Within the IC/ISM melieu there is a swathe of the community that gives free expression to an element of religious experience which to me is both fascinating, and . . . . yes, . . . disturbing.

Some (both inside and outside the community) might like to think that it is a peculiarity of those “theologically-challenged” IC/ISM “people” but the fact is. . . it is a long standing interplay that can be traced back to the late antique period and the early history of the Christian tradition. I’m writing here of how people within one “tradition” will, quite comfortably, appeal to the gods and holy figures of another.

Saturday’s Guardian has a great article on a contemporary ocurrence of this – in Kerala, India. There, the local Hindu goddess is viewed as the sister of the Virgin Mary, and Hindus and Christians alike believe that in order to have your prayer answered it is necessary to visit both shrines, and make an offering to both figures. Not to do so, could bring about the jealously of the other.

As an academic I find this phenomenon of religious expereince fascinating. Bishops of the late antique period wrung their hands over the fact that their congregations openly participated in the cult and devotional activity of their pagan neighbours. During the early 20th century – with the emergence of Spiritualism and Theosophy, perfectly “respectable” adherants of mainline denomonations participated in meetings and acts of worship, sought out clairvoyants and healers, in addition to their participation in the worship of their local church.

In some examples of cross-over one can readily identify with the experience. There are for example a number of places in the Holy Land where Christians and Muslims, or Jews and Muslims visit the saint or shrine of the other tradition seeking the power there for a particular purpose. Muslim women in Egypt, for example visit a number of sites and shrines associated with the Theotokos to pray, consult the priest, or seek her intervention. What makes this different from the cross over between Christians and Hindus in Kerala is the fact that Christianity, Judaism, and Islam share a common thread of religious experience and understanding – it is, in some respects easy to see and to identify with the experience of cross over. Christianity and Hinduism on the other hand, on the surface at least, appear to be quite foreign to one another. Orthodox Christians appealing to the power of a pagan deity is evocative of late antique practicies – and ambiguities.

It is this ambiguity of identification – or apparent ambiguity of identification that gives rise to disquiet. We live in a world of religious polarisation that the late antique believer did not always share. If visiting shrine X, saint Y, or goddess B brought about a transformation in one’s life, circumstances, or even just a bit of reflection and comfort, then people have historically ignored the hand-wringing of priests and teachers to gain access to that power. Rarely is there “black and white” in religious experience – in refined theological debate, perhaps, but not in religious experience. This was part of the lesson learned during the fifth century when Patriarch Nestorius challenged, what he felt, was the unqualified enthusiasm for the title “Theotokos”.

There are many examples in our IC/ISM context of this ambiguity being embraced, even “institutionalised” – that is drawn into the regular religious life of the community. It has created new identities within our tradition (or on the edge of it – depending on your view) and gives rise to some rather interesting questions. When does this “ambiguity” create a new identity – one that no longer shares a common thread with the rest of the OC/IC tradition? Is there a point at which its effect draws one outside the Christian household? John Plummer has pointed out that ISM communities are often a bridge between Christianity and Paganism for those on the journey away from the Christian path. Related to his observation – there is a collection of ISM groups and communities that appear to cater to this progression – obviously some are happy to remain in this middle place, standing on the bridge if you will enjoying the view, rather than moving on to the other side. This raises more delicate questions about respecting the various elements, and traditions borrowed, or appropriated. But it is also worth considering if these latter questions are grounded more in our contemporary desire for clear definitive lines of identification, or if there is indeed an issue of respect and integrity involved. For myself, I sense that it is a mixture of both.

The article this weekend gave me a moment to pause and reflect on both the historic and contemporary effect of this ambiguity, and how people seek spiritual power, the divine, god, whatever you like whereever it is, and yes, regardless of the boundaries of a particular identity – even those identities which have been personally appropriated.