"What Do We Want the Other to Teach About Us"
CCJU Conference February 8-10, 2000, Jerusalem
Executive Summary: "What Do We Want the Other to Teach About Us?"

On February 8-10, 2000, the Center for Christian-Jewish Understanding (CCJU) of Sacred Heart University, Fairfield, Connecticut, in cooperation with the Elijah School for the Study of Wisdom in World Religions, Jerusalem, sponsored a highly successful conference at the Ratisbonne Papal Institute, Jerusalem, entitled, "What Do We Want the Other to Teach About Us?"

More than 20 scholars from the Middle East, Europe, Canada and the United States were invited to participate at the proceedings with the additional attendance of graduate students from the Ratisbonne Papal Institute and Tantur Ecumenical Institute, Jerusalem, who joined as observers for each of the sessions spread over three days. The format of the conference included presentations of papers by noted scholars with prepared responses, followed by discussion, critiques and suggestions by all of the participants. Papers included philosophical, theological and methodological considerations from the Jewish, Christian and Muslim faith traditions on "What We Want the Other to Teach About Us."

Introduction: Why These Conferences?

These conferences are based on the mission of the CCJU which advocates a respect for the dignity of all people, acknowledges a special relationship between Jews, Christians and Muslims. The Center works to further interreligious dialogue by living the principles outlined in the 1965 Vatican II document, Nostra Aetate, which encouraged interreligious dialogue and understanding and positively asserted the ongoing validity and common spiritual heritage that Jews, Christians and Muslims share. As an academic and research division of Sacred Heart University, the CCJU promotes forums for dialogue and study in order to advance greater knowledge, understanding and harmony among religions.

As the number of people involved in interreligious dialogue continues to grow, more people need to accurately understand the "others" involved in the conversation and also desire to be understood and presented correctly by the others. Through these conferences, the CCJU advocates that the process of dialogue should flow in that order-understanding to being understood. After respecting the genuine needs of the others first, and attempting to understand them on their own terms, only then, as friendships and relationships mature, as each asks the other sincere questions, will it be important and appropriate to honestly share and reveal one's self and tradition. But the sharing of knowledge must also remain faithful to the "insider's" understandings. The participants in this interreligious dialogue agree to trust and respect each other enough to entrust each other with their sacred stories, experiences, historical events, interpretations, beliefs, mysteries, questions and uncertainties. Each says to the other, "We trust you enough to share these ideas, insights and sensibilities as best as you are able. 'Do unto others' now means that you will teach about us how you would want us to teach about you--adequately, fairly and respectfully. We become a mirror to each other where we can recognize our kinship with each other in the mystery of God."

When the question, "What do we want the other to teach about us?" is asked in the context of interreligious dialogue, an answer in the form of a reflection on faith or belief will be given. But that answer or reflection, de facto, becomes an invitation to another question which generally implies, "Now that you have heard my response, what do you think?" And so the dialogue continues where each trusts the other enough to be honest and say what he or she does not understand. Each perceives the other's faith as a vocation, literally a calling from God who dialogues with humanity.

Dialogue and education are tools for each to approach the other as people in relationship with God, first, not as objects spouting abstract beliefs. Happily, there is some truth to the notion that one learns something well when asked to teach it. In this sense, teaching demands more of a commitment to the other and his or her beliefs, than knowing or learning about the other might require. Moreover, to teach teachers is important work because as Henry Brooks Adams (1838-1918) said so well, "A teacher affects eternity; he can never tell where his influence stops." In the midst of a society that "teaches" values that are anti-religious, xenophobic, hateful, immoral and violent, the need for good teachers is indeed pressing. And so, the result of the dialogue process will need to be as much a pedagogical as well as a theological process.

Finally, the topic "What Do We Want the Other to Teach About Us?" comes out of a sustained reflection on how each one of us is "other," "stranger," or "outsider" to someone else. Indeed, the humorous but profound saying rings true: "Everyone is someone else's weirdo." This awareness of existential otherness gives each partner in the dialogue process the humility to proceed, in the words of Pope John Paul II, by "proposing" one's beliefs, rather than imposing them (Veritas Splendor, 1993, sec. 12, 35, 91, 95, 108, 110). The mutual blessing that arises out of this approach is that each understands himself or herself in a deeper and richer way by understanding and teaching about the other. Different perspectives help each partner in dialogue to clarify his or her own understandings and also help clarify the other's without demonizing or persecuting the other. A powerful piece about this process is that when one authentically teaches what the other wants to be taught, the teacher also communicates through his or her method and example, the convictions of respect, reverence, scholarship and friendship for the other as a son or daughter of God. By influencing how other religions are taught in each religion's formal educational structures, the dignity of each person can be affirmed and celebrated.

Summary of the Conference Proceedings Rev. Dr. Remi Hoeckman, O.P. Executive Secretary, Commission of Religious Relations with the Jews, Vatican City

"The Sacred Space of Dialogue"

Father Hoeckman began the keynote address for the conference by underscoring the divine dimension of the dialogue process which he characterized as a sacred enterprise that requires time and space. He said that God made time and space to dialogue with humanity, created humans in the divine image, and revealed the abundance of His love with humans in a relationship of friendship and as co-creators. "God has chosen to relate with us, speak with us, and seek us out when we hide," he said.

Turning to the Book of Genesis, Father Hoeckman affirmed the essential connection between the questions, "Where are you?" and "Where is your brother?" (Genesis 3:8-9; 4:9)--questions uttered by God who chose to create and dialogue with humanity. A most powerful expression of being made in the divine image comes from God's invitation to humans to dialogue and relate with each other. By being open to dialogue with the other, people create the sacred space that also opens them up to God's love, he said.

Father Hoeckman reiterated Pope John Paul II's October 28, 1999, message to an interfaith group from over 50 countries that had gathered in Rome, that the task before humanity is to "promote a culture of dialogue." Father Hoeckman said that one way to promote a culture of dialogue is through education. The importance of education and of being informed participants in the dialogue process was emphasized and clarified not as an elitist enterprise, but one that will bring about greater clarity and a more authentic relationship for everyone. He said, "Education is the master key which opens the door to that space in a human person where a person's deepest aspirations and expectations move, the God-given depth which allows a person to give and receive, to reach out and to be reached, to seek and to be found, to relate and to respond, to choose and to decide, to unify tensions, to overcome limitations, to integrate differences. It is the original space in a person which is really a religious space, tending towards self, towards another, towards one another, and ultimately towards The Other."

It is important to present the other in a way that is adequate, fair and respectful, so that the other recognizes himself or herself in the dialogue. Patient listening, honest sharing, mutual trust and vigilant prayer will help all the participants of the dialogue to seek common ground and solidarity with people of faith. "Our commitment must be to approach that reality, where the divine meets the human, with reverence; to enter that space with awe, for it is indeed sacred," he said.

Dr. Alon Goshen-Gottstein Elijah School, Jerusalem

"What Do We Want the Other to Teach About the Jewish Theological Tradition?"

Dr. Goshen-Gottstein spent a considerable part of his presentation exploring the "we" and the "other" in the conversation about what do we want the other to teach about us, and characterized the engagement of the "we" and "other" as a relationship between the "insider" and "outsider." He said that Judaism is multidimensional and multicontextual due to the influences of various "historical Judaisms." Phenomena such as identity, religion, knowledge, ideology, choice of sources and choices in general are as much a description of reality as they are experientially and socially constructed, which gives them an "arbitrary" subjectivity. Judaism is multi-layered and therefore the conversation about it must be multilayered, multivocal, and intersubjective.

Judaism's sources are found in all forms of Jewish life including the examples of holy men, but also articulated particularly well in the "canonical cornerstones of Judaism, the halacha [law codes] and sidur [prayer book]." Dr. Goshen-Gottstein said that there is no single way to teach about Judaism, but there is a continuity of identity, memory and history that allows for authentic dialogue and apologetics which are never neutral or value-free. Further, he noted that by relating to the other, one may be able to best uncover the deeper levels of meaning for the individual's self-examination as well as provide the situation to understand the "enduring story of Israel's life" with God and the community. However, Dr. Goshen-Gottstein said that it is most appropriate for the "insider" to be critical and foster self-examination rather than the "outsider" who would run the risk of being perceived as judgmental.

Dr. Goshen-Gottstein concluded by saying that Jews would want the other to teach about them that the story and life of Judaism is valid and unfinished and continues to powerfully mediate God's presence in the world. Judaism is open and willing to share questions, issues and struggles with others in a theologically descriptive and constructivist schema that would include as part of the dialogue such topics as covenant, mitzvot, Torah, prayer, sacred time, sacred space, holy men, election of the community, and messianic vision.

Responses and Discussion Rev. Michael McGarry Tantur Ecumenical Institute, Jerusalem

Response from a Christian Perspective

Father McGarry raised concerns over the need to differentiate between "subjectivity" and "arbitrary subjectivism" and that one need not be apologetic about apologetics. Alluding to the method of the Jesuit theologian, Bernard Lonergan, Father McGarry said that attentiveness to data and a critical self-consciousness will provide the foundation for careful, accurate and humble scholarship. Citing the strengths and limitations of a post-modern world view, he said that choices are based upon important, shared values, rooted in the community's ethical and liturgical relationship with God, and need not necessarily be arbitrary and obscure the meaningful language of persuasive, passionate faith-life.

Father McGarry agreed with Dr. Goshen-Gottstein that the holy person could be an excellent way to portray Judaism as well as Christianity and Islam. He said, "The curriculum seen through the prism of the holy person would not only be an accurate but also a beautiful portrayal of Judaism."

Dr. Mustafa Abu Sway Al Quds University

Responding from an Islamic Perspective

Dr. Abu Sway responded by noting that there is a large "field of meanings" found in every religious tradition which gives the religion its strength and ability to grow. This unity in diversity does not necessarily indicate arbitrary choices or interpretations. Rather, in his opinion, it reflects the different historical understandings that give meaning and identity to each group in relationship to itself, others and God. He said that God desires such diversity in the world.

Dr. Abu Sway noted that the perception of the "core and degree of otherness" is different for insiders and outsiders. He pointed out that an elderly, Orthodox rabbi from the United States might only have a small degree of separation or otherness from him as a Muslim "outsider," but the degree of separation may actually be perceived as greater in some intra-Jewish encounters than in some interreligious dialogues. Moreover, a good teacher or religious leader must be attentive of the degree otherness when teaching or preaching because the audience's ability to understand in no small way determines how effectively something is taught. The students determine the curriculum and the pedagogy as much as teachers influence the students.

Discussion by the participants centered around the insights and limitations of a post-modern worldview and on the importance of being attentive and respectful when using analogies or translating stories and categories across religious traditions. Even the universal religious command to love one's neighbor or brother, for example, would have varied nuances, understandings and narrative expressions in each religious tradition that can not be immediately and simplistically equated. It was also noted that reading the Scriptures as a believer or a skeptic has direct consequences on an understanding of the core of belief in a loving God.

Rev. Dr. David Burrell, C.S.C. Notre Dame University, Indiana, USA

What Do We Want the Other to Teach About the Christian Theological Tradition?

Father Burrell illustrated the triadic theological structure of revelation for Christianity and all the Abrahamic faiths as one that is characterized by Revealer, Word and Receiving Community. God, the Revealer, initiates a dialogical relationship of creation by speaking the Word, to an historical community which receives the Word and responds with an ethical commitment and life of faith in God. Christians believe that Jesus is God's primary and authoritative revelation, God's Word made human. From Jesus flows a distinctive understanding of God as Trinity, the sacraments, doctrine, authority, worship, ethics, grace and salvation which the Tradition seeks to share with others in every generation. Father Burrell said, "There is the natural predilection towards the metaphysical when explaining the Christian Word, specifically because that Word is a person and not the product of a person." He noted that this makes for interesting and multi-layered interreligious dialogue.

Alluding to the work of the psychiatrist, Carl Jung, Father Burrell also cautioned that there is a "shadow side" to the community's reception of the Word, especially when one group has a hegemony and seeks to define its identity over and against the other, rather than with the other. Each group needs to see and understand itself better through relationships with the other to allow for the full growth of its identity and mission. The Christian Gospels, for example, were constructed as proclamations (kerigma, hagadah) of good news, not primarily as apologetics. He said that the demonizing of the other has led to crusades and death in the past, whereas partnership with the other can lead to "mutual illumination" in the future.

Responses and Discussion Dr. Barry Levi McGill University, Montreal, Canada

Response from a Jewish Perspective

Dr. Levi affirmed the importance of seeking common structures, such as the one Father Burrell presented, for the advancement of discourse, understanding and interreligious dialogue. He suggested that further explication was necessary about specific questions such as the exact nature of the Word made flesh, the status and locus of the previous Word, and the inaccuracy of assuming, as some people do, that the three Abrahamic traditions share a substantial common Scripture. In particular, he said that interreligious dialogue might uncover more points of concurrence by focusing on the response of the faith community, more than the Word, per se.

Dr. Asma Afsaruddin University of Notre Dame, Indiana, USA

Response from an Islamic Perspective

Dr. Afsaruddin agreed with Dr. Levi concerning the importance of seeking common structures for understanding and dialogue. She also suggested that further study on the concepts of grace and prophecy may be natural links for interreligious dialogue. She cautioned, however, that all interreligious conversations about theology should be rooted in their complex historical and political contexts. Unless people "stop essentializing religious communities" then the result will be mythology and uncritical ideology. She suggested that people engaged in dialogue ask, "Which Jew? What Christian? When did the event exactly happen?" to keep the historical and political contexts clear.

Dr. Afsaruddin also commented on the religious diversity in the world as part of God's plan. There are also examples of similarities between Muslims and others with prophecy, for example, but "similar does not mean identical," she said. She noted the growing number of Muslims in the United States where Islam is becoming "less alien" and beginning to be more accepted by the majority of the population. When questioned whether she viewed this as something good, she said that only time would tell.

The participants at the conference discussed the strengths and weaknesses of becoming "westernized" as religious people. Most agreed that Jews, Christians and Muslims need to be prophetic enough to critique the culture by retaining their unique religious identity and preserving their integrity in the midst of a pluralistic society.

There was also a discussion about the differences between understanding, agreement and acceptance, and whether or not if someone really understood another religion, would he or she then not become a member of that religion? The participants suggested several different layers of understanding which do not require acceptance. These range from simple language or symbolic approximations, to analogy, to correspondence, to shared communal meanings, to "knowing" in an existential or intimate way--the latter meaning being representative of a more invested, committed understanding tending more towards acceptance, precisely because it is only able to be consistently experienced by "insiders." This consistent insider experience of faith is frequently understood on levels beyond one's theology and has characteristics that are more visceral, artistic, relational and dialogical in the contexts of familial and communal relationships or worship. The participants concurred that the goal of most interreligious dialogue is for the sake of understanding which leads to mutual respect, trust, harmony and peace.

Panel Discussion and Interfaith Concert

The second evening of the conference, Wednesday, February 9, 2000, the Center for Christian-Jewish Understanding and the Elijah School sponsored a panel discussion on "The Significance of the Pope's Pilgrimage to the Holy Land for the Three Abrahamic Religions," followed by an interfaith concert, at the Museum of Islamic Art, Jerusalem. Participants on the panel included His Excellency, Archbishop Pietro Sambi, Apostolic Delegate to the Holy Land, Jerusalem; Rev. Dr. Remi Hoeckman, O.P., executive secretary, Commission for Religious Relations with the Jews, Vatican City; Rabbi Shear-Yashuv Hacohen, Chief Rabbi of Haifa; Mr. Daniel Rossing, former director of Ministry of Religious Affairs, Israel; Mr. Ibrahim Sarsur, leader of the Islamic Movement in Israel; and Sheik Abdul Aziz Bukhari, Sheik of the Naqshabandian Religious Method, Jerusalem.

Over 250 people filled the Museum of Islamic Art to capacity, and several representatives from the Israeli press attended. Most of the panel agreed that Pope John Paul II was a man of peace and his pilgrimage would be a positive sign that all people need to move beyond violence and hatred to peace, respect and prayer. Archbishop Sambi said, "The sign value of the papal pilgrimage to the Holy Land can renew our relationships with hope and healing."

Several of the panel members said that the time was right to place more time and resources not only into furthering political interreligious dialogue but spiritual interreligious dialogue. One panelist suggested that all parties need to do more listening and less speaking in order to advance the art of mutual respect and love. These comments by the panelists follow less than a week after Prime Minister Yitzhak Rabin's widow, Leah Rabin, said in Rome, "When the Pope comes to Israel, we will be very enthusiastic and greatly honored. We consider him a great friend. . . . We do not want to deny anyone access to sacred places."

In his concluding remarks, Father Remi Hoeckman said, "Memory is so important in order that we can cope with the past and hope for the future. Unless all sides are willing to remember and understand the other's pain and seek forgiveness, then there will be no dialogue for healing." Rabbi Joseph H. Ehrenkranz, executive director of the CCJU, agreed, "There is still mistrust and paranoia, and I don't blame anyone. But the time has come for Jews to trust in the teshuva of the Church, and this pope, in particular. Time and security will heal our fears and build friendships based on mutual respect."

The panel discussion was followed by an interfaith concert with vocalists from the Great Synagogue, Johannesburg; Armenian Patriarchate, Jerusalem; and the East Jerusalem Mosque, Jerusalem. The consensus of the group was that the interreligious study and sharing of art and music should play a prominent part in the discussion about what we want the other to teach about us.

Dr. Jamal J. Elias Amherst College, Massachusetts, USA

What Do We Want the Other to Teach About the Islamic Theological Tradition?

Dr. Elias began his presentation by surfacing the common misconceptions about Islam, namely, that Islam is primarily a Middle Eastern religion, of solely classical expression, characterized by unusually ritualistic practices, a propensity towards violence, and oppression towards women. He said a main obstacle for a non-Muslim to overcome when teaching Islam is to move beyond situating Islam solely in Europe's past. He said that Islam is not a monolithic religious group, but very complex, especially due to the intra-Muslim political situations in Indonesia and around the world.

Dr. Elias spoke about the unity, mercy, compassion and uniqueness of God (Allah) whose generosity and justice inspires the believer to surrender to God in piety and strength and gratefully witness to others of God's amazing creation. Human beings have a most special responsibility in God's creation as His representatives (vicegerents) who must trust that God's ways are often beyond our grasp. He said that discrimination is forbidden on any basis, including religion, because it is God's will that there would be different religions on the earth until the last day. Many periods of Islamic history have been determined by the socio-political situation which had prevented the possibility for Muslims to live the pluralistic and peaceful ethos central to Islam. However, when humans live in peace and unity, they are a living sign of God's nature of unity and oneness, he said.

Dr. Elias also stressed the central role and importance of the Prophet Mohammed (d. 632) in Islam, who gradually received God's revelation which was gathered into the Qur'an, "the infinite reservoir of God's wisdom." The Qur'an is a guide for action and prayer and is the main source from which Muslims derive their laws, ethics, and theology. Islam is a religion as well as a way of life and a civilization, he said.

Responses and Discussion Rev. Dr. Franz Bouen White Fathers, Jerusalem

Response from a Christian Perspective

Father Bouen affirmed the strong connections between Islam and culture, faith and civilization. He said that the close communal living that strengthens and supports the identity of Muslims can also become a phenomenon that fosters exclusivity and can push the community to the margin of some societies. He said the Islamic world uses "a different scale of values" than western culture does which accounts for the difficulty in finding someone to talk with or someone who wants to talk with the other at all. Most of all, there is an element of supercessionism contained in the Qur'an which claims to be the final word on all previous revelations. "This may constitute a serious difficulty for interreligious dialogue," he said, but the challenge is to build bridges with such differing values and perceptions must be pursued with honesty and dedication. Points of connection between Muslims and Christians could be prayer and fasting, the unknowable mystery of God, and prophecy as gift, intellect and piety.

Rabbi Stanley Wagner University of Denver, Colorado, USA

Response from a Jewish Perspective

Rabbi Wagner also reflected on the strength of uniqueness, being set apart, for both Jews and Muslims, but also the difficulties connected with such identity when relating with the world. He said that Judaism is a culture and civilization whose ideals are at times in conflict with western values. At the same time, he said that by engaging and relating to the other, one can embrace and deepen one's own understanding of God's unity, for example, in the Shema Israel: "Hear O Israel: the Lord our God is one, and you shall love the Lord your God with all your heart, and with all your soul and with all your might" (Deuteronomy 6:4-5).

Rabbi Wagner said, "There will be ideological and theological differences which we cannot ignore." He said that all religions are pluralistic and true peace is the coexistence of different and sometimes contradictory convictions and realities. In particular, he said, "tikkun olam is not a slogan. It is a fundamental theological principle. It is the work that we can and must do together to restore the primacy and centrality of God in the world."

The participants discussed the distinctions and strengths of Judaism being a culture versus a civilization. The role of minorities functioning as prophetic, opinion-molding groups was seen as a tremendous asset to western culture, for example, while the burden of forbearance towards the minority would belong to the stronger group and civilization.

At the final session, Dr. David L. Coppola of the CCJU offered a summary some final reflections upon which this executive summary is based. The conference concluded with a dinner celebration and all agreed that the time had been well-spent and would look forward to the publication of the book. A Catholic priest from Hong Kong, Father Wong Chang, who had been studying at the Ratisbonne and had come to the conference as an observer, said, "I would like to see this book translated into Chinese, so that the communist censors will have to read this wonderful work."

Connections and Conclusions

A number of concurrent themes emerged from the proceedings. First, on a fundamental level, Jews, Christians and Muslims enter into dialogue because God has chosen to speak with us and to be in relationship with us first. The Word of God could arguably be seen as a history of dialogue, a covenantal relationship with a God who has chosen to communicate with humanity and invites us to live ethical lives in community. Subsequently, Jews, Christians and Muslims theologize because God has been revealed to us and we want to interpret and share that message of peace, unity, and compassion with the present and future generations. Since God's revelation is heard in many languages, people of faith have a responsibility to share the truth, wisdom and mercy of God with each other so that all can faithfully follow God's will in all of its plurality of expression.

Second, relationships are beautiful and good as much as they are true. Religion can have a share in that beauty and goodness by celebrating the wisdom and ethical lives of believers. By remembering the sages, saints, prophets and holy people, religion can be taught in a way that is theologically accurate and morally appropriate.

Third, more study will need to be pursued in the areas of the intellectual traditions, scriptures, laws, ethics, prayer and liturgy of each religion. Many of these questions will be addressed in the upcoming CCJU conferences. The advantage of this process is that each religious tradition continues to illuminate the other by its own reflections. In particular, those who are genuinely concerned with protecting the image of God and the love and wisdom of God found in the moral weave of relationships, will make every effort to know and understand the other, in spite of the obstacles that normally would interfere with such a relationship. The movement from defensiveness and distrust to friendship built on security and equality is still a long way from being realized, but has its hope of success in the dialogue process. The 1974 Guidelines published by the Vatican's Commission for Religious Relations with the Jews [published in the last issue of the CCJU Perspective] presents true dialogue as a process where each participant a) genuinely wishes to know the other; b) respects the other as the other is; c) respects the other's faith and the other's religious convictions; and d) respects the other's legitimate claim to religious liberty. In more poetic language, Ruel L. Howe says in his 1963 work, The Miracle of Dialogue (Seabury Press), "Dialogue is to love, what blood is to the body. When the flow of blood stops, the body dies. When dialogue stops, love dies and resentment and hate are born" (p. 3).

Finally, teaching what the other wants to be taught about him or her is a profound act of teshuva (an act of reconsideration and repentance for the past, and an invitation to transformation into a deeper relationship with self, others, and God). This teshuva can bring us face to face in honor and equality into a communion (havurah and koinonia), a communion of spirit and heart. To study others with the intention of trying to teach authentically about them, is not only to understand and know them, but is also a process of self-discovery and of knowing God more intimately. We do not simply teach about the other, but specifically the other-in-faith, the other as a son or daughter of God. This joint reflection leads us all, Jews, Christians and Muslims, down God's path of healing.

---David L. Coppola, Ph.D.

Previous Page    Back to 2000 Programs and Conferences    Next Page