Interfaith Dialogue

Conflict often emerges from assuming differences and ignoring similarities. Asserting irreconcilable differences between oneself and anyone else and ignoring the similarities to life’s experience is both very common and very dangerous. Any predetermined perception of others upsets the future of that relationship in an equitable way to the effect of stereotypes on racism and sexism. Exposure to other faiths can cause confusion and doubt about own own religion. But, however we react to our differences, there will be no progression without embracing both our similarities and our differences and engaging them. We are called to interfaith dialogue.

Interfaith dialogue is both an organized activity and a mindset for daily interaction. The daily mindset of interfaith dialogue is simply applying the principles of interfaith dialogue to daily conversations and exploring opportunities to learn about other faiths. Organized interfaith dialogue involves exploring each other’s faith in a respectful environment. It usually consists of a small group of people sharing with each other but it can be equally valuable with as few as two people or as a large group. The dominant principles of interfaith dialogue have been separately laid down in two documents. The first is Raimon Paniffar’s Intrareligious Dialogue and the second is Leonard Swidler’s “Dialogue Decalogue.”

It must be made clear at the outset that interfaith dialogue is not a watering down of religion; neither is it an assimilation of religions. In past years, the meeting of Catholics and Protestants, for example, has been under the pretense of defeating an opponent or, at the very most, to learn more about others so that we can navigate around them. The purpose of interfaith dialogue, however, is to cultivate understanding of other faiths and to enrich our own religious experience giving us a deeper connection to our faith.

Pannikar’s Intrareligious Dialogue begins with the “Sermon on the Mount of Intrareligious Dialogue.” It begins with the statement: “When you enter into an intrareligious dialogue, do not think beforehand what you have to believe.” Pannikar’s statement is a reaction to the defensive attitude that is often employed when entering into conversation with a person from a different faith tradition and he is very careful in his wording. Often, our first idea is that we should solidly establish what we need to believe before we talk to someone who we assume will disagree with us. We feel threatened and whomever we are talking to can sense our discomfort.

Swidler’s “Dialogue Decalogue” places a lot of emphasis on approaching dialogue without assumptions of where the disagreements are. It is up to the member of a faith to define their own faith; no one can define a religion with which they do not identify themselves. Dialogue can only take place between equals that are completely honest and sincere with each other and share in mutual trust.

The summation of Pannikar’s view is seen when we writes that “any human problem today that is not seen in pluri-cultural parameters is already methodologically wrongly put.” We can no longer discuss social justice or write about interfaith relations without considering the variety of perspectives from which the issue can be seen. Thus, the global implications of interfaith dialogue are extensive. The influence that it could have on international relations and economics are enormous.

Both Panikkar and Swidler have judged the interfaith movement to require interfaith engagement to an extent that makes many people uncomfortable. The furthest stages of each outlined journey of interfaith dialogue include s the engagement of other religions from within. The idea of trying Buddhist meditation may seem perfectly harmless to many people, but it is important to consider that even such a simple act is difficult for many people to accept. The goal is not to create in everyone a desire to change their religion or make everyone believe that every path is the right path. Rather, the goal is to show that everyone walks their spiritual path for similar reasons and to accept the value of other’s journey.

Sincerity in Dialogue

During the discussions of the Student Interfaith Council, one of the biggest concerns of the members regarding interfaith dialogue is sincerity. To fully understand this difficulty, consider a monotheistic (belief in one god, i.e. Islam, Judaism, Christianity, etc.) person who believes one religion to be the only true religion. For some, this may be a sensible place to start in interfaith dialogue because it can be a very significant time in a person’s spiritual development. However, no one should be so concerned that they decide never to engage in dialogue.

The comfort level of the participants can be aided by an understanding of both the necessity and the value of interfaith dialogue. Interfaith dialogue can be established as a reasonable necessity to live out one’s faith with honesty and integrity. Anyone who attributes their beliefs to a particular religion in one way or another believes it to be true. At some point, a choice is made to either pursue the truth of religious experience or to attach to a particular idea of truth and never question it.

The second option is valuable, but there comes a difficulty when that simplicity is expected of others. The first option reflects a deeper connection to our own faith because it implies a critical engagement with it. Strong faith is highly valuable in the context of dialogue and that deep connection shows the value of faith in a life.

Interfaith dialogue should be viewed as a progression in faith because engaging in dialogue becomes as ambassadorial action. It is a growing concept and has been implemented all over the world to the benefits of its participants. The need for dialogue is greater now more than ever as information becomes more accessible and anyone can put forward intolerant messages for the world to read for free. Nothing could be better for the world than to engage the truth honestly, openly, and with complete integrity in the pursuit of peace.

-Garrett Seelinger

Interfaith Scholar 2006-2009

Founder and Editor of the Interfaith Review 2006-2009

Published in the Spring 2007 Issue of the Interfaith Review