Let’s say you’re a Christian.  There’s a Muslim mosque down the street and you’d really like to encourage a dialogue.  Or you’re a Buddhist and there’s a Jewish synagogue or temple nearby and you’d like to have a dialogue.  Whatever the reason, you want to expand your own Interfaith understanding.  You want to understand and be understood.  You want to engage in an interfaith dialogue.   Perhaps you’ve already learned that dialogues between people of differing faiths can be tricky.  What then? 

Before going any further, I need to say that really nothing stated below is particularly new (though it may not have been applied very often to discussions of faith).  Everything below calls upon what any number of researchers and scholars came up with years ago.  And what it boils down to is listening!  The problem is, there’s not a lot of good listening modeled in public life.

What tends to pass for “dialogue” these days, is in fact more like a heated succession of monologues.  I may hear a little of what you say, but most of my energy and thought is going into my reply.  So I don’t really engage you.  I react to what you say, or what I was sure you were going to say (whether you actually said it or not), or what I believe your were thinking (again, whether you actually thought it or not).  And, of course, while I’m spewing out my monologue about my position, you’re putting most of your energy and thought into restating what you first said, because obviously I didn’t get it.  We speak at each other.  That’s no dialogue.

This isn’t news.  We do this with politics and sometimes even sports!  What makes it doubly hard, when religion is involved, is that we’re dealing with powerful emotional issues, symbols and beliefs.  And each one is a potential landmine.  So perhaps the first, essential step in a dialogue is to encourage the other person to engage in a thoughtful (as opposed to short and heated) monologue – to tell you what s/he is thinking, feeling, believing.  And here’s the key.  The only words you utter are simple questions for clarification.  As example,

“I would like to know more about what you mean by ‘God’.” 

and not

“Oh, I can’t agree.  I see God differently.”

Simply put, the first part of creating any dialogue is developing a common language.  If you and I mean something different when, for example, we speak of “resurrection” how are we going to be able to communicate?  So we really do need to listen, and seek to understand. 

But the truth of it is, the above is really step two for any faith that has a reputation for proselytizing.  Too many people of “other” faiths have learned the hard way that when certain “believers” say, “I want to have an interfaith dialogue” what they really mean is, “I want us to talk until you realize that you’re wrong and come to embrace my truth.”

You may not mean that.  You may be wholly sincere in wanting a real dialogue.  But it’s important to realize that there is baggage, that too many people who believed that they held the “one and only” answer to God have preceded you. 

So the very first step in establishing an interfaith dialogue is for us to say, and mean, something like, “I am not here to convince you or convert you.  I respect your beliefs.  I believe they may be different from mine.  I would like to understand.  And I would very much like for us to get to know each other better.”

Then we need to truly listen to each other’s monologues, asking questions that will deepen our understanding.  That, I believe, is the first step towards a real dialogue: respectful listening. 

If it is an Interfaith group you are forming (say a group composed of a couple of Christians, a couple of Jews, a couple of Native Americans, and Hindus, and Muslims and Buddhists) , as opposed to just two people talking, then this is going to take time.  It’s important to allow it to take as much time as needed.  Perhaps get together for dinner and then after dinner have one person tell her/his belief story, everyone else listening with respect, asking questions only for clarification and to deepen understanding.  Close the evening with that person leading a prayer from his or her tradition.  If it takes several weeks, or several months for everyone to speak, let it.  You will be building a solid foundation for real, valuable, and lasting dialogue.

When we’re in this “monologue” period, it is helpful if we make a real effort to avoid discussion.  Discussion can and will come later.  Right now, our efforts need to be channeled into understanding, and the respect that each of us craves which comes from really being heard.

There is one last consideration that should be stressed.  Our beliefs are very personal.  When someone expresses a belief that we don’t share it can be hard, very hard, not to argue.  But argument isn’t dialogue.  And we’re not dealing with something as “cut and dried” as two plus two.  So some simple ground rules may be helpful.

1)  Every person is deserving of respect.  “How can you believe that?” should be banished from the list of possible questions.

2)  We are creatures of habit.  And one habit many of us have formed is the idea that there is one right answer to the question of God.  This habit can make it hard not to argue.  The ground rule might be something like: let us first understand each other.  Let us feel free to explore our differences.  Let us lock “who is right?” in the basement and not let it out.