what now

Strengths and weaknesses of interfaith activities thus far and what needs to be done in the future

World Faiths Development Dialogue

1. Strengths

• The very existence of interfaith activities is a strength. If we do things together, whatever they are, we both show others that collaboration is possible and also get to know other faith traditions better through the people we work with.
• Interfaith work hasn’t just stayed at the level of top leaders. Work done at the grassroots level of people working with the poor, with young people from different communities, through different inter-faith circles/committees in many countries in the world and with the hotchpotch of people who arrive at the massive meetings of the Parliament of the World’s Religions and the United Religions Initiative is all useful as a way of incorporating more people into understanding better what other faith traditions are about.
• The different interfaith organisations do span a wide range of activities: education, youth, spiritual sharing, development, peace and reconciliation, inter-cultural activities etc.
• There is joint theological thinking going on with a focus on particular issues, such as faith and “development”/the globalisation agenda.

2. Weaknesses

• There is a risk of interfaith dialogue lapsing into “clubby circles” in which bonds of friendship among the privileged few who can attend international conferences may be formed but without any specific focus. This could result in the dialogue failing to turn into transformative action in our societies and thus, implicitly supporting the status quo.
• The interfaith work is still very largely led by people and organisations from the Christian West. Is this because Christianity feels solid enough to play a leadership role? Is it because the West has the money and resources to do it? Is it because there are western agendas which are suited by such activities?
• Interfaith worship tends to be artificial.
• Interfaith work is carried out solely by the “progressive” sectors/people of the different religions, leaving out the majority who either are indifferent to other faiths or think that they are nowhere near God or the Truth.
• Each interfaith organisation is still too concentrated on defending its own turf.
• There has been no serious evaluation of interfaith work.3. What needs to be done in the future
• We need to strengthen joint work being done on human issues, so that the interfaith movement is seen to have something relevant to say to people in their daily lives.
• We need to be stronger on evaluating work which has been done (using our own evaluation methods rather than standard ones, so the criteria will need to be worked out) as a basis for planning future action
• More thought needs to be given to why the interfaith movement is led by Western Christians and how this might be changed. It is a vital point, as we need to be very aware of the dangers of being used for agendas which are not our own.
• We need to get together to see how our resources are being used and whether a merger of some of the organisations might not be a good idea (without losing the focus of what is being done already)
• We need to ground interfaith work deeper into the spirituality of the different faith traditions involved. There have been fears expressed that the interfaith movement is beginning hardly to be distinguished in character from the secular NGO one. The need to find better ways of worshipping together is part of this point.
• Somehow, and this is very difficult, we need to find ways of talking to people who find interfaith activities an abomination (or a “Western plot”).