others’ religions, not only by religion scholars but by anyone who comes in contact with a religious belief or a religious adherent with whom he or she disagrees? Put simply, the world’s peace quotient among religions increases. When we realize that we have better ways to approach other religions than the ones most often presented in our histories—war, conflict, persecution, and hatred of the other—we find ourselves in a position to better our world by bettering ourselves, especially in the way we view [and, we might add, feel about and treat] other religions.²⁹

Purpose and Overview of Anthology

The purpose of this anthology is to offer an academically informed yet practically oriented collection of essays that encourages and helps shape orthopathic multifaith engagement among Evangelicals and other conservative Christians. Accordingly, we have assembled and edited eleven full-length essays, replete with a foreword, introduction, afterword, combined bibliography, reflection and discussion questions, and a Scripture index, on various aspects of emotions and attitudes in multifaith engagement. For a number of practical reasons (i.e., the general lack of Evangelical scholars of religion currently publishing on affectivity, scholarly availability, etc.), the international team of contributors we assembled represents a variety of Christian traditions, fields of expertise, and experience in multifaith engagement. Thus, while some have been involved in various modes of multifaith engagement for decades, others have relatively little such experience; while some are biblical, theological, and missiological scholars, others are psychologists, neuroscientists, and philosophers; and while some contributors freely identify as Evangelicals, others identify with mainline Protestant and Catholic traditions. Although our target audience is a broad, educated Evangelical readership, we hope that this openness to learning from scholars of other theological traditions only enhances the overall message and quality of the book.³⁰

What remains is to introduce the structure of the volume and each of the ensuing essays. A quick perusal will reveal three main parts: Part I—Biblical, Theological, and Social-Psychological Foundations; Part II—From Heteropathy to Orthopathy in Multifaith Engagement; and Part III—Avenues of Orthopathic Multifaith Engagement. Part I consists of three orienting essays. First is Bob Robinson’s survey of biblical attitudes toward religious outsiders, which focuses especially on the lessons that we can learn from Christ’s encounters with Gentiles and Samaritans. Second is Elizabeth Agnew Cochran’s analysis of the promises and challenges of orthopathy in the Christian life, which highlights Jonathan Edwards’s conception of the religious affections as a model of orthopathy appropriately framed within the parameters of Christian orthodoxy. And third is Rosemond T. Lorona, Thomas A. Fergus, and Wade C. Rowatt’s summary of recent theory and empirical research in the social psychology of emotion and intergroup dynamics, which introduces key concepts bearing upon interreligious relations, including social identity, moral foundations theory, threat-based theories of prejudice, and various models promoting healthier, more cooperative relations between groups.

Part II encompasses five essays concentrating on some of the most relevant emotions and attitudes in multifaith engagement, some heteropathic but most orthopathic in this setting.³¹ In the first of these essays, John W. Morehead examines how Evangelical concerns for purity often lead to disgust for and fear of adherents of non-Christian religious traditions; accordingly, he underscores the challenge that Jesus’s own approach to purity poses for Evangelicals today. In the second essay, W. Scott Cleveland discusses the virtue of courage and its associated emotions in multifaith contexts—namely, fear, despair, hope, and daring. Closely related is Terry C. Muck’s essay on hope, which emphasizes this ubiquitous affective-cognitive phenomenon as an underused yet ideal point of common ground in multifaith interactions. Michael L. Spezio then contributes an essay on the cognitive science of compassion and empathy, arguing that these active, rational affectivities, contra a number of recent public intellectuals, can be deliberately matured and even extended to outgroup members. And in the final essay of the section, Craig L. Blomberg reflects on Scripture and his twenty-five years of experience in Mormon-Evangelical dialogue to explore what it means for Christians to love their religious neighbors while retaining both their Christian convictions and their rejection of other (irreconcilable) religious tenets.

Part III comprises three final essays focusing on various modes of multifaith engagement: evangelism and mission, apologetics, and hospitality, respectively. The first of these essays, by Karen L. H. Shaw, underscores six affective qualities that pervade the apostle Paul’s theology and practice of evangelism and mission, which should pervade ours as well: grace, humility, peace, zeal, power in weakness, and anger rechanneled into expressions of love. The second essay, by Adam C. Pelser, contends that orthopathy offers a healthy corrective to current trends in apologetics—namely, approaching apologetics with a concern more for winning arguments than winning hearts and minds for Christ, exhibiting defensiveness and argumentativeness rather than a humble confidence in the truth, and viewing emotions as obstacles, rather than as aids, to thinking rationally. Finally, Amos Yong explores the benefits and drawbacks of an orthopathic approach to hospitality, inviting focus on an affective repertoire that not only facilitates the practices of hosting and being guests of our religious