Beyond Tolerance -- Review
BEYOND TOLERANCE: Searching for Interfaith Understanding in America. New York: Viking, 2008. xxxviii + 218 pages.
The Niebuhr name carries tremendous weight, and so when the grandson of H. Richard and grandnephew of Reinhold writes a book on interfaith understanding, it’s worth paying attention to what is said. Gustav Niebuhr, a former New York Times religion writer and now a professor religion and public communication at Syracuse University has tackled one of the most vexing issues of our time. That issue is the place of religion in public life. More specifically, the relationships between religious communities in an increasingly pluralistic America.
The commitment to interfaith understanding that permeates this important book is traced back to his grandfather, who sought to unite denominations, and his great-uncle, who spoke out in the 1930s against targeting Jews for conversion. As a journalist he faced a profession that often conflated religion “with a spiritual militancy (conservatism is not the right word).” (p. xii). With this background, Niebuhr looks at the present situation, notes the growing tensions in America and around the world that center on religion and seeks to put things in a better light so that increased communication can take place. The goal, in the end, is peace and security for all. That said, he expresses interest in efforts, large and small, to build interfaith networks – like Eboo Patel’s Interfaith Youth Core – that seek to cross boundaries that can be explosive. This task is complicated by a lack of knowledge of other religions. In this he seconds the suggestions of Stephen Prothero for the teaching of religion in our schools, with the purpose of forming better citizens.
Religious differences often are triggers for hatred, separatism, and violence. But, these differences, if taken into proper account, can be a means of forging peace in the world. Crossing boundaries doesn’t mean erasing differences. It’s not simply that we go looking for the least common denominator, but if we are willing to affirm each other’s common humanity and desire to know the sacred, then we can begin looking at each other’s differences in a new way. This task requires that we move beyond mere tolerance – thus the title of the book. Instead, we must move to a point of mutual respect. It is normal to privilege one’s own religious group, but is it necessary to see total darkness in the others? Indeed, we can follow the example of Martin Luther King, who not only learned nonviolence from Gandhi’s example, but he was influenced in his stance against the Vietnam War by Buddhist monk Thich Nhat Hanh.
This is a post 9-11 book. Since 9-11 there has been increased interest in other religious traditions, especially with regard to Islam. Although there has been increased alienation and violence toward Muslims, there have also been wonderful examples of non-Muslims reaching out to protect and speak out on behalf of Muslims in America. These efforts stand in contrast to our own nation’s War on Terror. These efforts are expressions of the best that is our nation. They express the vision of the Founders, who seemed to intuitively understand that religious diversity would lead to religious freedom. That diversity has been on the increase since the beginning of the 19th century, and even more so since the 1960s when restrictions on immigration, especially from Asia, were lifted. This decision has led to increased numbers of Muslims and Hindus in America. Even as the nation was beginning to diversify, religious communities were also beginning to look outward. Vatican II offered an open hand to other religious traditions, noting that God could be seen within their communities. The National Council of Churches followed up on that effort, adding to the increased openness to others. This is an expression of civic value.
As the National Council of Churches statement issued prior to 9-11 put it, the diversity of American religious practice is part of our landscape. It is, the statement suggested, the duty of Christians to discern God’s image in this spectrum of human life. Each is a “unique creation of the living God.” Niebuhr’s comment:
To do this we must reject the message of the fear monger and the terrorist.
The post 9-11 world is one of fear and distrust, which has led to violence. Indeed, the War on Terror – just the way it is configured – has contributed to this perspective. For, in this quest for victory, who is the enemy? In the minds of many Americans, it is Islam itself. The responses to this include tolerance, which essentially means forbearance, and coexistence. But this is no longer enough. Niebuhr points to a statement made by George Washington that suggests that religious liberty was better than tolerance, and that requires respect for others, though not a reduction in differences. Indeed, Franklin Roosevelt’s Four Freedoms speaks of Freedom of Religion. When Norman Rockwell painted his Freedom of Worship painting, he focused on the diversity of Americans at prayer, and boldly imprinted in this picture is the motto: “Each according to the dictates of his own conscience.” Niebuhr points out that while the painting focuses on the individual, there is also embedded within it a sense of community.
If we are a community that is diverse in belief and practice, how can we connect with one another? What is the common chord? We find examples of individuals reaching across the boundaries in people like Eboo Patel, founder of the Interfaith Youth Core and author of Acts of Faith, Swami Vivekananada, an important figure at the original World Parliament of Religions, and of course the Dalai Lama. These figures believed that we can live together in harmony. Not all are excited about this premise, but it is one that offers us hope for the future. The vision of Patel, which Niebuhr lifts up, is that we can believe our faiths to be true and even hope for the conversion of others, while coming together to serve others. The urgency of the threat to humanity requires, however, that we begin working together now. The forces of extremism are well organized and institutionalized. The voices of respect are much less organized.
The starting point for responding to the threat to pluralism is to reclaim the principle of hospitality that is present in almost all religious traditions. It is a tradition that is expressed in Abraham’s offering welcome to the three travelers under the Oaks of Mamre. It is present in the statement of Hebrews that by offering hospitality to strangers, one might be entertaining angels. When hospitality is offered, the other is no longer a stranger. The principle of hospitality has been evident in these years since 9-11, as interfaith conversations have sprung up across the nation. These conversations often start with shared values and then move from there to more difficult and more complex issues. In his chapter hospitality, Niebuhr points to a conversation that emerged from a Jewish community and a Muslim one. In time, as trust was built, they were able to deal with – even if it remained contentious – the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. In the course of these efforts, participants learn the importance of speaking up for others and for dismantling stereotypes. We are not out of the woods. There remains much distrust between communities. There is a growing nativist movement that seeks to keep out the other.
The book ends with two chapters, one focused on the legacy of Jewish-Christian dialogue in America. Niebuhr focuses his attention on a Baltimore-located institute that has focused on the relationship between these two closely related communities. As context, he notes that until 1826 it was illegal for a Jew to hold public office in Maryland. The history of Jewish-Christian relations is littered with vileness and violence – expressed most clearly in the Holocaust. We may be related, but we are also “divided by a common text.” (p. 126). One expression of separation is the belief held by many Christians that Christianity replaces Judaism as God’s covenant people. This supercessionist perspective has been the root of much violence over the years, but in recent years it has been reexamined and even rejected, though not by all. Part of the reason for this change has been the realization that Christian theology helped lead to the Shoah.
The final chapter of the book focuses on Louisville’s Festival of Faith, an effort centered around the local Roman Catholic Cathedral, which has become a gathering point for interfaith conversation. Louisville is interesting in its location. It is home to Southern Baptist Theological Seminary, whose president has rejected any conversation that doesn’t allow for overt evangelism (and thus doesn’t participate). Nearby is the Trappist monastery that was home to Thomas Merton, a figure who is identified here as a gatekeeper, one willing and able to introduce people to other faiths while retaining one’s own faith. Dialogue has been the focus of these efforts, but recently there is the realization that the shared values of these religious traditions can and should lead to shared action.
In closing, Niebuhr notes the importance of words to this interfaith interaction. Some might accuse the movement of being all about talking, and to some extent it is about talking. It is, however, also about listening. Conversation leads to important action – consider again the influence of the conversation that took place between Thich Nhat Hanh and Martin Luther King. The discussions focus attention on the humanity of the other. It is the foundation of relationship.
This is an important book. It is filled with illustrations, both historical and contemporary, of people reaching across boundaries. It is also a warning of what might happen if we fail to bridge the chasm that often divides us. Although not as personal a testimony as Eboo Patel’s Acts of Faith, it is a deep testimony of Niebuhr’s family history. Indeed, in many ways Niebuhr and Patel can be read together as one testimony to the need for movement beyond tolerance to engagement with one another.
The Niebuhr name carries tremendous weight, and so when the grandson of H. Richard and grandnephew of Reinhold writes a book on interfaith understanding, it’s worth paying attention to what is said. Gustav Niebuhr, a former New York Times religion writer and now a professor religion and public communication at Syracuse University has tackled one of the most vexing issues of our time. That issue is the place of religion in public life. More specifically, the relationships between religious communities in an increasingly pluralistic America.
The commitment to interfaith understanding that permeates this important book is traced back to his grandfather, who sought to unite denominations, and his great-uncle, who spoke out in the 1930s against targeting Jews for conversion. As a journalist he faced a profession that often conflated religion “with a spiritual militancy (conservatism is not the right word).” (p. xii). With this background, Niebuhr looks at the present situation, notes the growing tensions in America and around the world that center on religion and seeks to put things in a better light so that increased communication can take place. The goal, in the end, is peace and security for all. That said, he expresses interest in efforts, large and small, to build interfaith networks – like Eboo Patel’s Interfaith Youth Core – that seek to cross boundaries that can be explosive. This task is complicated by a lack of knowledge of other religions. In this he seconds the suggestions of Stephen Prothero for the teaching of religion in our schools, with the purpose of forming better citizens.
Religious differences often are triggers for hatred, separatism, and violence. But, these differences, if taken into proper account, can be a means of forging peace in the world. Crossing boundaries doesn’t mean erasing differences. It’s not simply that we go looking for the least common denominator, but if we are willing to affirm each other’s common humanity and desire to know the sacred, then we can begin looking at each other’s differences in a new way. This task requires that we move beyond mere tolerance – thus the title of the book. Instead, we must move to a point of mutual respect. It is normal to privilege one’s own religious group, but is it necessary to see total darkness in the others? Indeed, we can follow the example of Martin Luther King, who not only learned nonviolence from Gandhi’s example, but he was influenced in his stance against the Vietnam War by Buddhist monk Thich Nhat Hanh.
This is a post 9-11 book. Since 9-11 there has been increased interest in other religious traditions, especially with regard to Islam. Although there has been increased alienation and violence toward Muslims, there have also been wonderful examples of non-Muslims reaching out to protect and speak out on behalf of Muslims in America. These efforts stand in contrast to our own nation’s War on Terror. These efforts are expressions of the best that is our nation. They express the vision of the Founders, who seemed to intuitively understand that religious diversity would lead to religious freedom. That diversity has been on the increase since the beginning of the 19th century, and even more so since the 1960s when restrictions on immigration, especially from Asia, were lifted. This decision has led to increased numbers of Muslims and Hindus in America. Even as the nation was beginning to diversify, religious communities were also beginning to look outward. Vatican II offered an open hand to other religious traditions, noting that God could be seen within their communities. The National Council of Churches followed up on that effort, adding to the increased openness to others. This is an expression of civic value.
As the National Council of Churches statement issued prior to 9-11 put it, the diversity of American religious practice is part of our landscape. It is, the statement suggested, the duty of Christians to discern God’s image in this spectrum of human life. Each is a “unique creation of the living God.” Niebuhr’s comment:
“In one way or another, that realization was acted out by people in various places in the United States in the immediate wake of 9/11. Once can read a theological meaning into it, or one can simply identify its civic value – those constructive acts demonstrated a belief in a common society that incorporates differences, that values life by valuing individual lives.” (pp. 34-35).
To do this we must reject the message of the fear monger and the terrorist.
The post 9-11 world is one of fear and distrust, which has led to violence. Indeed, the War on Terror – just the way it is configured – has contributed to this perspective. For, in this quest for victory, who is the enemy? In the minds of many Americans, it is Islam itself. The responses to this include tolerance, which essentially means forbearance, and coexistence. But this is no longer enough. Niebuhr points to a statement made by George Washington that suggests that religious liberty was better than tolerance, and that requires respect for others, though not a reduction in differences. Indeed, Franklin Roosevelt’s Four Freedoms speaks of Freedom of Religion. When Norman Rockwell painted his Freedom of Worship painting, he focused on the diversity of Americans at prayer, and boldly imprinted in this picture is the motto: “Each according to the dictates of his own conscience.” Niebuhr points out that while the painting focuses on the individual, there is also embedded within it a sense of community.
“The eight people occupy an equal plane and they face (more or less) in the same direction, toward the painting’s left, the source of the painter’s light, which illuminates their faces. What goes on here is not something we do entirely alone; there are others, different from us, who do it too, and they are persons of worth and dignity.” (pp. 53-54).
If we are a community that is diverse in belief and practice, how can we connect with one another? What is the common chord? We find examples of individuals reaching across the boundaries in people like Eboo Patel, founder of the Interfaith Youth Core and author of Acts of Faith, Swami Vivekananada, an important figure at the original World Parliament of Religions, and of course the Dalai Lama. These figures believed that we can live together in harmony. Not all are excited about this premise, but it is one that offers us hope for the future. The vision of Patel, which Niebuhr lifts up, is that we can believe our faiths to be true and even hope for the conversion of others, while coming together to serve others. The urgency of the threat to humanity requires, however, that we begin working together now. The forces of extremism are well organized and institutionalized. The voices of respect are much less organized.
The starting point for responding to the threat to pluralism is to reclaim the principle of hospitality that is present in almost all religious traditions. It is a tradition that is expressed in Abraham’s offering welcome to the three travelers under the Oaks of Mamre. It is present in the statement of Hebrews that by offering hospitality to strangers, one might be entertaining angels. When hospitality is offered, the other is no longer a stranger. The principle of hospitality has been evident in these years since 9-11, as interfaith conversations have sprung up across the nation. These conversations often start with shared values and then move from there to more difficult and more complex issues. In his chapter hospitality, Niebuhr points to a conversation that emerged from a Jewish community and a Muslim one. In time, as trust was built, they were able to deal with – even if it remained contentious – the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. In the course of these efforts, participants learn the importance of speaking up for others and for dismantling stereotypes. We are not out of the woods. There remains much distrust between communities. There is a growing nativist movement that seeks to keep out the other.
The book ends with two chapters, one focused on the legacy of Jewish-Christian dialogue in America. Niebuhr focuses his attention on a Baltimore-located institute that has focused on the relationship between these two closely related communities. As context, he notes that until 1826 it was illegal for a Jew to hold public office in Maryland. The history of Jewish-Christian relations is littered with vileness and violence – expressed most clearly in the Holocaust. We may be related, but we are also “divided by a common text.” (p. 126). One expression of separation is the belief held by many Christians that Christianity replaces Judaism as God’s covenant people. This supercessionist perspective has been the root of much violence over the years, but in recent years it has been reexamined and even rejected, though not by all. Part of the reason for this change has been the realization that Christian theology helped lead to the Shoah.
The final chapter of the book focuses on Louisville’s Festival of Faith, an effort centered around the local Roman Catholic Cathedral, which has become a gathering point for interfaith conversation. Louisville is interesting in its location. It is home to Southern Baptist Theological Seminary, whose president has rejected any conversation that doesn’t allow for overt evangelism (and thus doesn’t participate). Nearby is the Trappist monastery that was home to Thomas Merton, a figure who is identified here as a gatekeeper, one willing and able to introduce people to other faiths while retaining one’s own faith. Dialogue has been the focus of these efforts, but recently there is the realization that the shared values of these religious traditions can and should lead to shared action.
In closing, Niebuhr notes the importance of words to this interfaith interaction. Some might accuse the movement of being all about talking, and to some extent it is about talking. It is, however, also about listening. Conversation leads to important action – consider again the influence of the conversation that took place between Thich Nhat Hanh and Martin Luther King. The discussions focus attention on the humanity of the other. It is the foundation of relationship.
This is an important book. It is filled with illustrations, both historical and contemporary, of people reaching across boundaries. It is also a warning of what might happen if we fail to bridge the chasm that often divides us. Although not as personal a testimony as Eboo Patel’s Acts of Faith, it is a deep testimony of Niebuhr’s family history. Indeed, in many ways Niebuhr and Patel can be read together as one testimony to the need for movement beyond tolerance to engagement with one another.
Comments