A meeting of Interfaith Glasgow this week reflected on the nature and purpose of interfaith and the best way forward for interfaith relations in Glasgow. Some research has shown that the city has a number of small interfaith dialogue initiatives but many more multifaith projects dealing with issues such as poverty, destitution, the environment, for example. These are not interfaith projects as such. I would describe interfaith activity as a face to face activity which is a term used by Lord Jonathan Sacks. Its focus is on dialogue, on understanding one another, sharing insights about common concerns and in so doing breaking down barriers and prejudices. The other kind of interfaith activity Lord Sacks terms side by side and this focuses on common issues. This is an important activity and it is right that people of faith come together to promote justice and equality and work together for the common good. At the meeting this week there seemed to be a general consensus that this was the way forward for interfaith relations and a sense that it was better to do this than merely talk. it was accepted that working side by side encourages friendships between people of different faiths and can lead to greater understanding. While this is true i had some hesitancy about the general consensus.
in my experience voluntary organisations which focus on justice issues, many of which originated as Christian charities, wish to widen their membership and involvement to include people of different faiths. They go to faith communities to invite them to get involved but ...... the agenda often belongs to the organisation and is not necessarily a priority for the religions that are being invited to get involved; and often it is the same people who are being approached so that faith communities, which on the whole are small, are overstretched. If an organisation or project is to be genuinely multifaith then the agenda has to emerge from the common concern of people of different faiths. Because we live in a multifaith world many institutions, public, private and voluntary are multifaith because people of different faiths work in them and as colleagues develop friendships. So multifaith involvement is in a way integral to society and does not need a special group or committee to do this.
Face to face is less popular and less understood. Why just talk( which includes listening)? Often it is the talk about important issues that concern us all, that focuses on our common values, on what it means to live a good life, on the place of religion in society that allows religious people to play their part in the public square. It is talk that helps us explore one another's faith, that helps us understand what it is like to stand in one another's shoes, that shows us how limited and subjective is our own perspective, that challenges our own faith. It is our talk which develops the kind of relationship that helps us have the difficult conversations about areas of difference and sometimes even of conflict. Without the talk these difficult conversations cannot take place. And yet these conversations are necessary if the world is to become a safer place.
in my experience voluntary organisations which focus on justice issues, many of which originated as Christian charities, wish to widen their membership and involvement to include people of different faiths. They go to faith communities to invite them to get involved but ...... the agenda often belongs to the organisation and is not necessarily a priority for the religions that are being invited to get involved; and often it is the same people who are being approached so that faith communities, which on the whole are small, are overstretched. If an organisation or project is to be genuinely multifaith then the agenda has to emerge from the common concern of people of different faiths. Because we live in a multifaith world many institutions, public, private and voluntary are multifaith because people of different faiths work in them and as colleagues develop friendships. So multifaith involvement is in a way integral to society and does not need a special group or committee to do this.
Face to face is less popular and less understood. Why just talk( which includes listening)? Often it is the talk about important issues that concern us all, that focuses on our common values, on what it means to live a good life, on the place of religion in society that allows religious people to play their part in the public square. It is talk that helps us explore one another's faith, that helps us understand what it is like to stand in one another's shoes, that shows us how limited and subjective is our own perspective, that challenges our own faith. It is our talk which develops the kind of relationship that helps us have the difficult conversations about areas of difference and sometimes even of conflict. Without the talk these difficult conversations cannot take place. And yet these conversations are necessary if the world is to become a safer place.
RSS Feed
