Another Interfaith Member's Lens

Another Austin interfaith group member reflect on her first experience with an interfaith dialogue group:

"I have really enjoyed this interfaith group. It's an opportunity to talk with my friends about my faith in a very casual, open, friendly, and fun environment. I love it! And this group has also been a key instrument in helping me learn how to listen to others. It's been wonderful."

Interfaith Group Reflections

I recently asked my Austin interfaith group to reflect on their participation in their 1st interfaith group. Here is a response from one of the members. Are there parts of this reflection that resonate with you or appeal to you?


What are the upsides and the challenges?

An upside to the group is that we are all girls. It would be great if gender did not interfere with group discussions but I can see how talking about something, like religion, and how personal it can be could, that gender interfere with the group dynamics. However, for some topics it would be interesting to get the male perspective. Fortunately, our group has not had any major conflicts other than scheduling conflicts. I do wish to see more individuals from other religions join the group because I would like to learn about their religions as well.

What do you find most valuable about the group?

At first I was a bit hesitant to join the interfaith group because I don’t consider myself a very religious person and was afraid that others may try to push their religious beliefs onto me or other group members. I was delighted to find that was not the case. I’ve been able to learn about different religions and their practices in a causal yet intellectually stimulating way. The group’s ability to discuss various religions, values, morals, and beliefs in an open manner without judgment is inspiring. It’s nice to know that even though there are a lot of religious conflicts, misrepresentations, and misunderstandings in the world that our group is able to join together and openly discuss these issues with respect for one another.

What are your hopes for the group as we continue to grow together and meet?

We have attended events, watched movies, and discussed cultural and religious beliefs. I have enjoyed looking at the religions’ similarities and differences. The cultural activities are the meetings that I find most enjoyable. It is interesting to see how people can misinterpret someone’s behaviors as something rooted in their religion when really it turns up being a cultural belief, plus there is always good food!

How Shall We Build Safe Spaces for Lay Dialogue?

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.

Friendship on the Margins, Marginal Friendship, or Something Else?

In the most recent issue of the Evangelical Interfaith Dialogue Journal, I wrote a review for Friendship at the Margins:Discovering Mutuality in Service and Mission. This book makes for intriguing reflection in light of a conversation I recently had with a dear friend of mine. She is a rabbi, and I am a pastor. While when we meet every few weeks for coffee, it is by default and not primarily intention that we are having an interfaith conversation. The more primary objectives of our conversations tend to focus most often on support for our respective leadership roles in religious communities. It is incredible how much easier it is to relate, at times, to leaders in other faith traditions than with laypersons in my own. The nature of religious leadership carries distinctions from other types of leadership, such as leadership roles in business. However, the nature of religious leadership does not appear to shift drastically from one faith to another so much as from one role to another.

My question then becomes this: Is my friendship with this rabbi missional because it is an authentic friendship outside of my own faith? Do the supportive intentions of our conversations, rather than the civil focus on theological distinctions, mean it is not missional? What does my friendship with this rabbi have to do with our respective understanding of and relationships with God?

Hospitality and Interfaith Dialogue

From Dr. Richard Mouw's Convicted Civility and Interfaith Dialogue article in our summer issue:
"True hospitality carries with it an element of vulnerability. When Jesus showed hospitality to people whose lifestyles and ideas he strongly opposed, it got him into trouble with the religious leaders of his own day: “The Pharisees and their scribes were complaining to his disciples, saying, ‘Why do you eat and drink with tax-collectors and sinners?’” (Luke 5:30). To be sure, those religious leaders were guilty of quite a bit of self-righteousness. But we can at least understand something of their concerns. When we show hospitality we are often taking some risks."

When I think of the word "hospitality" outside a theological context, images of hosts inviting guests into their homes appear in my mind's eye. I can see a family providing a homemade meal for friends passing through town. Fresh, clean towels and linens might await such guests. After getting cleaned up from travels, perhaps there is a good conversation in the living room while sipping on coffee or tea. What these image communicate are a warm generosity, implying hospitality as a happy gift to the guests, not the hosts. With these images, the definition of hospitality would imply it is in fact the host's honor to have the guests, though convention would say the honor is the other way around. After all, the guests are the ones getting free room and board. Thus, what hospitable hosts provide is anything but a power play; it is a kind of vulnerability in that it is a service.

Thus, when I prepare to shift this notion of hospitality into a more explicitly theological context, including interfaith dialogue, I find myself wondering what it looks like for my actions to show I am a servant, a person happy to give up a struggle for power or being right. I wonder in what ways this provides God space to teach all of us something about Himself.

Additionally, if we agree that God enters into such vulnerable conversations, I wonder what is involved with preparing our mindset and actions to be vulnerable in such interactions. Hosts do not act out of fear, safeguarding their house in case their honorable house guests decide to steal or damage their belongings. They say "My house is your house!" It might be a cliche, but its meaning is quite vulnerable. Thus, what does a commitment to this kind of hospitality look like for interfaith dialogue? In what other ways does the notion of hospitality help frame the importance of a certain disposition in dialogue? Are there aspects of hospitality that do not translate well into healthy dialogue?

Welcome to The Conversation

Evangelical Interfaith Dialogue has just launched its interactive blog, which allows people to interact with the content of the journal as well as other relevant content.