While in seminary, I facilitated an interfaith house group in Los Angeles twice a month. It mainly involved seminarians of different traditions. We came together to discuss various theological topics. I set an agenda and the time was organic but focused. We shared religious holidays with one another sometimes, but discussion was unquestionably our mainstay.
When I arrived in Austin, Texas, fresh out of seminary, I set out to build another house group. At first, the group involved a few of us who were accustomed to discussing our faith with other traditions. As the group grew and now includes people new to dialogue, I have noticed the group’s gravitation toward experiences rather than pure discussion. Films and events have covered most of our meetings for the past few months, with intriguing cultural conversations in between, such as discussing the topic of the way our traditions are portraying in American mainstream media.
Now that it has been a few months, there seems to be a greater pull toward discussion topics. I am curious what my fellow house group members would say about this, but my perception is that there were enough members who were new to dialogue that those common experiences allowed for feeling out the group as an increasingly safer space. Now it seems the group is ready for more discussion with continued accompanying experiences. I am both excited and sense the group is ready for this as engaging and non-threatening! This is the type of space that allows for God’s presence and transformation of all present in the conversation.
I am curious to see if, in hindsight, this group’s preference of initial common experiences will affect the way I facilitate dialogues when piecing non-clergy groups together to try their hands at dialogue for the first time. Should common experiences serve as an orientation into eventual theological dialogue, or is it different with every group? I look forward to learning about this over time through further experiences.
No comments:
Post a Comment