How to establish a productive interfaith dialogue

[Jon_Mallory]

I think most Protestant communions today acknowledge the need for at least some reliance on tradition, as well as Scripture, but there is enormous variation in how they view these. There is no one “Protestant episemology”. Orthodox churches rely on Scripture as well as tradition. The Catholic Church relies on Scripture, tradition and the magisterium. Some non-Catholic churches that don’t have a formal “magisterium” do have some current authority that will lead a focus on this or that aspect of Scripture or tradition. So there is a lot of potential common ground here. More important, all can trust in the Holy Spirit to guide them.

I agree that Christians across ecumenical lines rely on some common sources and may even hold to some of the same doctrines such as the Incarnation. The problem is that these things we agree upon cannot help us come to an agreement on the things we disagrees on such as grace, works, the Filioque, the role of Peter in the Church. Protestants, Catholics, and Orthodox all use the word grace but it means something different to each of them. For Protestants, grace is “imputed” whereas for Catholics it is “infused”. One has a juridical meaning and the other is more mystical. The Orthodox are even tougher. They speak of grace in terms of God’s uncreated energies (which I do not understand. If an Orthodox wants to explain this, feel more than welcome!). Hence, when these traditions debate about grace with one another, the talk past each other and not to each other because each rests on a certain set of unquestioned assumptions. In many of the Orthodox/Catholic threads, the debate goes on unresolved because the Orthodox believe one thing about the primacy of Peter and the Catholics another. Sometimes I’m tempted to throw up my hands and cry.

 

[Servant19]

The Church can condemn no one. But to answer your question, yes, the Church would hold that such a bishop was apostate. Presumably the bishop had known the truth and had traded the truth for a lie.

Faith, like truth, is not a matter of preference.

Yes but apostasy is not a condemnation to hell.

Therefore the belief that Jesus is God, or the primacy of Peter, or the nature of grace or the Filioque, and in fact all other non-empirically evidenced concepts are irrelevant to a productive interfaith dialogue.

These things have been tried, tried and tried again for centuries and we still have segregation, and disunity. Maybe its time to try something different?

Maybe trying something that is conducive to unity, commonality and collaboration is what really gives salvation?

Faith in God and what we should do as a response to that Faith is all that is needed for a productive advancement in global faith communities.



.

 

[Servant19]

We first need to consider what position we occupy in the general scheme of things.

I had the pleasure of a presentation by Msgr. Andrew V. Tanya-anan, Undersecretary of the Pontifical Council for Interreligious Dialogue, at the 2009 World Oblates’ Congress.

A brief summary of his thoughts based on the notes I took during his presentation: theological interfaith or ecumenical dialogue is well above our pay grade. The levels of dialogue are:

1. • Dialogue life: daily life, living with our neighbours. Being a Christian fanatic is not Christian. He gave as examples a mosque in Jakarta that was designed by a Catholic, living together in respect in areas where we share with other faiths;
   • Dialogue of action: joint projects, human solidarity; he gave as example working together for tsunami relief, running/building schools, hospitals, community services, etc.
   • Theological dialogue: this requires expertise, knowing who we are; these exchanges should occur at expert levels; he cited as an example the opening of dialogue with Saudi Arabia on the issue of places for Christians to pray, what had previously been a closed issue.
   • Dialogue of experience: an example is Thomas Merton visiting Buddhist monasteries, or when my wife and I attend each others’ services (she’s Anglican).
   At our level dialogue is not talk of beliefs, but respect of faith and its action in our lives. Dialogue is not proselytizing, and evangelization begins with leading a life of Christian witness in a manner that is consistent with the great Truths of our faith: i.e., walk the talk. We don’t start out with an intention to convert, but with deepening our own faith. He gave an example of focusing on core issues: in Coke, Pepsi and orange juice, the core “truth” at the center is pure water. A similar concept in religion would be the “Golden Rule”. That is the common ground for dialogue.
   
   We shouldn’t confuse political and spiritual issues but I think we can work together on joint projects, such as opposition to abortion (something not limited to Catholics!).
   
   He stated though, that we must avoid some risks in interfaith dialogue:
   • Relativism (all religions the same) that leads to loss of Christian identity;
   • Syncretism: everything mixes together, also with loss of identity;
   • Secularism: this one should be obvious
   • Indifferentism.
   Given the presenters credentials, this would appear to be the way the Vatican looks at interfaith dialogue. I think with ecumenical dialogue (i.e. between Christian Churches and denominations), we at least have a much wider common area, namely Christ with the Protestants, and even wider: Christ and the sacraments, with the Orthodox.

1. 
   
   
   great post
   
   This is indeed not a world composed of Orthodox, Catholics and various Protestant denominations.
   
   We should let our vision be world embracing, and not confined to our own selves.
   
   
   
   .

 

[Jon_Mallory]

The Church can condemn no one. But to answer your question, yes, the Church would hold that such a bishop was apostate. Presumably the bishop had known the truth and had traded the truth for a lie.

Faith, like truth, is not a matter of preference.

Ah, thank you, that broadens the meaning of dialogue quite a bit:thumbsup:

 

[SteveVH]

Yes but apostasy is not a condemnation to hell.

Servant, don’t read too much unto my statement. I said the Church can condemn no one, not that apostasy does not result in eternal damnation. If one has been taught the truth and then rejects that truth it is a grave matter and one may very well be condemned by God for eternity.

Therefore the belief that Jesus is God, or the primacy of Peter, or the nature of grace or the Filioque, and in fact all other non-empirically evidenced concepts are irrelevant to a productive interfaith dialogue.

You have a very unique way of thinking Servant. The truth is always relevant to a productive dialogue, interfaith or otherwise. What you have listed above are not “concepts”, they are doctrines; Church teaching concerning a divinely revealed truth (dogma). So yes, they are relevant.

Now if you are speaking of interfaith dialogue surrounding forming a food bank or getting together with other faith communities to help in a disaster or provide other charitable assistance to the world you will not have a better friend than the Catholic Church. If you are expecting the Catholic Church to give up or water down its doctrines and dogmas you are seriously mistaken.

These things have been tried, tried and tried again for centuries and we still have segregation, and disunity. Maybe its time to try something different?

Maybe trying something that is conducive to unity, commonality and collaboration is what really gives salvation?

No, what really gives salvation is Jesus Christ, not a group hug. And in order for one to know Jesus Christ one must be taught the truth about him so that their faith is well formed and well founded.

Faith in God and what we should do as a response to that Faith is all that is needed for a productive advancement in global faith communities.

Here we would agree, as long as we understand to the best of our ability Who we are worshipping. It does no one any good to have unity in error.

 

[SteveVH]

great post

This is indeed not a world composed of Orthodox, Catholics and various Protestant denominations.

We should let our vision be world embracing, and not confined to our own selves.

But Servant, everything he said here was qualified by:

we must avoid some risks in interfaith dialogue:

Relativism (all religions the same) that leads to loss of Christian identity;
Syncretism: everything mixes together, also with loss of identity;
Secularism: this one should be obvious
Indifferentism.

The first two qualifications, that is, what we must avoid, is exactly what the Baha’i faith espouses; all religions the same and everything mixes together (Christianity, Islam, Hinduism, etc…).

This is exactly what I have been saying. If you want to work together to feed the hungry, clothe the naked, house the homeless, stop the murder of unborn children, protect the institution of marriage, and a host of other things, as I said, you will find no better friend than the Catholic Church.

If you want the Church to in any way change its doctrines and dogmas (i.e. Jesus is God), it’s not going to happen, nor should it happen.

 

[commenter]

Yes but apostasy is not a condemnation to hell.

Therefore the belief that Jesus is God, or the primacy of Peter, or the nature of grace or the Filioque, and in fact all other non-empirically evidenced concepts are irrelevant to a productive interfaith dialogue.

These things have been tried, tried and tried again for centuries and we still have segregation, and disunity. Maybe its time to try something different?

Maybe trying something that is conducive to unity, commonality and collaboration is what really gives salvation?

Faith in God and what we should do as a response to that Faith is all that is needed for a productive advancement in global faith communities.

We tend to notice the exceptional - disunity among religious people - and are rightly saddened by it. It is tempting to deemphasize doctrine then. The media constantly refers to “Islamic Fundamentalists” carrying bombs, or various kinds of “dogmatic” Christians causing division, sometimes violence. The media also tends to portray “spirituality” as a positive feature. If you call someone “very spiritual” he will probably think you are complimenting him, and thank you.

We fail to notice the ordinary unity among people, and we fail to notice the doctrinal foundation underlying that unity. We admire Mother Theresa for her total commitment to human beings, from unborn babies to the dying poor - and - what sets her apart - her love for the rich people, and everybody else. But WHY do we admire her? The reason we admire her, and also the reason we deplore child abusers - including priests - is because Catholic dogma-makers drilled into our brains over the centuries WHY human life is sacred. That “why” is where the dogma comes in.

Imagine a car has been 60 MPH for some distance. But the driver has neglected to refill the gas tank and now is low on gas. The driver is going downhill, using various techniques to prolong his journey as much as possible. That’s where Western Civilization is today, still running on the momentum built up when people were very careful about doctrinal orthodoxy. Without intending to condescend, I think your line of argument is like focusing on the skill of the driver in coasting, when a more humble driver would stop for gas (i. e. true dogma).

Read “Orthodoxy” by G. K. Chesterton.

 

[Servant19]

Servant, don’t read too much unto my statement. I said the Church can condemn no one, not that apostasy does not result in eternal damnation. If one has been taught the truth and then rejects that truth it is a grave matter and one may very well be condemned by God for eternity.

You have a very unique way of thinking Servant. The truth is always relevant to a productive dialogue, interfaith or otherwise. What you have listed above are not “concepts”, they are doctrines; Church teaching concerning a divinely revealed truth (dogma). So yes, they are relevant.

Now if you are speaking of interfaith dialogue surrounding forming a food bank or getting together with other faith communities to help in a disaster or provide other charitable assistance to the world you will not have a better friend than the Catholic Church. If you are expecting the Catholic Church to give up or water down its doctrines and dogmas you are seriously mistaken.

No, what really gives salvation is Jesus Christ, not a group hug. And in order for one to know Jesus Christ one must be taught the truth about him so that their faith is well formed and well founded.

Here we would agree, as long as we understand to the best of our ability Who we are worshipping. It does no one any good to have unity in error.

There are many many Catholics who have become Muslims, for example. By using the words “grave matter” it seems to indicate the opposite to what the Church professes which is:

“The plan of salvation also includes those who acknowledge the Creator, in the first place amongst whom are the Muslims; these profess to hold the faith of Abraham, and together with us they adore the one, merciful God”

What is your understanding?

.

 

[Servant19]

We tend to notice the exceptional - disunity among religious people - and are rightly saddened by it. It is tempting to deemphasize doctrine then. The media constantly refers to “Islamic Fundamentalists” carrying bombs, or various kinds of “dogmatic” Christians causing division, sometimes violence. The media also tends to portray “spirituality” as a positive feature. If you call someone “very spiritual” he will probably think you are complimenting him, and thank you.

We fail to notice the ordinary unity among people, and we fail to notice the doctrinal foundation underlying that unity. We admire Mother Theresa for her total commitment to human beings, from unborn babies to the dying poor - and - what sets her apart - her love for the rich people, and everybody else. But WHY do we admire her? The reason we admire her, and also the reason we deplore child abusers - including priests - is because Catholic dogma-makers drilled into our brains over the centuries WHY human life is sacred. That “why” is where the dogma comes in.

Imagine a car has been 60 MPH for some distance. But the driver has neglected to refill the gas tank and now is low on gas. The driver is going downhill, using various techniques to prolong his journey as much as possible. That’s where Western Civilization is today, still running on the momentum built up when people were very careful about doctrinal orthodoxy. Without intending to condescend, I think your line of argument is like focusing on the skill of the driver in coasting, when a more humble driver would stop for gas (i. e. true dogma).

Read “Orthodoxy” by G. K. Chesterton.

Why is the humanitarian work of Mother Teresa born out of her Faith in Jesus more valid than the humanitarian work of Abdu’l-Baha born out of His Faith in Baha’u’llah?

In the eyes of God, FOR whom both Abdu’l-Baha and Mother Teresa both sacrificed life and limb for, would it matter if one was immersed in the grace of Jesus, or if the other was immersed in the grace of Baha’u’llah, or if Muhammad was the source of that grace for Muslim humanitarian saints?

No one here is talking about coasting along the atheist bandwagon of just do good without immersing yourself in the grace and bounty of God. Faith is critical, not faith in an idol, this is faith in the one God.

.

 

[Servant19]

But Servant, everything he said here was qualified by:

The first two qualifications, that is, what we must avoid, is exactly what the Baha’i faith espouses; all religions the same and everything mixes together (Christianity, Islam, Hinduism, etc…).

This is exactly what I have been saying. If you want to work together to feed the hungry, clothe the naked, house the homeless, stop the murder of unborn children, protect the institution of marriage, and a host of other things, as I said, you will find no better friend than the Catholic Church.

If you want the Church to in any way change its doctrines and dogmas (i.e. Jesus is God), it’s not going to happen, nor should it happen.

No one is asking the Catholic Church to change its doctrines.

I don’t think I have once stated that Steve. All I am saying is that in the framework of PRODUCTIVE (and that word is critical) interfaith dialogue, we should ignore all doctrinal differences.

The world is dying and for ever and ever it seems we have been feeding the poor and helping the children, while man made institutions are giving charities plenty to do by propagating the cycle. If we are to actually DO something PRODUCTIVELY, then interfaith dialogue should focus on sustainability, and institutional change.

.

 

[SteveVH]

There are many many Catholics who have become Muslims, for example. By using the words “grave matter” it seems to indicate the opposite to what the Church professes which is:

“The plan of salvation also includes those who acknowledge the Creator, in the first place amongst whom are the Muslims; these profess to hold the faith of Abraham, and together with us they adore the one, merciful God”

What is your understanding?

My understanding is that the Church is not saying both are true therefore it matters not what one believes.

One can only be an apostate if one has been taught and knows the truth, and then rejects and abandons that truth. The Church is saying that Muslims “profess” to hold the faith of Abraham and insofar as this is true we say . The Church, however rejects the majority of what Islam professes, especially when it comes to their position concerning the Person of Jesus Christ. At the most basic level the Church would agree with Islam that there is a Creator and that He should be worshipped and adored. That is pretty much the extent of it.

 

[Servant19]

My understanding is that the Church is not saying both are true therefore it matters not what one believes.

One can only be an apostate if one has been taught and knows the truth, and then rejects and abandons that truth. The Church is saying that Muslims “profess” to hold the faith of Abraham and insofar as this is true we say . The Church, however rejects the majority of what Islam professes, especially when it comes to their position concerning the Person of Jesus Christ. At the most basic level the Church would agree with Islam that there is a Creator and that He should be worshipped and adored. That is pretty much the extent of it.

And it is at that most basic level of agreement that we can find common points of action by which our faith can express itself in sustainable resolution to the worlds problems.

There is no need for further “more complex” explorations if interfaith dialogue is to be productive. A Muslim can never agree that God can be born from a womb, and Catholics can never agree that Muhammad’s Revelation was Divine in origin…

…sooooo

…let’s talk about DOING STUFF TOGETHER



.

 

[SteveVH]

No one is asking the Catholic Church to change its doctrines.

I don’t think I have once stated that Steve. All I am saying is that in the framework of PRODUCTIVE (and that word is critical) interfaith dialogue, we should ignore all doctrinal differences.

Okay, so what you are saying is that we should not change our doctrines, we should just ignore them.

And what would be the subject matter of this dialogue, Servant? Please give me an example, then we can have something substantive to discuss.

The world is dying and for ever and ever it seems we have been feeding the poor and helping the children, while man made institutions are giving charities plenty to do by propagating the cycle. If we are to actually DO something PRODUCTIVELY, then interfaith dialogue should focus on sustainability, and institutional change.

Servant, God does not call us to be successful, he only calls us to be faithful. Mother Theresa did not stop poverty in Calcutta. She picked up the dying, worm ridden person in front of her and treated them with the same dignity she would if she found Christ laying in the gutter. Change must occur within the hearts of mankind. We must be transformed by love. If everyone acted as Mother Theresa or St. Francis of Assisi there would be no need for any government to guide us or judge us. So that should be our goal. To become Christ to others. That is not accomplished by a system of government but rather by an inner transformation of ourselves.

Peace.

Steve

 

[SteveVH]

And it is at that most basic level of agreement that we can find common points of action by which our faith can express itself in sustainable resolution to the worlds problems.

There is no need for further “more complex” explorations if interfaith dialogue is to be productive. A Muslim can never agree that God can be born from a womb, and Catholics can never agree that Muhammad’s Revelation was Divine in origin…

…sooooo

…let’s talk about DOING STUFF TOGETHER



.

We do. All the time.

*Pope Benedict’s provocative 2006 University of Regensburg speech about faith and violence concluded with a warm and heady encouragement for Muslims to partake “in the dialogue of cultures.”

But rather than a grand theologian’s invitation to tea, Muslims around the world took the Pope’s discourse — a probing and sometimes blunt analysis of reason’s role in religion that included a denigrating historical reference to Mohammed — as a monumental slap in the face. The Pope’s defenders argued that some of the more radical reactions to the speech, including church burnings in the West Bank and the murder of a nun in Somalia, were themselves proof that Benedict was right to delve deeply into the question of violence in Islam. All agreed that more than tea would be needed to repair the damage.

Two years and two months after the most highly charged episode of his papacy, Benedict’s invitation to Muslims to a new, more “frank” inter-faith dialogue finally has a time and a place. An unprecedented three-day Catholic-Muslim summit begins Tuesday at the Vatican, with leaders of both religions hoping not only to heal the wounds of Regensburg and its aftermath, but also to bring about a deeper understanding between the world’s two biggest religions.* - Time magazine, November 4, 2008

There is much, much more.

 

[SteveVH]

Just found these “dialogues” currently in place, just with Muslims and just within the United States alone:

• The Midwest Dialogue of Catholics and Muslims
• The Mid-Atlantic Dialogue of Catholics and Muslims
• The West Coast Dialogue of Catholics and Muslims
• The National Muslim-Catholic Plenary

We also have ongoing dialogues with all other major world religions:

Buddhism
Between the years of 2003 and 2009, the Bishops Committee for Ecumenical and Interreligious Affairs co-sponsored an annual Northern California Ch’an/Zen Buddhist-Catholic Dialogue.

Hinduism
The fifteenth annual meeting of Vaishnava Hindus and an ecumenical body of Christians convened to discuss the hiddenness of God as it is understood in the Hindu text Bhagavad Gita and the Christian classic the Mystical Theology of Dionysius the Areopagite. The meeting was held in Potomac, Maryland on April 13-14.

I can find more but so can you. just google Catholic dialogue with… and add a religion.

We are already doing, and have been doing, what you aspire to do.

What “dialogues” are the Baha’i currently engaged in with the world’s religions?

 

[Servant19]

Okay, so what you are saying is that we should not change our doctrines, we should just ignore them.

Whether Jesus is God or not has absolutely no relevance in Christian/Muslim/Bahai dialogue. I am not saying we should ignore the subject, but what I am saying is that it is pointless in dialogue between the religions. What fruit does it have? The theology can be strongly debated from a scholastic point of view, so why would we dialogue on something that will clearly, from the very start, create disagreement? Jesus didn’t say that His first commandment is to treat Him as God. He didnt say His first commandment was to regard Peter as the leader, He did’t say that His first commandment was to believe that He is the sole source of grace in the world.

His first commandment (a commandment means we as humans must do this first) and His new Covenant (this means that it is part of our obligatory contractual agreement with our Creator) is to love the one God and to love our neighbour as we love ourselves. The practical implications of this Covenant has far reaching implications and there is so much to discover on what it means in our lives.

The rest of religion should be ignored when it comes to attempting “productive interfaith dialogue”, in my humble opinion
(not ignored by you in your personal life, but just ignored in this dialogue setting)

And what would be the subject matter of this dialogue, Servant? Please give me an example, then we can have something substantive to discuss.

So what are some practical examples of loving our neighbour as ourselves, and loving God with all our hearts, souls and minds?

Muslims, Baha’is, Christians , Jews, Hindus, Sikhs, Buddhists can all dialogue on how to bring spirit and faith into the lives of every person in the communities in which they live.

Maybe a Muslim and a Catholic can visit the home of an ailing neighbour to share a prayer in a spirit of reverence, humility and love. Maybe this can be done on a weekly, or fortnightly basis. In order for this to happen, the Muslim and the Catholic must first dialogue

Maybe, Baha’is and Catholics can dialogue on the commonalities that they share when it comes to children’s education? We all believe in love, respect, service, humility, reverence, charity, selflessness, thoughtfulness, truthfulness, honesty, the list goes on and on. Maybe we could teach the children how to practically “practice” these virtues and make it a part of their weekly homework to consciously carry out acts which reflect these virtues, then bring their stories to share the following week on how they went on?

This way you can attract divine blessings into homes which really have no idea what truthfulness means for example. We can create community minded children that yearn to express their virtue for the love of humanity, their neighbours, God. They will be instilled with a earnest searching heart for the Creator of these gifts they now possess.

This again requires dialogue.

None of these expressions of the first commandment of Jesus and the first commandment of all religions requires us to get into deep theological wrangles…

Servant, God does not call us to be successful, he only calls us to be faithful. Mother Theresa did not stop poverty in Calcutta. She picked up the dying, worm ridden person in front of her and treated them with the same dignity she would if she found Christ laying in the gutter. Change must occur within the hearts of mankind. We must be transformed by love. If everyone acted as Mother Theresa or St. Francis of Assisi there would be no need for any government to guide us or judge us. So that should be our goal. To become Christ to others. That is not accomplished by a system of government but rather by an inner transformation of ourselves.

Peace.

Steve

Dear friend, Jesus taught us to seek change within our hearts.
Muhammad taught us to seek change within our hearts, and within the community
Baha’u’llah taught us to seek change within our hearts, within the community and within the institutions serving the community.

I think you misunderstand the impact of society, and the institutions of society on the ability for people to create change within their own hearts.



.

 

[SteveVH]

Whether Jesus is God or not has absolutely no relevance in Christian/Muslim/Bahai dialogue. I am not saying we should ignore the subject, but what I am saying is that it is pointless in dialogue between the religions. What fruit does it have? The theology can be strongly debated from a scholastic point of view, so why would we dialogue on something that will clearly, from the very start, create disagreement? Jesus didn’t say that His first commandment is to treat Him as God. He didnt say His first commandment was to regard Peter as the leader, He did’t say that His first commandment was to believe that He is the sole source of grace in the world.

Well yes, as I have said, if we want to talk about feeding, clothing, housing, educating, providing medical care and otherwise helping the world together the Catholic Church is in with both feet. But we also go further than that. I would suggest that you read up on some of the interfaith dialogue already going on, as I have pointed out in prior posts. One discussion with the Hindus, I believe, had to do with “The Hiddenness of God”. Pretty cool stuff. Anyway, I understand what you mean. There is much we can discuss and accomplish without getting into the particulars.

So what are some practical examples of loving our neighbour as ourselves, and loving God with all our hearts, souls and minds?

Muslims, Baha’is, Christians , Jews, Hindus, Sikhs, Buddhists can all dialogue on how to bring spirit and faith into the lives of every person in the communities in which they live.

Maybe a Muslim and a Catholic can visit the home of an ailing neighbour to share a prayer in a spirit of reverence, humility and love. Maybe this can be done on a weekly, or fortnightly basis. In order for this to happen, the Muslim and the Catholic must first dialogue

Maybe, Baha’is and Catholics can dialogue on the commonalities that they share when it comes to children’s education? We all believe in love, respect, service, humility, reverence, charity, selflessness, thoughtfulness, truthfulness, honesty, the list goes on and on. Maybe we could teach the children how to practically “practice” these virtues and make it a part of their weekly homework to consciously carry out acts which reflect these virtues, then bring their stories to share the following week on how they went on?

This way you can attract divine blessings into homes which really have no idea what truthfulness means for example. We can create community minded children that yearn to express their virtue for the love of humanity, their neighbours, God. They will be instilled with a earnest searching heart for the Creator of these gifts they now possess.

This again requires dialogue.

None of these expressions of the first commandment of Jesus and the first commandment of all religions requires us to get into deep theological wrangles…

 

[Servant19]

Well yes, as I have said, if we want to talk about feeding, clothing, housing, educating, providing medical care and otherwise helping the world together the Catholic Church is in with both feet. But we also go further than that. I would suggest that you read up on some of the interfaith dialogue already going on, as I have pointed out in prior posts. One discussion with the Hindus, I believe, had to do with “The Hiddenness of God”. Pretty cool stuff. Anyway, I understand what you mean. There is much we can discuss and accomplish without getting into the particulars.

Thanks Steve, I’ll be sure to look into those dialogues you posted above

.

 

[Servant19]

What “dialogues” are the Baha’i currently engaged in with the world’s religions?

Baha’i dialogue with other religions is purely based around planning to act. Baha’is also tend to work on a neighbourhood scale, visiting the homes of neighbours and trying to find commonalities with them to advance their spiritual condition towards godliness.

Similar to what I posted above in creating spaces for devotion and prayer. Children education, and teenage education. Unlike many segments of society which considers early teenagers a “nuisance to society” and “going through hormonal change” etc, Baha’is tap into this period of change and utilise their developing sense of justice.

Teenagers are encouraged to be the leaders of their communities in terms of spirituality, charity and service. So dialogue with other religious communities in our neighbourhoods is taking place to see if this exploration of teenage leadership and excellence is something of interest. Teens are encouraged to evaluate the constructive and destructive forces of the reality in their communities and try to develop an identity centred around the constructive forces and contribute towards them, using the spiritual gifts of charity, service, humility and reverence to guide them.

These endeavours are still very early stages and it is difficult for other religious communities to develop trust in the Baha’i community. Frankly, most people believe that we are trying to convert them! (lol)

As Tonyfish keeps on saying, conversion is not in our hands, it’s in God’s…however the spiritual advancement of our neighbourhood towards a righteous way of life can be in our hands if we allow the Holy Spirit to guide us.

This is why “productive” (as in it has an outcome, not begins in words and ends in words, but rather ends in deeds) dialogue is so important to Baha’is because our numbers are low, but we truly believe that if other religious communities were to give us a chance to explain fully what we are trying to do, they would join us and we can walk a common pathway of service towards a more righteous neighbourhood, community, nation and planet

.

 

[SteveVH]

Baha’i dialogue with other religions is purely based around planning to act. Baha’is also tend to work on a neighbourhood scale, visiting the homes of neighbours and trying to find commonalities with them to advance their spiritual condition towards godliness.

Similar to what I posted above in creating spaces for devotion and prayer. Children education, and teenage education. Unlike many segments of society which considers early teenagers a “nuisance to society” and “going through hormonal change” etc, Baha’is tap into this period of change and utilise their developing sense of justice.

Teenagers are encouraged to be the leaders of their communities in terms of spirituality, charity and service. So dialogue with other religious communities in our neighbourhoods is taking place to see if this exploration of teenage leadership and excellence is something of interest. Teens are encouraged to evaluate the constructive and destructive forces of the reality in their communities and try to develop an identity centred around the constructive forces and contribute towards them, using the spiritual gifts of charity, service, humility and reverence to guide them.

These endeavours are still very early stages and it is difficult for other religious communities to develop trust in the Baha’i community. Frankly, most people believe that we are trying to convert them! (lol)

As Tonyfish keeps on saying, conversion is not in our hands, it’s in God’s…however the spiritual advancement of our neighbourhood towards a righteous way of life can be in our hands if we allow the Holy Spirit to guide us.

This is why “productive” (as in it has an outcome, not begins in words and ends in words, but rather ends in deeds) dialogue is so important to Baha’is because our numbers are low, but we truly believe that if other religious communities were to give us a chance to explain fully what we are trying to do, they would join us and we can walk a common pathway of service towards a more righteous neighbourhood, community, nation and planet

.

Yes, we should all be involved in our communities. We join with several other Christian faith traditions in providing for and serving the poor in our area, visiting the sick and those in prison. It is a wonderful thing to see and everyone is greatly blessed. The witness of one’s life speaks louder than any preaching.