Getting to the Heart of Interfaith

September 29 Discussion Questions

Question 1.  Pastor Don believes in the transformative nature of love.  In what ways have you experienced this?  How do you see this power of love as a universal value?

Question 2.  If Pastor Don sees love as the central focus of his Christian faith, does that mean Christianity “owns” love?  What if several traditions share a common focus?

Question 3.  Rabbi Ted talks about finding deeper meaning in words he had learned as a child.  Are there texts, songs, or stories in which you are now able to find deeper meaning than they had for you when you first learned them?  If so, how did that additional meaning become clear to your?

Question 4.  Rabbi Ted shared an event that helped open him to a fuller vision of his spiritual identity and through that, to deeper interfaith connections.  Are there events in your own life that have enabled you to understand what you share with those of other faiths and traditions?

Question 5.  Sheikh Jamal found himself experiencing the intensity of God’s compassion even when going through an extremely difficult time of loss.  When have you most been aware of universal compassion and love?  When have you felt most distant from that love?

Question 6.  Sheikh Jamal focuses on the virtue of compassion.  Do you think that every spiritual path needs to reflect this virtue?  Why?

Question 7.  If you were to focus on one central teaching that has impacted you in your life, what would it be?  How did you find that teaching?  What has it meant for you?

Getting to the Heart of Interfaith

September 22 Discussion Questions

Question 1.  In Pastor Don’s journey to interfaith, he describes his experience of being born into privilege.  How do you relate to the issue of privilege in your own life?  Do you feel as if you are an “insider,” or do you experience yourself on the “outside,” looking in?

Question 2.  Have there been special moments in your own life when you became aware of the suffering of others?  What have been the consequences of those moments?

Question 3.  Rabbi Ted shared his experience when he realized that he was a minority and related some of the painful experiences associated with that realization.  Have you ever felt like a minority, an outsider, different?  How has that experience influenced you?

Question 4.  What is your relationship to some of the minorities in your community?  How do you feel when you think about approaching them?  What might your goals be in establishing such conversations?

Question 5.  Sheikh Jamal shared his very special relationship with his parents.  They were major teachers for him on his spiritual path.  How have your parents influenced your own spiritual path?  Are you following in their footsteps, or have you set out on your own?  How has this affected your relationship with your parents?

Question 6.  Sheikh Jamal said that, until 9/11, he never experienced discrimination as a Muslim, but he did experience discrimination as a person of color.  How have you been aware of discrimination in your own life?  Have you been able to allow your experience to sensitize you to the experience of others?

Question 7.  The three authors mentioned the synchronicities that brought them together.  How has synchronicity played a part in the significant relationships in your life?  Are you aware of the special but surprising moments of meeting you have experienced?

Question 8.  How have you become interested in issues of interfaith relations?  Is this an important subject for you?  What circumstances in your life have awakened your interest in other religions?

Getting to the Heart of Interfaith

September 15 Discussion Questions

Question 1.  What does the word interfaith mean to you?

Question 2.  The stages of interfaith dialogue often begin with distrust and suspicion.  Are there any religious groups with whom you experience this kind of distrust?  What do you think might bridge the distance you feel?

Question 3.  Sometimes we tolerate each other, but do not know very much about the beliefs and rituals of someone of another religion.  Have you ever been to a religious service of another faith?  If so, what did that feel like?  Have you ever welcomed another to an observance of your faith?  What was that experience like?

Question 4.  What other faiths would you like to learn more about?

Question 5.  What differences or concerns get in the way for you when you think about interfaith relations?  How might both your interests and concerns serve as a catalyst for your next step in exploring interfaith dialogue?

Question 6.  If you found something in another faith that resonated for you, would you be comfortable incorporating an aspect of that practice into your life and making it your own?  What might that look like?

Question 7.  Do you think that interfaith exploration can lead to a watering down of an individual’s faith identity?  If so, how?  Do you think such an exploration can deepen your faith identity?

Question 8.  What opportunities are there in your community for meeting people of other faiths?  Who might you take advantage of these and explore them further?

Belief, by Francis S. Collins

May 19 – Alvin Plantinga & Antony Flew

Question 1.  Alvin Plantinga (whom I’ve never heard of) seems to be a pretty sharp guy.  He goes to great lengths to demonstrate the absurdity and contradictive nature of evolutionary naturalism.  Granted, this may fall under the category of “Who cares?” for the general populace, but there are some very interesting ancillary discussion pieces that we may find rather savory upon further inspection. 

According to Plantinga, naturalism (the idea that there is no such person as God or anything like God) makes atheism look like a half-baked effort…calling naturalism “high-octane atheism or perhaps atheism-plus.”  He notes that this mindset is extremely fashionable in the academy…even labeling it as “contemporary academic orthodoxy.”  Where do you see this present in our current culture, both inside and outside of academia?  What persons (and in what positions of influence/power) are most likely to possess and assert this belief?

Question 2.  Plantinga introduces naturalist philosopher Patricia Churchland, summing up her thesis this way:  “What she means is that natural selection doesn’t care about the truth or falsehood of your beliefs; it cares only about adaptive behavior.  Your beliefs may all be false, ridiculously false; if your behavior is adaptive, you will survive and reproduce.”  “All that really matters…is that the neurophysiology cause the right kind of behavior; whether it also causes true belief (rather than false belief) is irrelevant.”

Granted, this is not a theological discussion per se…but it does force us to examine both our history and our purpose as humans in a much different light.  Recognizing the grand diversity of beliefs and truth-claims that emerge out of the human experience, how do we respond, then, to what Plantinga calls the unreliable nature of our collective cognitive faculties?  (The answer, he suggests, is that evolutionary naturalism is therefore self-refuting.)

Question 3.  Fortunately, as Christians, we believe that our beliefs are not limited by the neurophysiology that caused or produced certain adaptive behaviors in us.  We are much more than the principle functions of Churchland’s four-part survival scheme as directed by our nervous systems (page 302).  How does this discussion not only allow, but especially encourage, our Christian understanding of “grace?”  How does grace allow us to believe, even when we fail to understand or agree on God’s activity?

Question 4.  Antony Flew is first and foremost a philosopher.  He is not a Christian and does not subscribe to any recognized religious affiliation.  As he writes at the conclusion of his article, “In short, my discovery of the Divine has been a pilgrimage of reason and not of faith.”  His arguments follow along the lines of natural theology and not any of the revealed religions.  He has no personal relationship with God.  As such, Flew simply argues for the conceptual justification of “infinite Intelligence,” as well as Divine intention and involvement with creation.  What are the pros and cons of such a position?  How does this differ from real faith?

Question 5.  On page 311, Flew identifies the three domains of scientific inquiry that intrigue him most: the origin of the laws of nature; how life emerged from non-life; and the origin of the universe.  How does the Christian faith allow for the scientific community to function as common partners in each of these dialogues?  What perspectives do we have in common?

Question 6.  Flew professes his admiration for both Aristotle and philosopher David Conway.  Toward the end, he writes, “Conway believes, and I concur, that it is possible to learn of the existence and nature of this Aristotelian God by the exercise of unaided human reason.”  While I’m sure that his aim is to disarm the many proponents of atheism, the effect of such statements also alienates Flew from the Christian community, which solidly recognizes faith in God as a matter of revelation, led by the Holy Spirit.  As Luther emphasized repeatedly, faith is unattainable by any amount of human effort or reasoning.  It is always God’s free gift to us.  Why is this contrast so important to recognize?  How does this insight serve to free us in receiving God’s unconditional grace?

Belief...by Francis S. Collins

May 12 - G. K. Chesterton and Hans Küng

Question 1.  OK…is it just me, or does Chesterton’s writing style leave you a bit unsure as to where he’s coming from?  He does make some evocative statements, including liberal amounts of sarcasm and humor, but fails to fully explain his perspective…at least in terms that I can confidently interpret.  Perhaps this is simply due to the amount of change that has occurred since this was written.  In his opening portion on “The Suicide of Thought,” he states, “The modern world is not evil; in some ways the modern world is far too good.  It is full of wild and wasted virtues.  The virtues have gone mad because they have been isolated from each other and are wandering alone.”  How did you take this?  Do you agree?  Why or why not?

Question 2.  On the topic of humility, Chesterton writes, “A man was meant to be doubtful about himself, but undoubting about the truth; this has been exactly reversed.”   I found this discussion to be intriguing…how about you?  How does this confusion of roles and values play out in today’s culture?

Question 3.  Perhaps my favorite quote (p. 284) is this, “It is idle to talk always of the alternative of reason and faith.  Reason is itself a matter of faith.  It is an act of faith to assert that our thoughts have any relation to reality at all.”  That’s a loaded statement!  How do you see and experience this close relationship between reason and faith?  What potential caveats are necessary as we consider their dependency, yet also their individual characteristics?  How does this play into an attitude of proper humility?

Question 4.  Hans Küng takes on an ancient, but lingering question, “Is religion merely wishful thinking?”  (Similarly, can Vikings fans really expect their boys to win the Super Bowl?)  Küng’s primary focus here is Freud’s contribution to this subject.  By and large, he dismisses Freud’s atheistic position, though validating some of his criticisms of the Church’s many abuses.  He states, “It is true that the wish alone does not contain within itself its fulfillment.”  And later he notes, “The existence of God must remain an open question.”  So, from your studies and observations, how do religion and psychology differ?  What traits and pursuits do they share?

Question 5.  Küng asks, “Can faith in science replace faith in God?”  He thinks not, stating, “But for innumerable people throughout the world belief in God has gained a new future, particularly in our time.”  He then asks, “Is there really an essential contradiction between science and belief in God?”  How do you respond to this ongoing question?

Question 6.  At the beginning of page 296, Küng argues that many in today’s culture turn neither toward science nor religion as a total explanation of reality.  “Between skepticism and affirmation we now find all too often not indeed a militant atheism, but one that is practical, everyday, and banal.”  He closes with a partial justification of Freud’s critique of religion, pointing to “defective forms of religion, the Church’s misuse of power, and the traditional image of God.”  How do we address such shortcomings to an ever-increasing attitude of skepticism in today’s world?  What are the ultimate strengths of the Christian faith that allow us to prevail in our witness to God in Christ?

Belief, by Francis S. Collins

April 28 - Mahatma Gandhi and The Dalai Lama

Question 1.  In the beginning, Gandhi asserts, “Religion is not really what is grasped by the brain, but a heart grasp.”  He describes it as an inherent piece of our makeup as humans…thus, all possess it.  From there, he provides several “rules,” noting that strict adherence is required by all who seek to be a fellow member of his Institution.  These include: The Vow of Truth; Doctrine of Ahimsa; The Vow of Non-Thieving; The Vow of Fearlessness; and reflections on God. 

According to the first vow, Truth is not an option.  His example of the life of Prahlad was dramatic and extreme.  Most of us will not suffer similar torture and suffering for the sake of truth.  How do we understand the value and role of Truth today as Christians?  How does this compare with our culture’s flippant and casual attitude toward Truth?

Question 2.  Ahimsa means “non-killing.”  Gandhi broadens this definition to include any negative thought and action toward another…including enemies.  Obviously, this concept has never caught on with the rest of the world…which seems to prefer violence and retribution whenever possible.  Jesus taught a similar ethic of love and non-violence.  What, if any, might you regard as justifiable exceptions to this principle?

Question 3.  In his vow of “non-thieving,” Gandhi urges the sharing of one’s resources with those in need.  He implies that to retain more than one really needs is to “steal” it from another.  Again, this really hasn’t caught on too well in our capitalistic, consumer-based economy.  But progress is being made, especially through social agencies and religious institutions.  Where have you made progress in this area of your faith?  What opportunities are you aware of that might benefit others who wish to follow this path?

Question 4.  Gandhi maintains that “there is only One whom we have to fear, that is God.”  His discussion of God’s nature is humble and respectful…acknowledging the great mystery that pervades God’s spirit and presence in the cosmos.  God must rule the heart and transform it.  Our union with God is a joint effort in wrestling with and against evil…a continuous journey for which we can only strive with diligence and perseverance.  As best you can, describe your journey with God thus far.  How near or far do you feel from God, and why?  What would bring you closer?              

Question 5.  The Dalai Lama is obviously a well-educated person.  His basic thrust in this chapter emerges from a simple question: “Doe ethics have a place in science?”  What is your experience with the study and practice of ethics?  What are the dangers involved today with the exclusion of ethics from scientific forums?

Question 6.  The Dalai Lama explains the danger of “scientific materialism,” which, at its worst, leads to nihilism.  On the flip side, spirituality without the input of science can lead to a narrow-minded fundamentalism…also quite bad.  Obviously, the existence of both extremes is fully entrenched in their own preservation and pursuits.  Again as Christians, particularly the Lutheran expression, we attempt to see God at work in these ongoing dialogues.  What seem to be the most pressing issues of our day along this continuum?  What concerns you most as science advances and human needs continue to push for solutions and answers to human suffering?

Belief...Francis S. Collins

April 14 Book Study

Thomas Merton, Dietrich Bonhoeffer,

Viktor Frankl, Mother Teresa

Question 1.  Merton rushes out of the gate with this bold statement, “Ultimately, the highest function of the human spirit is the work of the supernaturally transformed intelligence, in the beatific vision of God.  Love is both the starting point of contemplation and its fruition.” 

Merton is careful to explain that this grace comes to us through Christ.  He continues, “But what is the true nature of mystical contemplation?  Essentially, mystical experience is a vivid, conscious participation of our soul and of its faculties in the life, knowledge, and love of God Himself.” 

For most Christians, and certainly Lutherans, such language is murky and such experiences otherworldly.  How do we bridge the gap between Merton’s world and ours?  How might our patterns of spiritual “contemplation” be considered “mystical?”  Where do we have opportunity to grow in this area of spirituality and what steps might we take to move in such directions?

Question 2.  Bonhoeffer has been a model theologian for me over these many years.  His great emphasis on love from Matthew 5 is compelling, not for its simplicity and ease, but for its difficulty and demands.  As such, Bonhoeffer urges us to take up our crosses and follow Jesus.  It is something we do…in “simple, unreflecting obedience to the will of Christ.” 

When and where have you been the giver and/or the receiver of such love of late?  How does your faith allow and direct such obedience?  Give examples, please.

Question 3.  I recall studying Frankl’s work on “logotherapy” both as an undergraduate and graduate student.  This should not be confused with “Lego-Therapy,” which is far cheaper and more entertaining.  Frankl skips the appetizers and immediately serves the meat and potatoes portion of his diet. 

Our real “hunger” as humans is centered on our search for meaning.  The key, he suggests, is always maintaining a worthwhile goal.  The absence of such a goal(s) creates an “existential vacuum,” otherwise experienced as boredom.  This, of course, leads to all kinds of shenanigans, as he aptly points out.  In the end, we must pursue these goals according to our own path. 

How successful have you been in pursuing such goals of late?  How have you assisted others by enabling them to “actualize their potentialities?”  (Or, in redneck vernacular:  “Git ‘r done?”)

Question 4.  Mother Teresa is less of an author and more of an author-ity on the synthesis of faith and love.  As a champion for the poor, she illustrates the broad scope of poverty beyond mere physical means…pointing to the poverty in spirit we all wrestle with at times. 

If possible, share your attempts to confront your own “poverty” and what steps have been most beneficial in recognizing and addressing this greatest of human struggles.  Where have you discovered opportunities to function as Mother Teresa to others in their need?