(272)S11E8/2: Modern Sacralism w/Dr. George Kalantzis
Welcome back to the Fourth Way Podcast. We just finished our episode on the true conspiracy of Christianity of, of the resurrection, which, was an episode that we used to kick off this section of the season focused on religion. Now I think this section of the season is really important because, you know, I spent a lot of the season weaving in this idea of the false prophet of of the church, of Christianity, this, kind of bizarro version of Christianity that, that kind of has replaced throughout the ages, the true Jesus following way of Christianity. And so in the last episode, my point was to ground Christianity in the resurrection and to show that, I do hold to the resurrection as a core belief and that I really do value Christianity and think it's important, which is why I spent a lot of, a large part of the season critiquing, what I think is a dangerous and false form of Christianity. In this section on religion then, because I I've spoken so much about the church in other sections, and we're going to get into some, positive aspects in regard to discipleship later in the season.
Derek Kreider:This section of the season is largely about exploring Christendom or Christianism specifically, and taking a look at, what, what the problems are with the iterations of Christianity that we discussed. And this episode, we're kind of kicking that off with, an interview that was one of my favorites so far. It was, it was just a real joy to talk with, Doctor. Kalantzis, in, in this episode. And I hope you'll enjoy it too.
Derek Kreider:But just as a fair warning, this is going to be a very long introduction. And so I will put timestamps in the show notes so that you are able to skip all of my talking if you so desire and just get to the interview. But there is a lot that I want to set up before we get into into the episode proper. One of the reasons I enjoyed my, my interview with Doctor. Kalantzis here was because I thoroughly enjoyed his book, Caesar and the Lamb, which I highly recommend you grab.
Derek Kreider:We'll also be talking with, with somebody else in the next episode or 2, about something somewhat similar. But what Doctor. Kalantzis does in his book, Caesar and the Lamb, is he he uses a lot of the early church, to to discuss some of the the politics and nonviolence and and stuff. And so he's got a zoomed in focus, there back in antiquity, back in the the anti Nicene church, which I I find really invaluable. In fact, it was the the early church is the thing that tipped the scales for me in regards to how I interpreted the words of Jesus, because they, univocally pretty much, and, and just in large numbers, they were identifying, you know, Jesus' non violent ways and and and that sort of thing.
Derek Kreider:But one of the things that I particularly liked about this book is that, there's there's an emphasis on something that, is known as sacralism, even though, he doesn't use the word sacralism, all that much. It's it's definitely present in there, and we'll kind of pull that out in this episode. But sacralism is a concept that I think is so, so important and something that we just don't see in a word that we hardly ever use. And, and that's something that's ever present in Caesar and the Lamb. And I think it's important because we are largely blind to sacralism today, because of, of, just kind of the way that we we view religion and we've partitioned it from the secular.
Derek Kreider:And we think that, because we're a secular society, we're not religious and we don't have religious practices, but we're we're so religious. And I, I think, this interview helps to point that out. Another author who I think points this out really well, and I'm actually gonna read a really long excerpt from here, from him here in just a second is James K. A. Smith in his book, Desiring the Kingdom.
Derek Kreider:And then in his book, it was one of the first times that, I felt like there was a really good example given where I'm where I was like, holy cow. We are, like, we are idolaters. We we are worshipers. We do have a sacral society. So let me go ahead and read this excerpt, and I'll also put a a link in the show notes where you can get this if you don't, go out and read the the full book, Desiring the Kingdom.
Derek Kreider:Quote, I would like to invite you for a tour of one of the most important religious sites in our metropolitan area. It is the kind of place that may be quite familiar to many of you, but my task here is to invite you to see it with new eyes. As we're still off at a distance, I want you to notice the sheer popularity of the site as indicated by the colorful sea of parking that surrounds the building. The site is throbbing with pilgrims every day of the week as 1,000 and 1,000 make the pilgrimage. In order to provide a hospitable environment and absorb the daily influx of faithful, the site provides an ocean parking.
Derek Kreider:But the monotony of black tarmac is covered by dots of color from cars and SUVs lined up row by row, patiently waiting as the pilgrims devote themselves to the rituals inside. Indeed, the parking lot constitutes a kind of moat around the building since there are no sidewalks that lead to the site. We begin to wend our way towards the building that sprawls in both directions and seems to be rising from the horizon, a dazzling array of glass and concrete with recognizable ornamentation. The architecture of the building has a recognizable code that makes us feel at home in any city. The large glass atriums at the entrance are framed by banners and flags.
Derek Kreider:Familiar texts and symbols on the exterior walls help foreign faithful to quickly and easily identify what's inside, and the sprawling layout of the building is anchored by larger pavilions of sanctuaries akin to the vestibules of medieval cathedrals. We come to one of the several grandiose entrees in the building, channeling us through a colonnade of chromed arches to the towering glass face with doors lining its base. As we enter the space, we are ushered into an arthic of sorts intended for receiving, orienting, and channeling new seekers. There's a large map, a kind of worship aid, to give the novice an orientation to the location of various spiritual offerings and provide direction into the labyrinth that organizes and channels the ritual observance of the pilgrims. The design of the interior is inviting to an almost excessive degree, sucking us into the enclosed interior spaces with windows on the ceiling open to the sky, but none on the walls open to the surrounding automotive moat.
Derek Kreider:This conveys a sense of vertical and transcendent openness that at the same time shuts off the clamor and distraction of the horizontal mundane world. This architectural mode of enclosure and unfolding offers a feeling of sanctuary, retreat, and escape. The worship space is very much governed by a kind of liturgical festival calendar, variously draped in the colors, symbols, and images of an unending litany of holidays and festivals, to which new ones are regularly added since the establishment of each new festival translates into greater numbers of pilgrims joining the processions into the sanctuary and engaging in worship. The layout of this temple has architectural echoes that hark back to the medieval cathedrals, mammoth religious spaces that can absorb all kinds of different religious activities all at one time. And so one might say that this religious building has a winding labyrinth for contemplations, alongside of which are innumerable chapels devoted to various saints.
Derek Kreider:As we wander, we'll be struck by the rich iconography that lines the walls and interior spaces. Here is an array of three-dimensional icons adorned in garb that inspires us to be imitators of these exemplars. These statues and icons embody for us concrete images of the good life. Here is a religious proclamation that does not traffic an abstracted ideals or rules or doctrines, but rather offers to the imagination pictures and statues and moving images, offering embodied pictures of the redeemed that invite us, imagine ourselves in their shoes. These same icons of the good life are found in such temples across the country and around the world.
Derek Kreider:The symbols and colors and images associated with their religious life are readily recognized the world over. The wide circulation of these icons through various mediums even outside the sanctuary invites us to make the pilgrimage in the first place. This temple, like countless others now emerging around the world, offers a rich embodied visual mode of evangelism that attracts us. This is a gospel whose power is beauty, which speaks to our deepest desires and compels us to come not with dire moralisms, but rather with a winsome invitation to share in this envisioned good life. As we pause to reflect on some of the icons on the outside of one of the chapels, we are thereby invited to consider what's happening within the chapel, invited to enter into the act of worship more properly, invited to taste and see.
Derek Kreider:We are greeted by a welcoming acolyte who offers to shepherd us through the experience, but also has the wisdom to allow us to explore on our own terms. Sometimes we will enter cautiously, curiously, tentatively, making our way through this labyrinth within the labyrinth, having a vague sense of need, but unsure of how it will be fulfilled. Having our sense of need, we come looking, not sure for what, but expectant, knowing that what we need must be here. After time spent focused and searching in what the faithful call the racks, with our newfound holy object in hand, we proceed to the altar, which is the consummation of worship. Behind the altar is the priest who presides over the con consummating transaction.
Derek Kreider:This is a religion of transaction, of exchange and com communion. And so we make our sacrifice, leave our donation, but in return, receive something with solidity that is wrapped in the colors and symbols of the saints in the season, released by the priest with a benediction, we make our way out of the chapel in a kind of denouement, not necessarily to leave the temple, but rather to continue contemplation and be invited into another chapel. For who could resist the tangible realities of the good life so abundantly and invitingly offered? End quote. If you didn't catch that, of course, James K.
Derek Kreider:A. Smith is talking about them all. Right? Now some of those things probably a bit of, of a stretch. Right?
Derek Kreider:Yet at the same time, you definitely, you can feel some of the religiosity that goes into it. The, the, that there's, there's a pattern to that sort of living, the construction, the architecture, and just the process. So sacralism is going to rear its head in a lot of ways. This is kind of a little bit of a trite, simple example. Nevertheless, I think it's something that, helps you to realize that, things that just seems really mundane often do have more infused meaning, and messaging than you probably think.
Derek Kreider:Besides the issue of sacralism, we also get to discuss the importance of origin stories in this interview. We glimpsed origin stories back in the, the false prophet of government episode where we looked at the donation of Constantine. But, you know, as origin stories are something that we think we are immune to today. This episode, we discuss some of the American origin stories and how we curate our origins by expelling the bad parts of the history that we don't like, because that's not really who we because that's not really who we are while clinging to the good things and even fabricating or embellishing some of those good things. We want a collective identity of good without a collective responsibility.
Derek Kreider:We want control over our future while exonerating us from our past. I mentioned, here when we have this origin story episode that Hannah Arndt, in her work on revolution, she talked a bit, about this kind of origin story. And I I couldn't find the quotes in the mid, mid interview, but I found it and and when I include that here, so you can reference this at, at that point. But she makes the connection between ancient myths of origin, and, and the way that those bound people aside of the, beside the American binding in our origin stories. So here's what Arndt says, quote, the word religion must be understood in its original Roman sense, and the piety of the founders would then consist in binding themselves back to a beginning as Roman Piotas consisted in being bound back to the beginning of Roman history, the foundation of the eternal city.
Derek Kreider:And since it was in this respect that the American Revolution was most conspicuously different from all other revolutions, which were to follow, one was tempted to conclude that it was the authority that the act of foundation carried in itself rather than the belief in an eternal legislator or the promises of reward and the threats of punishment in a future state, or even the doubtful self evidence of the truth enumerated in the preamble of the declaration of independence that assured stability for the new republic, end quote. And I did splice just a little bit there in the middle. So if you want to see the full quote, you can check out Arndt's book on revolution and and find the whole thing. But, I mean, she's basically saying that, you know, all all of these things that are that we look back to and talk about self evidence and all of these other things, She just kind of compares the United States to other societies and and to what was different. And she talks about how it's this origin story that seems to be, the glue that was able to help the, the United States to kind of move forward because it was very Roman esque.
Derek Kreider:So it's a really fascinating argument. Arndt is extremely perceptive and I like her because you can never really pin her down too much. She seems to kind of, be somebody who's willing to say what she thinks is true, regardless of the implications for her. I mean, she got bashed by, by her own Jewish community, as well for kind of saying saying things that she thought were true, but were unpopular. And, so she's somebody that I would at least give a ear to even if I don't end up, agreeing with her.
Derek Kreider:And so go check out her, her work if you wanted to dig more into origin stories. So sacralism, origin stories, those are all good things. But one of the other things that we talked a bit about, which is probably the most contentious thing I would imagine. Cause, even if you talk to pacifists and Christian anarchists, you, you still get people who, who have a hard time throwing off the idea of, of voting. But in this episode, we get to talk a bit about how voting is sort of a sacral act and how it's, you know, in some ways, akin to kissing the bust of, of Caesar.
Derek Kreider:Right? It's this act that you're expected to do if you are a loyal, dedicated citizen of the empire. Right? And people even say, they're like, you know, it doesn't matter who you vote for. You just need to vote.
Derek Kreider:They're appalled. People don't like it if you don't vote for the person that they think is, is the morally correct person, of course. But if you don't vote at all, that's like, that's, that's like, heretical. Right? So we talk about how voting is, is a sacrament in our society, how it's an act of, of control, right?
Derek Kreider:An act of, preservation of group identity. It it's a dissipator of guilt, and it's also an act that creates, this moral indebtedness. You know, it's, it's, it reminds me a little bit of the Bloods and the Crips. Right? They, they, these gangs, they'll have somebody go out and kill somebody as an initiation, and that binds you to the gang.
Derek Kreider:Right? If you go out and vote, it's kind of the same thing. Well, I voted for the guy. I gotta kinda stick with him, because he he's my guy. He's the one I voted for.
Derek Kreider:And if I would admit that he's wrong, then I might bear some culpability, some guilt. Right? Well, Aidan Balu, who I referenced in here, he takes this a step further and he says, it doesn't matter if, if you didn't vote for the guy, if you voted at all, you are culpable because you agree to the system. And again, another quote that I wasn't able to pull up in reference, and read in the interview, but I'm able to do that here, and I wanna include, Balu's argument against voting at all. And so here's what he says, quote, as constituent supporters of human government, whether civil or military or a compound of both, in its state or national sovereignty, men are morally responsible for all constitutions, institutions, laws, processes, and usages, which they have pledged themselves to support or which they have validly approved or which they depend upon as instrumentalities for securing and promoting their personal welfare or in which they acquiesce without positive remonstrance and disfellowship.
Derek Kreider:Thus, if a political compact, a civil or military league, covenant, or constitution requires, authorizes, provides for, or tolerates war, bloodshed, capital punishment, slavery, or any kind of absolute injury, offensive or defensive, the man who swears, affirms, or otherwise pledges himself to support such a compact league, covenant, or constitution is just as responsible for every act of injury done in strict conformity thereto, as if he himself personally committed it. He is not responsible for abuses and violations of the constitution. But for all that is constitutionally done, he is responsible. The army is his army. The navy, his navy.
Derek Kreider:The militia, his militia. The gallows, his gallows. The pillory, his pillory. The whipping post, his whipping post. The branding iron, his branding iron.
Derek Kreider:The prison, his prison. The dungeon, his dungeon, and the slave holding, his slave holding. When the constitutional majority declares war, it is his war. All the slaughter, repine, ravages, robbery, destruction, and mischief committed under the that declaration in accordance with the laws of war are his, nor can he exculpate himself by pleading that he was one of a strenuous anti war minority in the government. He was in the government.
Derek Kreider:He had sworn, affirmed, or otherwise pledged himself that the majority should have discretionary power to declare war. He tied up his hands with that anti Christian obligation to stand by the majority and all the crimes and abominations inseparable from war. It is therefore his war. Its murders are his murders. Its horrible injuries on humanity are his injuries.
Derek Kreider:They are all committed with his solemn sanction. There is no escape from this terrible moral responsibility, but by a conscientious withdrawal from such government and an uncompromising protest against so much of its fundamental creed and constitutional law as is decidedly anti Christian. He must cease to be its pledge supporter and approving dependent, end quote. So in in brief summary, what Balu is essentially saying is, look, when you go to vote, it doesn't matter who you vote for. Right?
Derek Kreider:What what you are saying is when you agree to the voting system, you go and you cast your vote and you say, hey. You know what? I'm voting for this guy, and everything he does that is constitutionally legal, I'm agreeing to because I'm agreeing to this system. That means I agree to do whatever's constitutionally legitimate. And if my guy doesn't win, well, by my having voted and and, participated in the system, I'm saying that I'll agree to the outcomes of the system provided they're legal.
Derek Kreider:Right? If there's, if there's something that is unconstitutional that happens or illegal, right, you're not agreeing to that because, that's people going outside of the the boundaries of of what's agreed upon. And so they're they're, messing with the system. But so far as the system functions legally and constitutionally, then you agree to everything that happens. Meaning, if the other guy wins, you've consented.
Derek Kreider:You've consented to, be a part of that system. And so all the horrors that are done are your responsibility because you consent to the system. I think it's a fascinating argument. I can understand intuitively when I first read it, I was I was kind of iffy about, whether you could say that or not. But since then, I've thought of a number of analogies in, non voting, non governmental situations.
Derek Kreider:And I think it holds. I mean, when when you agree to participate in a system, I I agree. I think the logic of Balu kind of, is is it makes sense. But anyway, something to chew on there. Of course, this also gets into, a lot of consequentialism, which is a topic that is so important.
Derek Kreider:I spent our whole 2nd season addressing it, and it's something that you should go back and brush up on. But this idea of lesser of 2 evils where ends justifying the means, that just absolutely is not, a Jesus ethic. Unfortunately, it currently is a big evangelical Christian ethic. It's one that they employ all the time, but it is absolutely hands down, not at all a Christian ethic. And, and it's something that you should be aware of because it's, it's a huge ethic that's employed by, a lot of Christians, but it's, it's absolutely immoral.
Derek Kreider:You know, and that's because the good is defined by faithfulness to Jesus. And, unfortunately, that's been replaced in part through sacralism with, this idea of the good of the state. Right? We need to do what what ends up giving us the best results. So I can vote for a guy who's not good if it gets me a Supreme Court justice.
Derek Kreider:Right? I can I can embrace some injustice in order to to provide a bigger justice? So in in an attempt to preserve 2 loyalties, God and mammon, God and state, whatever those are, we make the state and its power into a supposedly Christian entity, or we at least try to, and it's a Christian goal. And when it's a Christian goal, we can then sacrifice our fidelity on its altar and define that as good. Doctor Klontz says, quote, nowhere in scripture are we called to change society.
Derek Kreider:We're called to let the Holy Spirit change us, end quote. And I think that's something important to remember when we we talk about this consequentialism, when we think that it's our job to change society. Of course, we'd love to see society transformed. The gospel is all about transformation, but that happens voluntarily on the individual level, and then it works up into societies. It's not something, that we are meant to take a top down approach on.
Derek Kreider:And that's generally what consequentialism tries to do. It tries to do the most good, which ends up meaning that people try to grasp the most power to force the more most good, as they see it and define it. And in doing that, they end up doing tremendous amounts of of evil and injustice. Finally, I was so excited that doctor Kalontas ended up talking about discipleship and how the church ought to function in the world. If you've listened to this season, you know that I've been hinting at discipleship as the propaganda killers since the beginning.
Derek Kreider:And I think Doctor. Kalantzis explained how discipleship worked really, really well. And he was able to distinguish it, from propaganda. And propaganda seeks to get us to become something that we are not. It tries to replace our identity.
Derek Kreider:But discipleship on the other hand, it reminds us who we truly are, and it tells us to seek action that's in line with reality, in line with our true selves. But what it ends up most churches have done is that we have turned discipleship into propaganda. We've actually, conflated those things. And doctor Klontzus, identifies that this when he said that, quote, we need to take discipleship back from a methodology to a way of life, end quote. What is discipleship as a methodology, but an attempt to propagandize individuals?
Derek Kreider:It treats them as objects to change rather than than beings in which to uncover true identity. And I objectifies people. There is really so much there, and hopefully I'll get to that in my episode later on discipleship in the season. And this also helps us with some previous conversations, you know, when I did the interview with Greg Johnson and talked about his book Still Time to Care and why conversion therapy and that whole movement destroyed any reputation that evangelicals had in the gay community. It it was because it objectified them.
Derek Kreider:Right? It didn't disciple them. And I think that's hard for people to see because if if you're a Christian who thinks that homosexuality is, is immoral, you'd say, well, conversion therapy was trying to get those people to be their true selves, who they who they ought to be in Christ. That's not objectification. And, you know, I I I get the sentiment there, but when doctor Klontis was able to kind of unpack this a little bit, and if you read, Greg Johnson's book, Still Time to Care, and you listen to our discussion, I think you can start to see how, discipleship is so much different than, trying to get some sort of conformity.
Derek Kreider:You know, Greg talked about how conversion therapy, you know, you you try to teach gay men how to throw a football and change the oil. Right? That's not discipleship. That's you're you're trying to conform them to a certain appearance. Right?
Derek Kreider:They weren't getting invited to Thanksgiving meals. They weren't, they weren't part of a family. They were just you're trying to fix these outward appearances. And that's that's propaganda. That's methodology.
Derek Kreider:That's, that's not discipleship. And so I think this is, this interview here, we get into that a little bit, and it's just another piece of that that puzzle and counter propaganda, which is discipleship. So this is, this is also going to be an episode you might want to come back to at least this section, because, also it's going to connect with an episode that I'm going to put out in right about a month, which, discusses a moral framework that I think might be helpful to understand and in, discussing our uncovering of true reality, the beings that we truly are. Alright. That's, introduction is a whole episode in and of itself, and hopefully you found it informative and helpful.
Derek Kreider:So without further ado, here is the interview with Doctor. George Klontzas. So, I recently read your book, Caesar and the Lamb. And, I also recently heard you give an interview which touched on a topic that I've been, wrestling with for for quite a while now, and that's, the topic of sacralism, which I don't think, all that many people are probably too familiar with. But I thought that this would be a a really good interview to have, because I'm just finishing up a season on propaganda and truth.
Derek Kreider:And sacralism, it it strikes me as an extremely subtle form of propagandizing. And as I've uncovered more and more of it, it seems like it's particularly a form that we Christians seem susceptible to. So I wanna, dig into sacralism in this episode. Okay. But before we do, I would love for you to give an introduction of yourself and, you know, maybe briefly describe some of your works or your your passions.
Dr. Kalantzis:Yeah. Thank you. It's good to be with you. I was George Kalantzis. I teach theology at Wheaton College in Chicago, in the US, and, I also direct the Wheaton Center For Early Christian Studies.
Dr. Kalantzis:My work has been in patristics. That is the study of early Christianity. I work primarily in the historical setting of the early church, both doctrinal and social, and that is where this aspect of my work on the relationship between the church and society around it came. Originally, I was born and raised in Greece, in the evangelical community in Greece, and, have been in Chicago now for 37 winters. That's how we count the years here.
Dr. Kalantzis:So 37 winters. Awesome. Yeah.
Derek Kreider:So, like I mentioned, I I first came across the term sacralism just a couple years ago, and it was I don't know if you're familiar with, Leonard Verduin's work.
Dr. Kalantzis:Not that much. Yes. Just a little bit.
Derek Kreider:Okay. Well, he kind of convinced me that that sacralism was really significant. And this was all happening, like, for me right around 2016 with, the elections and just conservative Christianity in in turmoil. But still, even 5 years out, 6 years out from that, sacralism just isn't a term that I see discussed. And I felt like your book talked about sacralism a lot.
Derek Kreider:But I actually just tonight, I wanted to verify. I went back and I did a search through, the Kindle version. And it really you only bring up the exact term twice in your book. Mhmm. Yet it felt like it was just steeped in it.
Derek Kreider:So I think it I think it's something that we're we're familiar with. We just don't know what to term it. So maybe you could
Dr. Kalantzis:Right.
Derek Kreider:Define sacralism a bit and explain what what it's all about, why it's important for us to to see.
Dr. Kalantzis:The whole idea of the so we we have we have to think historically here, and and we have when we think about sacraments more, the sacred, in our time, we think of sacraments, sacred religiosity, the gods, god, etcetera, very different than differently than the world before the enlightenment or before the last 150, perhaps 200 years. Societies are held together by, a variety of means. But, fundamentally, for a society to be held together as that society and not another society, it has to have things that it has sacred. In other words, things that identify, things that form, things that educate, things that things that demand that members of the society behave in a particular way for a particular purpose towards a particular end. And when those behaviors, not just ideas, but also behaviors, are transgressed, then we have problems within that society.
Dr. Kalantzis:So in ancient society as well as now, that's what the sacralism looked like. You know, the sacraly the sacred behavior, behaviors that we hold for ourselves to be true. And without them, we're not the people who we are. So that also has consequence. Right?
Dr. Kalantzis:Think of well, in the American experience, think of we are What are the sacred, ideas, principles, practices that we have that hold us together as one society? Think about Europe, and each European country or society has its own. Think about, Christians as a group if that can be held, either in a global sense as such. What are the things that if we're not practiced this particular way, then we have issues within the community. So a sacral society, as as you define it, is a society held together by the sacred.
Dr. Kalantzis:What is that sacred? It can be, an ideology. It could be, an an an a religious idea. It can be a creed or set of creeds, but it's also fundamentally practices, expressing practices. Think of baptism or Christian, which is a fundamental behavior.
Dr. Kalantzis:For whom is it? To what end is it? How is it to be enacted? Or in Christianese, we would say, in whose name are you baptized? Right?
Dr. Kalantzis:What formula do you use to be baptized? Or think of the Lord's table or the Eucharist or the Lord's supper. Do we divide according to the words we use, and the practices we have? And then think one has to think of what offering or sacrifice the language of sacrifice that is used within our social endeavors. Think about one has to think about we we I just came from a a tour of 4 countries, 5 countries with students for 6 weeks.
Dr. Kalantzis:And every country we went to, somewhere in their capital has a tomb of the unnamed soldier. And the language in front of that, would be of sacrifice. These are the people who have sacrificed. Well, what does that mean? That's religious language.
Dr. Kalantzis:That is not a civil language. A sacrifice is an offering to something and someone. Who is that someone? Is it a deity? Is it a set of deities?
Dr. Kalantzis:Is it a is it what what is it? We think of soldiers who sacrifice themselves for the what? We say for the good of the country, for freedom, at the altar of of what? This this is our religious language in which we're very, very steeped but don't understand.
Derek Kreider:Yeah. It's it's, I think it seems like, we think of idolatry and those sorts of things as being something of the barbaric past, you know, where you have these graven images that are sitting in front of you, and we don't recognize some of these things. Like, you know, when you're talking about the Tomb of the Unknown Soldier, it also triggered in my mind, I think it's in the Capitol building. They have the apotheosis of Washington, this big mural. I mean, that's that's a religious term right there or, the Lincoln monument, right, in this temple.
Derek Kreider:And then it calls him a savior. Like, in this temple is
Dr. Kalantzis:That's right.
Derek Kreider:Our savior. So we've got this kind of stuff all over the place. Why don't why don't we see it, like, we can see it when the Romans did it, but we can't see it when we do it?
Dr. Kalantzis:Yeah. Because and I argue that both in writing and, I wanna test this out also with you. Be because we have fallen into a verbal habit, a narratiable habit. We we use the expression in the western world, especially in the US, of a separation of religion or church and state. And and that's just simply a mental concept.
Dr. Kalantzis:It is just simply an idea not practiced, but it informs the way we see the world. We see ourselves as desacralized even though we're fully. So we tell ourselves a story that no. No. No.
Dr. Kalantzis:We're we're not we don't behave believe or behave or function the way pre enlightened people did because we understand that there are no deals behind ceilings and springs and the wind and all that. We are what we call a secular people. But in reality, we we're anything but that. I grew up in in Greece or think of football. Like, as god intended it, like football, like proper football.
Derek Kreider:Yeah. Where you actually use your feet.
Dr. Kalantzis:Yeah. That's right. The yeah. That one. And think about how often it is spoken in religious terms.
Dr. Kalantzis:So and so is our god. Right? We're talking about player. And we say, yeah. We we we really don't mean it.
Dr. Kalantzis:Really? Then why do you clash with the other team physically, like battles, people be in stretchers, right, throwing rocks and and behaving that way. Is that not a religious relationship? It's not a sacral sacramental relationship? The same thing in the US we have with every aspect of life.
Dr. Kalantzis:We we have a bad habit of of singing the national anthem or raising the flag at the beginning of basketball games or or, you know, American football games or whatever it may be. What does the national anthem have to do with a sport event itself? Well, it's a religious practice. It's not a civic practice. It's a religious practice, and rather it is a civic religious practice.
Dr. Kalantzis:I I I do exercises with my students quite often in class. Many of them come from public schools. Some of them come from private schools, etcetera, etcetera. But they all most of them come from American educational system. And and we're in the middle of the class and say when we're talking about sacraments and and say, do you understand the concept of being formed into a a people?
Dr. Kalantzis:Well, let's play a game. Can you recite the pledge of allegiance? They giggled for a moment and go, that's it. Go go ahead. Like, just go ahead.
Dr. Kalantzis:And they start, and within 3 seconds, they're in unison. Right? The whole pledge of allegiance to the flag of the etcetera etcetera. They stop at the same place. They put the comma in the same place.
Dr. Kalantzis:They take the breath in there, and they finish in unison. Great. Now recite the creed. And everything goes array in in because somebody's gonna start this creed, somebody's gonna start that creed, the Nicene Creed, the apostle's creed. Somebody knows it.
Dr. Kalantzis:Most people don't know it. Everybody perhaps knows, like, the first four words and go. So what what just happened? Did you realize that for 18 years of your life, every day, you stood up and recited a creed that formed you into a particular kind of people? Right?
Dr. Kalantzis:It formed you in a particular kind of people, people who can recite this pledge. But it's more than that. What did you do for 18 years every day of your school life? You pledge allegiance to the flag and to the republic for which it stands. But let's state in the first part.
Dr. Kalantzis:If you take, I don't know, Napoli's flag in class. Right? Print it in paper. Bring it in class and rip it apart. Just rip the flag.
Dr. Kalantzis:Some would go, why are you doing this? You shouldn't be doing this. But meh. Okay. Most people go, I don't really care.
Dr. Kalantzis:And then you take a, I don't know, pick a Canadian flag. Right? And you do the same. People go, meh. I mean, they're Canadians.
Dr. Kalantzis:They don't care anyway. And then you take an American flag, and you rip it. And then you have that right here. It's like a punch in the gut. Right?
Dr. Kalantzis:Why? Because every day for 18 years, you pledge allegiance to that thing. That's how it works.
Derek Kreider:Yeah. You, there's another section in your book where you talk, about, the the main reasons that people, in ancient times would sacrifice to the gods. You you talk about, you know, honoring them, expressing gratitude, and obtaining some benefit. And And so when you're talking about the the pledge here and and what's going on, just internally, even if if they don't realize how they're being shaped over 18 years, you know, they've got these mantras of pledging allegiance. You know, it's a republic.
Derek Kreider:There's freedom. There are all of these these things that are wrapped up in it. And so, you know, there's there's this idea that you have to honor, express gratitude, and obtain some benefit, which reminds me so much of the Lord's prayer. You know?
Dr. Kalantzis:Our
Derek Kreider:Father who art in heaven, you know, give us our daily bread, all that stuff. But what's what's really fascinating to me is that I'm I'm a Protestant. And as an evangelical Protestant, I've a reformed Protestant, I've heard a lot of people speaking against Catholicism for for most of my life, and and, the Orthodox Church now that I'm here in Romania. And they they say, you know, they have icons in their church. That's idolatry.
Derek Kreider:There's no distinction between veneration and worship. Veneration is worship. And then you get to the flag, and you get to these other emblems of the United States. And all of a sudden, it seems like there is a distinction for a lot of evangelical conservative protestants between veneration and worship. They just only make that distinction when it comes to to the state.
Derek Kreider:So I'd love for you to maybe expound a little bit on, you know, is this just veneration? Are people just venerating these these symbols, or is this worship? Like, how would you distinguish that?
Dr. Kalantzis:I don't think it's actually only veneration. If it was such a distinction, veneration rather than worship, then one would not kill on behalf of that that one venerates, not worships. That's different. 1 would not put oneself in the place of being killed for that. Right?
Dr. Kalantzis:So what do we see here? We see what we call Christian nationalism. We see, in other words, worship misplaced. It it may, in a theoretical level, in some abstract concept, be, conceptually do you see how many qualifiers I put there? Treated as respect.
Dr. Kalantzis:We wouldn't use the word veneration because it it seems very Catholic or orthodox rather than worship. Yet the action itself and the length we use is of worship. We sacrifice at the altar of freedom. That's worship language. Right?
Dr. Kalantzis:As you said, the apple theosies, that we have from from our currency to our stature here, right, That's not veneration. That's worship. And how do you know that? I dare somebody to deface that. Then will you see what you actually worship?
Derek Kreider:Yeah. Exactly.
Dr. Kalantzis:And and we see that everywhere. January 6th a few years ago here in the United States was a prime example of that. Right? And and we forget that the veneration, John of Damascus in his homilies, in defense of the icon, veneration is a different order of relationship than worship is. Why?
Dr. Kalantzis:Because I worship the one who actually is, as John says, the Damascene says. That is god. Right? I venerate the one whose example or whose person or the story or, I respect. But I don't kill for the one I respect.
Derek Kreider:Oh, that's a great distinction. Yeah. I like that. You know, it's it's talking about this. There are a lot of ways that I think we are are too hard on people from ancient times, you know, thinking that they're just these these ignorant barbarians who did stupid things like bow down to, you know, graven images, when we're doing something similar there.
Derek Kreider:But there's there's another way that I feel like I've seen, sacralism kind of pop up a bit. And it was I think it was Hannah Arendt. She wrote a bunch of different, political works. But in one of those works, she talked about how the United States was was really centered around this this mythology of origin, like, a foundation. And it was it was really fascinating to me because as I was trying to figure out what, what topics I was gonna do in regard to religion and the state and things, I came across 2 ancient documents, the Donation of Constantine and the Marvels of Rome.
Derek Kreider:And both of those documents were used in in different ways. But they were basically propaganda pieces. And the way that they functioned was they said, okay. Here's, you know, The Marvels of Rome was was the most interesting one to me because it's basically saying, you know, like, that you've got you've got Noah building his, his wall around Rome. And, you know, so Rome and Noah are associated the patriarchs.
Derek Kreider:And you're like, that's just so ridiculous that you need you need an origin story of that magnitude to justify, you know, who you are as a people. Yet it seems like, the more I study about American history and the things that we don't want to come to light, about our past and the things that we do highlight and the hills that we want to die on in order to protect certain ideas about our origins. I'm I'm coming more to the realization that we're really not different than the ancients in regard to our origin stories. It's just we think our origin stories are more believable than Noah building a wall around our city. So maybe you could talk a little bit about what is the role of, of origins and and why are foundations' origins really a part of sacralism and important for the social bonding?
Dr. Kalantzis:Well, Elizabeth Castelli has a great book called, Martindon and Memory. And and she deals with the the very concept of how narrative storytelling, forms people into the people they are. It's it's a wonderful book, and I highly suggest. And she has a section, in the beginning of the book on myth history fact. Right?
Dr. Kalantzis:And as she goes through the story of of myth. We we use the word myth as fantasy, as Disney, as something that comes out of, you know, imagination. But myths throughout the his human history is storytelling that has a purpose. And Casselli says very quickly very, clearly. Myth, myth speaking mythologically, has a purpose, and that purpose is to unify the past so as to provide a unified present or a hopeful unified future.
Dr. Kalantzis:In other words, we tell stories that unite the past into the people we want to be today and in the future. That's how storytelling works. Romans had the same thing. Ancient Greeks had the same thing. Sumerians had the same thing.
Dr. Kalantzis:Everyone has the same thing. Why are who we are today because of here where we're coming from? Was the this not great? We have a great story. Nobody begins well.
Dr. Kalantzis:Well, we were a bunch of idiots who knew nothing about nothing, and whoop. Here we are today. Like, that that's not how this works. It says, we were humble in our beginnings. Tribes were disunited, but there was this figure or these figures who was the aid of the gods united us and turned us towards the blessing of those gods.
Dr. Kalantzis:So as we can worship properly and well, the gods or the god or whatever that is, who then bestowed upon us virtue, power, success, continuity, a 1000 years of success as the Romans had by the time of Jesus or the early church. Right? And, therefore, we are in a close connection with those gods or that god or that deity in a proper way. When when we come to the time of the early church or the Jesus and the first post apostolic period, Rome has been Rome for a 1000 years. It has been wrong for 800 to a 1000 years.
Dr. Kalantzis:By the time of this Augustan or the Julian period, they're the greatest empire that has existed. Why? Well, because the gods showed their favor on us. Why? Because there were these 2 brothers who united us around the worship of those gods, and therefore, the favor of the gods came to us.
Dr. Kalantzis:That that's how origin stories work. Right? And the purpose the idea is that we unite them as a people. So today, to have a unified out of a unified past, a unified present, we are not going to go against that narrative because if we do, then we run the risk of incurring the wrath of the gods or the, with withholding of blessing from the gods.
Derek Kreider:Yeah. I think it was it was actually on page 1 of your book. You, you said something to the extent that narratives are character formative.
Dr. Kalantzis:That's right.
Derek Kreider:And that's just something that it seems hard for me as an individual American. I think it's it's very difficult for a lot of Westerners and especially Americans who think that we're individualists to to feel like we're reliant on these symbols and on these narratives to define us because I define myself.
Dr. Kalantzis:Well, maybe. It it it's almost like think about the what is the quintessential American locus place on the mall? Right? Every teenager goes to the mall to be an individual. Right?
Dr. Kalantzis:And everybody comes out looking the same. Why? Because the stores are owned by, like, 4 companies. All the stores. Myriads of stores are, like, 4 or 5 companies.
Dr. Kalantzis:Right? That's the idea. So we have a narrative of individualism, which is the key ingredient of the enlightenment, but we actually don't function like that. And if if the last few years, call them 6, 10, whatever you wanna bracket them, 20 years have shown us here in the US is how storytelling forms us into groups of people who have separate identities. If you if one is consuming the Fox News ecosystem versus the MSNBC or CNN or whatever else, ecosystem, these are not 2 the same groups of understanding how history works and how local I mean, current events actually function.
Dr. Kalantzis:We inhabit 2 different worlds in the same neighborhood because of storytelling. But even further back into into the story of origins. Right? We speak here in the US of the founding fathers as Christians or Judeo Christians. I don't know when the Judeo came into the Christian thing, but Judeo Christian value.
Dr. Kalantzis:Right? Who are the founding fathers? Well, late 18th century landed aristocrats. So what about 16/19? So what about 2 centuries before that?
Dr. Kalantzis:That's not the founding of our country? That's not part of our story? We suddenly just plopped into the 17 seventies? Is it a sui generis movement? And when you say when we say they're Christians or the country's founder of, you know, Christian values, what are you actually talking about?
Dr. Kalantzis:Forgiveness of debts? Love of enemy? Peace making? Meekness? Are are those not the Christian values on which Christian community is founded?
Dr. Kalantzis:What other Christian values are we talking about? But the narrative of this is a Christian nation has overtaken the reality of the story. And he has formed us into a people who see ourselves as therefore blessed by the God of the Christians because we have behaved in this particular way Without asking, what is this particular way? Slavery? The the Trail of Tears?
Dr. Kalantzis:The civil war? I mean, what what exactly is it that is Christian in this founding of this Christian nation?
Derek Kreider:Yeah. That, that reminds me of, jumping all over the place here, but it's it's good. That's right. Give give me a second just to find it. Yeah.
Derek Kreider:So you, so sacralism is something that, I think you highlight really well in your book that that fits right here. You're talking about ignoring certain parts of our past and, kind of highlighting the good things. But it it it does 2 essential things. I I think you say basically, in summary, you say that it it distracts us from the negative, and it also is able to dissipate guilt. So it can give us a a sense of control and a sense of absolution.
Derek Kreider:Yeah. So we have security and control when we're part of a unified group. We feel secure in that group. But we also have absolution, and and that guilt can be diffused among all of society rather than being born by me, the individual. So for example, when the US came together around the flag after 911, you know, I felt invigorated.
Derek Kreider:And I was part of a group. And even though we were attacked, like, you know, we were we were good, and and we weren't gonna be able to be kept down. So I had I had some peace from that. But, conversely, after the unjust invasion of Iraq, I didn't feel guilty. Even though Mhmm.
Derek Kreider:I I had voted for Bush, I didn't feel guilty over a a problematic invasion of Iraq that killed 100 of 1,000, tens of thousands of people, because I didn't order the invasion. So I was able to have my guilt kind of assuaged a bit through that. Yeah. So maybe you could talk a little bit more kind of, I I know you expounded on slavery and and kind of our history and and that kind of stuff. But maybe you could talk a little bit more about the function of of sacralism and group identity in helping us to dissipate, that guilt and give us a sense of control.
Dr. Kalantzis:And the example that you used is a very good example. It's not the only example. Think about, manifest destiny. Right? The movements westwards, the imperial colonization of, let's say, the Philippines and everything else in between, or the the the the continuous expansion of the the American empire throughout the 20th century, especially, from World War 2.
Dr. Kalantzis:Right? Not my fault. I didn't participate in that. Yet I drive on roads that come that are created by the funds that come from that, or the current debate of I don't have slaves. My family didn't have slaves.
Dr. Kalantzis:Why am I guilty for slavery? Right? That's guilt is dissipated into that. Have we noticed in the Lord's prayer that the petition to forgive our sins is in the plural? And forgive us our sins as we forgive those who trespass against us, who sin against us.
Dr. Kalantzis:See, the scriptures one of the things that English the trick that English plays on us is that we're not an inflected language. We don't have, for us, the the the singular and the plural second person is the same. You. You. Singular and plural.
Dr. Kalantzis:In the New Testament, in Greek, it's vastly different. It's plural and singular, differently different 2 different words. The vast majority of the New Testament with a very few personal exceptions is plural. It's not singular. Therefore, the understanding of seen as communal, as social, and therefore the results of that as a social expression in which I participate in that group identity are ever present.
Dr. Kalantzis:In our linguistic idiom, that is also dissipated both by the idea that at some place, I'm responsible for the system even though I voted for the system or I participate in the system or I benefit in the system or whatever. And it's not my doing. It's somebody else's doing. So I rarely question, where do my tax dollars go? Who needs the shirt that I wear?
Dr. Kalantzis:Where it come from? That's part of the social responsibility that somehow I'm trying to avoid? Because if I start asking those questions, then I cannot escape the responsibility. What do I do as a citizen of a country that has responsibility for the outward and the inward expression, foreign policy and domestic policy of the government I support. Am I responsible for it?
Dr. Kalantzis:Or my responsibility ends after I cast my vote? Do is my place as a Christian to hold the state accountable both as an individual and as a collective law church, capital t, capital c? The government, many of our friends are quick to point, government is appointed by God. But government is appointed by by God for a particular purpose, and that is to enact the justice of God. Right?
Dr. Kalantzis:Not not any justice anywhere. The justice of God. So what is the purpose of the church? Purpose of the church is to hold governments accountable to the justice for which they have been appointed. That's not their justice.
Dr. Kalantzis:That is the justice of god. So when when in a in a narrative that tells me that I am somehow separated from the civic religion that is our life together, the the the sacredness of the space that we occupy together. Even the very fact that we argue we could argue some of us could argue that perhaps we have transformed secular and sacred as 2 different domains when they never were. Then that absolves me of responsibility for which I should be, fully accountable. In a in a second edition of this book, Caesar and the Lambda, it's coming out in a year's time or so, less than a year from now, I had an addendum.
Dr. Kalantzis:I play, out with the idea of penance, the medieval concept of penance for those who come back from military campaigns, and I add to that civic administration. Throughout the history of the church, there was an understanding that war is traumatic. We're coming again back to this Afro Vietnam War after, you know, desert storm and etcetera. Now we we have language to use PTSD in other in in other. But in medieval times, they didn't have that.
Dr. Kalantzis:Or in late antique time, they didn't have that vocabulary. But what they knew, as Basil of Caesarea, the bishop said, is that bloody hands cannot come to the Eucharist. So they had a period of time for penance where where combatants would need to be it was not punitive. It it was it was pastoral care. Need to work through confession and and and and pastoral care, to come to cleanse themselves, to come back to to the table.
Dr. Kalantzis:And I play with the idea. I wanna propose for us, especially as evangelicals, a reimagining of that category and of that practice in which those who come back from military campaigns, we don't throw parades for them as churches, but we rather welcome them into a period of penance. Not just them, but we invite ourselves as churches to enter that period of penance with them. Why? Because it's our action or inaction that made it requirement for them to go to war.
Dr. Kalantzis:Do do you see how this works?
Derek Kreider:Yeah. No. I I think that's that's beautiful, the action or inaction, because I think it's it's very easy. You know, if you if you, you know, go one route and you vote and and do all of this stuff, you can say, well, I I did my job. But if you abstain, you can say, well, I didn't, you know, I didn't participate in contributing to this war.
Derek Kreider:But but, really, it's, it's all of us as a collective responsibility that that Yeah.
Dr. Kalantzis:I mean, there's no more clear example than the Kuwait desert zone. Well, it's now it's entering history, but it's, like, 30 years ago. Right? Half a 1000000 troops gathered at the borders of Kuwait to what? What was the excuse?
Dr. Kalantzis:Restore freedom? And I remember Cornel West asked a question. So if if the product of Kuwait was not oil, but chrysanthemums, would we have invaded?
Derek Kreider:Yeah. Of course.
Dr. Kalantzis:No. I mean, the answer is, like, clearly not. Right? If if they produce artichokes and chrysanthemums, we will not have invaded. We will not have sent half a 1000000 troops in.
Dr. Kalantzis:But why did we send them in? Because I wanna drive a car that consumes, you know, a lot of gas, but I wanna pay cheaply for it. Like, I I want cheap gas for my big car so I send people to war.
Derek Kreider:And I Iraqi lives were cheap
Dr. Kalantzis:That's right.
Derek Kreider:For for us. Yeah.
Dr. Kalantzis:And our lives. I mean, and American lives were cheap. American lives were cheap. Iraqi lives were were cheap. Afghani lives were cheap.
Dr. Kalantzis:Right? Syrian lives are cheap. Migrant lives are less than cheap. Why? Because I want to have fruit, you know, produce that is very cheap, inexpensive.
Dr. Kalantzis:So am I not culpable for that?
Derek Kreider:Yeah. So one of the one of the things that, that was touched on quite a bit there was, in regard to we had mentioned voting a number of times. So I I'd really like to I'd like to talk about voting as a from kind of 2 angles. One angle is voting as a sacral act. You know, in in the book, you mentioned you have a quote, you say, the piety of the Roman was civic, communal, and public, which is why Roman society grew increasingly suspicious of religious practices that advocated the role of personal belief, private piety, and secret rituals.
Derek Kreider:So you think about voting. Yeah. And, to me, it seems like a very clearly sacral act. You go in. You, you get a sticker.
Derek Kreider:You plop that sticker on. You put it on social media. And right? I I participated. And, I abstained from the last election.
Derek Kreider:And from the election before, I voted for, like, a third party candidate. And when I voted for the 3rd party candidate, you know, that would people didn't like that. They they thought I was being immoral for throwing my vote away. But, man, when I abstained, they they just, like I mean, that is immoral to, to to do that. Yeah.
Dr. Kalantzis:I hear that.
Derek Kreider:So I would love, for you to talk a little bit about Yeah. The sacral act of voting. If you agree with that.
Dr. Kalantzis:If you agree that it's Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. It it is because primarily because it is one of those binding, public acts that we do as society.
Dr. Kalantzis:I'll start by saying that I I always vote. I always I stand on the 1st Tuesday morning of November, 5:30 in the morning, I go to my, to the high school down here, stand in line, get my ballot, and I always vote exactly the same way. None of the above. I I I I I don't do, you know, Jesus or Mickey Mouse or, you know, whoever because that's just silly. In in European societies and others, we have a long tradition of the protest vote, the blank vote, as an option, and those are always tabulated at the end and shown as the result.
Dr. Kalantzis:In the US, we don't have that. We have a forced choice between 2 options that, I'm gonna use the word the system in quotation marks, has already presented to us as the only 2 viable options. Rarely a third one, never to be considered seriously, simply as a spoiler. But that very act of choosing between the lesser of 2 evils is still choosing evil. Do you see?
Dr. Kalantzis:But I always participate by going in and rejecting that option. None of the above. Why? Because then I cannot be accused of, well, you were too lazy to go and vote, or you don't take this seriously. I take it very, very seriously.
Dr. Kalantzis:I take it more seriously than the peer pressure or the community pressure of voting for this for x, y, and z reasons or that one for the other a, b, and c reasons. Right? If I have to choose between 2 evils, I choose no evil. Now okay. What did you gain by doing that?
Dr. Kalantzis:Well, in my little one vote way, nothing other than the right to be part in the discussions, political discussions when we talk about our common life together. Because if you sit on my couch and go, nah. Better sleep another half hour. I haven't earned the right to speak. Right?
Dr. Kalantzis:I have stood in line. I have rejected in public the the options that have been given to me. But imagine if, like, 50,000,000 evangelicals did this. If 50,000,000 evangelicals or however many we are, went into the voting booth and wrote none of the above. Not Jesus, not Mickey Mouse, not, you know, none of the above.
Dr. Kalantzis:Wouldn't somebody notice that? And one may not affect that election cycle because those will be taken aside and but but what about the next one? Have you noticed that we, evangelicals, are now a marketable block? How will the evangelicals vote? Right?
Dr. Kalantzis:You go, wait wait a minute. What? This is a marketable group to whom we need to create this set of language and advertisement and appeals so that they may support our narrative and our candidate for our benefit. It's no different than Coke does and, you know, beer companies do. It's the same exact idea.
Dr. Kalantzis:You have the, what, 18 to 24 demographic. You have the 30 to 50 demographic. You have the evangelicals. It's the same thing. Right?
Dr. Kalantzis:But what would happen if evangelicals, Christians, those who claim, you know, the lordship of Christ, said none of this is acceptable for a simple reason. None of them is enacting the justice of God.
Derek Kreider:Yeah. What you, what you said there, that was that line of thinking is exactly what kind of what got me down this path. When, in the 2016 election, when it finally hit me that, man, I you know, I'm I'm choosing between a lesser evil. And then it, you know, it struck me that, well, that's not really a Christian ethic to do that, is
Dr. Kalantzis:it? Gotcha.
Derek Kreider:So there has to there has to be some moral option. What what is what is my moral option? And when I started going down that route, you know, I I just I recognized how steeped inconsequentialist ethics, we evangelicals are, even though we we talk about integrity and doing the right thing no matter what it costs you. That just that just isn't how it really plays out for our moral ethic, it seems.
Dr. Kalantzis:No. Because most of our yearning for 50, 70 years, and there are a lot of books that have been written recently on that, and one can find them and pursue them. The history of evangelicalism where or I worked in the last after the second World War has singularly been about power. It hasn't been about justice. It has been about power, political power, social power, economic power, academic power, whatever power.
Dr. Kalantzis:But it has been about power. So I'm gonna vote for the one who's going to give me more power. Right? I I even heard that famous or, you know, evangelical leader leader who's in the evangelical world say, we are tired of being the punching bag. And I was about to, you know, send him a bible and ask him to highlight where that actually principle comes from.
Dr. Kalantzis:Like, no one has read Paul's description of his own life. No one has read the light. Like, Jesus? I mean, the idea of that we are tired of being a punching bag is so anti Christian as to be singularly pagan. It's idolatry.
Dr. Kalantzis:Because fundamentally, it dismisses the sovereignty of Christ.
Derek Kreider:I couldn't agree more. I wanna try to wrap this up in the next, 10 minutes. So I've got 2 more questions for you.
Dr. Kalantzis:Okay.
Derek Kreider:And you can take take as long as you want, on them. But these are the last 2. One of the one of the things that kind of, that struck me in here was, you had a quote, that says, you know, Roman religion was not concerned with distinguishing true from false beliefs. It was simply the proper behavior that characterized the life of the Roman citizen. And, you know, when I when I I try to think about how I would use to think about these sorts of things when I when I'm doing this conversation, and just I think 10 years ago, I would feel like, okay, yeah, maybe, you know, maybe saying a pledge of allegiance every day in school is a little crazy.
Derek Kreider:It's a little bit too much. But I'd still I think I would struggle with this idea that, I really am am idolatrous to a certain extent. And I think that's because it seems to me like evangelicalism, a lot of times, tends to be so much about orthodoxy and and, I mean, hence, all the denominationalism. But it's so much about right belief and a lot less about right practice. But one of the things that that stuck out to me when I first started studying propaganda, reading Jacques Ellul, and and his book on propaganda, he said, look, propagandists, they don't care what you believe.
Derek Kreider:They care what you do.
Dr. Kalantzis:And so
Derek Kreider:he he, you know, he gives the example. He he can say, you can say all you want that, you're not you don't believe their propaganda. But if you go out and buy their product, they don't care what you believe. And and so we have sort of these 2 sets, these things that we say we believe and these things that we show we believe, which is is akin to, you know, what James tells us. I'd love for you in just a couple of minutes, which I don't know if that's possible, but to talk a little bit about all this sacralism that we talked about, how does that fit in with with our problem with orthopraxy and our elevation of of orthodoxy?
Derek Kreider:How does the sacralism get us to do things that we say we don't believe in?
Dr. Kalantzis:Religio was to bind together for the Romans, put the Greeks and the Romans. Right? To bind a community together. So it was based on practices. In the last 1800 years, he has transitioned from, from a social binding together to an interiorization.
Dr. Kalantzis:It's about what you believe up here that's clearly can be seen happening in the 15th century 16th centuries. Right? So from a social orthopraxis, right, how do you know I'm a Christian by the way I live my life, to how do you know I'm a Christian by what I confess with my mouth. Right? That movement then led to a privatization of religion.
Dr. Kalantzis:And if religion is private, then religion is relative. You know, your religion, my religion, doesn't matter as long as we, you know, do this thing together. So the full circle comes around, which is the social thing together. Yeah. I leave you in peace.
Dr. Kalantzis:You leave me in peace. We, you know, we have a good fence in our yards, and and we're good. Right? The movement to creed all confessions are signs of who we are rather than lived out faith is also part of an a linguistic narrative. Because in English, we have Latin from Latin English, especially, we have two words that sound as different, belief and faith.
Dr. Kalantzis:In Greek, is the root word for both. Faith. Is what the Latin would have. Right? Every Roman general, the elevation of the commission will have a ring with the word on it.
Dr. Kalantzis:The emperor doesn't care what gods you worship. It's are you faithful? Belief is faithfulness. Is. Right?
Dr. Kalantzis:Faith is faithfulness. How do I know your faith by the way you work your life? I play another game with my students to say, take your index finger and point to the part of your body where faith resides. And they go, you know, okay. My head.
Dr. Kalantzis:Okay. I'll just go all my heart. Great. I'll just go. I had no idea what you're talking about.
Dr. Kalantzis:But I always lead them to to see that, actually, they should be pointed at the bottom of their feet. How you walk your life. Right? Now here's the difference. For the Romans and propagandists and the American every civil system, I really don't care which god you worship or any god as long as you do the proper things when we all do them together.
Dr. Kalantzis:Right? Your taxes, you know, stand for the national anthem, and, you know, do whatever it is that we do together to say we're one people. Right? Go to the fireworks on 4th July. Like, the things we do as one people.
Dr. Kalantzis:But for the Christian, it's the other way around. I do the things I do because I belong to the god whom I confess with my mouth. It's a difference between, I would say, theologically, etiology and teleology. The Romans dig things together to be one people. Christians do things particular things because there are these kind of people.
Derek Kreider:Oh, that's, that's really fascinating because, you know, the the conclusion, that I've I've drawn and kind of the culmination of of the season is, I'm not just looking at propaganda, but I want to look at, okay, well, what does what does that mean for us positively? How do we act? And my conclusion has been that, you know, the answer to, to propaganda is discipleship. I think discipleship is is the antithesis of of propaganda. Yeah.
Derek Kreider:But at the same time, sometimes it's hard to distinguish because if you're saying, well, the antithesis of propaganda is to get yourself in an echo chamber in a community that is going to teach you the right things. That just sounds like alternative forms of propaganda. But the way that you just described that is in in the direction of where you start from, that seems like it makes a very big difference in in propaganda versus discipleship.
Dr. Kalantzis:Absolutely. Why do Christians feed the hungry? Because that's what Christians do. That that's etiology. Right?
Dr. Kalantzis:That's. Why why are Christians peacekeepers, peacemakers? Because that's what Christians do. Right? Not not so that we may have peace in society.
Dr. Kalantzis:That's teleology. Right? So Christian peacemaking would be interested or begin in justice, in in the protection of the oppressed, in standing against the oppressor. Right? Hopefully, bringing oppressor and oppressed together in a amicable peaceful resolution.
Dr. Kalantzis:If not, the Christian doesn't stand in the gap in the middle between oppressed and oppressed, worried and afraid about the violence inflicted upon oneself. Why do nations engage in peacemaking so that they may have profit. Prosperity, profit. It's the same thing. Those are 2 different things.
Dr. Kalantzis:2 completely different things. And that's what we forget propagatists or in any sense, state civil religion wants you to behave in a particular way regardless of who you are. Christians flipped that and said, because I am who I am, I behave this particular way.
Derek Kreider:And that that last 5 minutes is is gold for me. It's just it's helping to make so many connections, and, I I appreciate that insight.
Dr. Kalantzis:What's the other question that you had? So yeah.
Derek Kreider:And last question for you. How do we fix this? Where where where do we go from here? How do we how do how do Christians unpropagandize themselves? How do I unpropagandize myself?
Derek Kreider:And then step 2, how do I then, in my community, help us to to see these things and, change direction?
Dr. Kalantzis:Yeah. The the first principle, the first step in peacemaking is to see the problem, to see the conflict, recognize it as conflict. The first step in this discussion is to recognize the problem. And the problem is that we have we're more deeply affected by civic religious formation than by religious formation. The state in all its instrument the capital t, capital s state.
Dr. Kalantzis:Right? Not the state of that. The state has a lot more influence on us than the church does the gospel does. And last game I use in class is I ask students to close their eyes, and I give them about 10 minutes for the giggles to go. Well, then I say, I want you to paint paint a picture.
Dr. Kalantzis:I'll give you 20 seconds. If you project yourself out 15 years, let's say, it's easy to do. They're 20 years old. They can do that. Look.
Dr. Kalantzis:What does success look like? Paint a picture. And I give them about 20 minute 20 seconds. They don't need more than that. For most of them, immediately, they have an image in their head.
Dr. Kalantzis:Right? They're university students. They go, I know what it looks like. And then I asked them. I don't ask them for that image.
Dr. Kalantzis:That's their own. Who gave you that image? Who formed for you that that is what success looks like? Your family, your community, movies, the mall, somebody framed for you and says, this is what success looks like. Right?
Dr. Kalantzis:That's discipleship. So how do we fix this? How do we address this? As churches, we take discipleship back from a methodology to a way of life. The book of common prayer has a practice that my church engages in that I find extremely annoying annoying and and irritatingly difficult to do.
Dr. Kalantzis:And that is and it has the words right there. It forces me to pray by name for those in authority. Whether I agree with them or not, it forces me by name to pray for president so and so and governor so and so. That forces me to move outside of my likes and dislikes and to pray for the one who is in that seat of authority who enact the justice of God. That's discipline, and I'm not good at it.
Dr. Kalantzis:So every Sunday, I have to be forced by my church in writing to enter it. And slowly, the animus goes away, and slowly, the dislike goes away. And slowly, the petition for the good of the person and the good of the office comes in. And slowly, I'm asking the question, so what is my role in this? Then slowly, I'm starting to say, well, can I then live in that place, drive that car, and wear this shirt?
Dr. Kalantzis:It's a slow process, but it has to be given the recognition that Christians do not act the way we do so that society may change, But we act and behave the way we do because of who we are, regardless of the other social pressures that force us to make choices. If you end up with 2 bad choices, there's always a third one. I don't have to accept the 2 choices. I have to look for the third one. And the third one may be none of the above.
Derek Kreider:Good stuff. So, essentially, we we maintain faithfulness and trust God for effectiveness.
Dr. Kalantzis:Yeah. Yeah. We're not called by nowhere in scripture are we called to change society. What we're called to is to let the holy spirit change us. That's the end.
Dr. Kalantzis:That that's the beginning. That's the end. That's it. That's the game.
Derek Kreider:Right. Well, thank you so much. I appreciate you you giving up an hour of your your valuable time, especially this time of year. It meant a lot, and it helped me and, I know to help other people too.
Dr. Kalantzis:Thank you. It was a pleasure, honor to be with you.
Derek Kreider:That's all for now. So peace, and because I'm a pacifist, when I say it, I mean it. This podcast is a part of the Kingdom outpost network. Please check out the links below to find other great podcasts and content related to non violence and Kingdom living.
