Why Interfaith Work Does Not Equal Relativism

by Alexis Vaughan 11-03-2009

There is a line in the Riga Veda, a collection of ancient Hindu scripture, that says “Truth is One, but the sages speak of it by many names.” I had heard of this before, but hadn’t given it much thought before someone mentioned it last week at the Interfaith Youth Core’s 6^th annual conference, Leadership for a Religiously Diverse World. It was used to claim that interfaith work and dialogue was really all about relativism. Since returning from the conference, it’s been just about all I’ve been able to think about.

As a committed religious pluralist, I’m used to hearing the movement reduced to promoting relativism. That which would argue that the true nature of interfaith work lies in the sentiment of the Riga Veda, and that it is essentially a manner of saying “it’s all good” in terms of the variances among the world’s religions. They’re pretty much all the same, right? It is largely due to this misconception that interfaith work is considered by some to be a less authentic form of faith-based activism because of the idea that it undermines individual religious traditions and ignores exclusive truth claims. So why isn’t interfaith work just about relativism?

First of all, it’s biblical. One of the great commandments to Christians is to love our neighbors as ourselves (Mark 12:28-31). But who is our neighbor? When asked this, Jesus replies with the story of the Good Samaritan to illustrate that a neighbor is anyone in our presence, whether they be known to us or a stranger. Moreover, God calls us to be the peacemakers (Matthew 5:9). We are living in an age where people across the globe are killing each other to the soundtrack of prayer. We see it everyday on the news and in the media; religious conflicts are our immediate reality. But when Christ calls us to be the peacemakers, he’s calling us to give life and integrity to our faith by engaging in interfaith action. It’s a call to change the conversation from one of conflict to one of cooperation.

Second, it’s pragmatic. For meaningful social progress to occur in our society and around the world, religious communities working together need to be part of the solution. Period.

Third, it strengthens our capacity to love and know one another in a way that deepens our connection to the Divine. Several times over the course of the conference I was asked by other participants “Why interfaith?” as if to suggest “why not just stick with purely Christian activism?” Beyond the pragmatic benefits of having more comprehensive, diverse coalitions, what is the spiritual value in engaging with people from other faiths?

In true IFYC fashion, I answered by telling my story. I spoke of spending Friday night after Friday night at my Jewish best friend’s house from the time I was 12 years old, sharing Shabbat with her family, and the peace that came to rest in my heart from being blessed by her parents- always in the form of a little kiss on the forehead and a whispered “shalom” in my ear. I spoke of the strength and comfort I received from my Hindu friends who took time off from their classes to go to the Temple and pray for my father’s spirit when he passed away. Through telling my story I wanted to show how by entering into deep relationship with each other, we come to realize that the full nature of the Divine is infinitely bigger than our own experience, and the non-Christians of the world can in fact teach us a lot about God. In reflecting back on all the years I’ve spent with these friends, I realized how much closer I had grown to God from getting to know how God is God in them.

As faithful Christians we should reflect on this and make ourselves available to all that God reveals. As activists, I call our attention to a popular song that says it better than I ever could: “I’m a movement by myself, but I’m a force when we’re together. I’m good all by myself, but you make me better.” It’s the truth. God is still speaking, and doing so through every soul we encounter.

Alexis Vaughan is a graduate student at the University of Chicago Divinity School and former Sojourners intern.

Categories: Activism, Spirituality

Palosaari

Good article. But I don't think you have it right, who is my neighbor? I think Jesus was saying two things here. One, the question is not, "Who is my neighbor?", but rather, "How can I be a neighbor?" Two, my neighbor is the despised dog who I utterly detest (or so he is in my eyes). It is not merely those in my presence, whoever they may be. It is an enemy I look down on so greatly I can not even respect them as an enemy of equality.

Madison_McClendon

I find myself, as a divinity school student, to have grown in a few ways.

1) I am more politically liberal than when I started my formal religious education.
2) I am more religiously orthodox than when I started my formal religious education.

You can figure out how those things are true, I don't feel like explaining it.

I find myself believing that the task of relationship with other religious people is extraordinarily important, precisely because Christ commands us to love each other; and each other occasionally includes people with whom we disagree. And the scary, scary thing about that is the encounter with other people often forces us into the position of listener and learner, not always teacher.

Madison_McClendon

Interfaith work is categorically spending time with friends from other religious backgrounds.

You seem to be saying interfaith work can be done badly. This is obvious. But I really don't see how that justifies the claim that "interfaith work" and "experiences with friends from other religious backgrounds" is not necessarily the same thing.

BillSamuel

The author doesn't seem to be really speaking of "interfaith work" but about her experiences with friends from other religious backgrounds. It is not necessarily the same thing.

I attended a "Dialogue Dinner" sponsored by the Interfaith Conference of Metropolitan Washington. Several of the participants used the occasion to bash other religious groups, especially Southern Baptists, and self-righteously boast about being "liberal" in contrast to those other folks who take their faith seriously. It seemed most participants wanted it to be about "us" and "them", and to bash "them." Does their willingness to have the "us" be people from different faith traditions justify their behavior?

I don't know how often "interfaith work" degenerates to this level, but it certainly left a bad taste in my mouth.

tblossom

I find no conflict with fully believing the the Truth of the scripture's revelation of the God Who Is and Jesus, Son of God and Savior - with loving and learning with any dialogue partner. Sometimes I find my own faith deepened and facets of God's nature enhanced that I had previously missed appreciating. Sometimes I find my own faith strengthened by what is clearly a different understanding than the Truth God has, by Grace, revealed to us. I am not afraid that God's Truth has to be "protected" from other understandings. Jesus was, is, and will always be and be in Truth.

RachelK

I read somewhere that there is a school in Northern Ireland with a sign that says "If we lived where they live, we'd believe what they believe." Interfaith dialogue is not an abandonment of the unique claim to truth posited in Jesus Christ. It is an acknowledgment that while we live we never have the whole truth of anything. It is the humility of being able to say I will seek to encounter God in and through another, because God is Truth no matter how you or I understand truth.

Common Loon

Interfaith dialogue is certainly risky for all parties involved and presents very real challenges for anyone who is not a universalist. However, if it’s done well (as seems to be the case with IFYC for example), I see at least 2 potential benefits:

1) Much of the pettiness and misplaced hostility between religions can be exposed as counterproductive to the common good and uncharitable toward our fellow humans beings created in God’s image. From there, maybe it won’t be such a big deal for Protestants and Catholics to volunteer at the same soup kitchen.

2) The difficult work of cultivating intentional and respectful relationships with living, breathing human beings who ascribe to other faiths can serve to strengthen and refine one’s own beliefs. (Try explaining your faith in Christ to someone without the use of Christianese.)

In today’s increasingly pluralistic and globalized context, Christians must develop the ability to collaborate for the common good with those outside the Body of Christ while holding their ground theologically when necessary. It's a delicate dance, but I’d say it’s worth the attempt because the cost of escalating inter-religious tension is too great.

Sojourners' strengths clearly lie in the realm of collaboration for the common good. As far as maintaining a commitment to historic Christian theology (authority of Scripture, supremacy of Christ as the only Savior etc.), I get the sense this is more of a means to an end (promoting peace & justice) rather than a defining core value.

consciouslyfrugal

From what I've read, higher education tends to move folks further from conservatism of all kinds, generally speaking. I wouldn't assume that anyone who changes their mind or relationship with/understanding of Christ is somehow inherently "ashamed" or "less likely to stand for something concrete," just as it's incorrect to assume that anyone who maintains a conservative faith throughout his or her life is somehow ignorant or fearful. Some folks change; others don't. Attaching judgment to that change seems misguided.

What I find disturbing is the continued desire for control over strangers. Despite claims of preservation, I think the desire to control others is at the heart of disdain for relativism. (Again, just an opinion gleened from personal experience.) I've yet to read any studies on why so many folks find relativism (not in its formal "there is no truth" sense, of course, but in how we commonly refer to it, "it's all good") so very offensive or assume that collective effort equates homogeny.

Sometimes, I think we religious folks spend far too much time in our heads instead of our there in the world, sharing with our communities. As the author states, it's hard to have misconceptions about our neighbors when we're genuinely engaged with them.

Ray_A

"Implicitly, she believes they're wrong but doesn't mind agreeing to disagree"
like others who've responded, I think I'm missing the insinuation..

I think I get hung up on "I had grown to God from getting to know how God is God in them." Sounds relative..

Ray_A

Paul could be counted as a relativist if he left it at " yea we're all gods kids"
but he didnt, he said repent because He's coming to judge the world and is essentially calling 'relativism' or 'paganism' (whatever) as ignorance.

Bless_da_Lord

Alexis writes: "...that interfaith work is considered by some to be a less authentic form of faith-based activism because of the idea that it undermines individual religious traditions and ignores exclusive truth claims."

Interfaith work is not necessarily considered "less authentic" but it does commit to advancing an alternative agenda--one that is not exclusively centered on Jesus Christ. One that is not Christian.

It is one's prerogative if they decided to engage in this work. I think this work is very valuable. But, there is a difference between partnering for a more peaceful/just community, society, world, vs. working to create a general level of homogeneity (aside from traditions/rituals) among faith-based groups. It's very easy for a person of faith (please note that I do not use the word "Christian") to say, "As long as we all believe in something it's 'all good'." Well, is it?

Religious pluralism is a secular concept. I am concerned for students in "Divinity" schools and "Seminary" these days. As a young adults, I watch my peers head off to seminary to gain "wisdom" and they end up growing more distant from the Lord, more ashamed of their theologically conservative past--less likely and willing to stand for something concrete.

"For the message of the cross is foolishness to those who are perishing, but to us who are being saved it is the power of God.
For it is written:
'I will destroy the wisdom of the wise;
the intelligence of the intelligent I will frustrate.'" -1 Cor. 1:18, 19-

irish_annie

i wonder if the apostle paul were preaching today if he would be accused of relativism...? it was to 'pagan' athenians that he said, "He (God) is not far from each one of us, for in Him we live and move and have our being, as also some of your own poets have said, 'for we are also (all) his offspring'." (acts 17)

whether folks recognize it or not, we are all one in the One, beloved children of our great and grand Father. of course we all believe our theory-ology to be the 'right' one or we wouldn't embrace it. yet, Love is the 'rightness' that exceeds the 'rightness' of the scribes and pharisees, borne not of 'correct' doctrine, but of Spirit. selah.

honestdissent

I appreciate your perspective, especially the statement, "...the full nature of the Divine is infinitely bigger than our own experience, and the non-Christians of the world can in fact teach us a lot about God." As a Western Christian living in Asia for the last 15 years (India, China, Hong Kong) I have slowly come to realize the value of being able to appreciate and even enter into the thinking and culture of people of non-Christian faiths. I have found that there is a mutual enhancement and even transformation that takes place when we Christians encounter people of other faiths on an equal, non-judgmental, relational level. It sounds like you have had similar experiences. Bless you in your work!

Chris "Jesdisciple"

Not to mention that when their stereotypes are shattered and "Christian" becomes a real person, I imagine they are more open to the Gospel. Sounds like the Great Commission to me.

Chris "Jesdisciple"

"Truth goes by all names" would be a disadvantage in survival. Prove to me that you can believe the air next to that cliff isn't empty. Such a claim, if kept consistent, would be much too absurd to accumulate a sizeable following. On the other hand, "truth goes by many names" doesn't help us rule out any metaphysical claims any more than the former version does.

There's also the issue of what to do when two claims seem to contradict each other. Do you cop-out by claiming a paradox or try to reconcile them? If you were to cop-out, well, I'd personally consider you a relativist and/or agnostic rather than a Christian.

So the two seem effectively identical to me, save for the ease of rebutting the "all" version.

Chris "Jesdisciple"

She doesn't refute it, but she offers an alternative reason. She tells why she engages other faiths as obedience to Scripture.

Implicitly, she believes they're wrong but doesn't mind agreeing to disagree. This is opposed to the Riga Veda.

EDIT: And actually, giving an alternative reason does prove the stated inequality. Equality would mean that each is necessarily the other, which is not the case.

melayton

Speaking as someone who is about 2/3 through teaching her first ethics course, including a hefty section on what is relativism... I am struck by the quote, that it doesn't say "truth goes by all names," but that "truth goes by many names." This doesn't mean everyone is right. It just means that there may be more people right than just the people I think of as "my" group. True relativism says there is no truth, just what I (or my culture) believes. The Riga Veda quote seems to be saying something rather different.

Just sayin'. :-)

Morna

I agree that there might be a better title for this article, such as "Why Work with Other Faiths?" However, it behooves is to consider the message of the article and not just whether or not it fits the title.

I especially liked the section in this article that mentioned getting to know and love people of other faiths strengthens our connection to God. God calls upon us to love everyone. One of the greatest barriers to obedience is an unconsciously held stereotype. Engaging in real relationship with real human beings has a tendency to challenge stereotypes.

nuclearferret

You in no way refute the issue of relativism. By using the commonalities of different faiths, you hope to accomplish what is goals in your faith, that is cooperation with non-Christians to end war and to achieve political goals. The third point would be better served as the lead (or only) point in the sense of bringing people together as people. But your conclusions still gets around to "It's all good."