Circle of Faith: Interfaith Dialogue and Circle Keeping

Larry Schooler

Restorative Justice

Dr. Toran Hansen

Nova Southeastern University

October 20, 2013

Restorative Justice Practice Paper Larry Schooler Page 1

The use of circle keeping in the context of an alleged crime

can produce compelling results for victims, alleged offenders,

and other community stakeholders. But circle keeping, or a

variation of the practice, can also help strengthen relationships

among adherents of various faith traditions, as has been

demonstrated in several communities across the United States and

around the world. Interactions among followers of different

faiths can take numerous forms—from multi-faith ritualized

celebrations, to joint action on social justice issues; from

mission trips that serve the needy and seek new followers, to

wars fought in the name of a deity or deities. Wars fought

overtly on the basis of religion seem to have declined, though

acts of terror connected to an adherent’s faith have continued,

while groups orchestrating interfaith dialogue have begun to

proliferate. The specific use of circle-like dialogue in an

interfaith context has revealed its potential to help debunk

religious myths, heighten understanding, and sustain or increase

interfaith harmony in an era where religion still motivates some

to commit violence.

Restorative Justice Practice Paper Larry Schooler Page 2

The concept behind the circle, to “offer the possibility of

uniting many hearts and minds as one, even for a moment” (Pranis

et al, 2003, 1907), has taken hold in several interfaith

settings. One such setting, which has occurred on an ongoing

basis in Austin, Texas, since 2009, is known as the “Red Bench:

Conversations that Matter.” The red bench itself symbolizes “a

place for conversations that cultivate peace and respect”

(Spencer, 2010). The interfaith dialogue program, held most

months in the gymnasium of a local church, involves groups of

around eight participants of varying faiths sitting with a host,

or circle keeper, who guides discussion using a set of

predetermined, open-ended questions. The evening usually begins

with introductory remarks from one or more speakers, often

theologians, who help frame the discussion; this program segment

can “help shift focus from our separateness to our relatedness”

(Pranis, 2003, 1969). Hosts then invite participants to take

moments of silence and/or meditation before passing a talking

piece and sharing from their personal experiences while listening

from their hearts. Participants can also review inspirational

quotations from multiple faith traditions on a piece of paper

Restorative Justice Practice Paper Larry Schooler Page 3

before speaking, complementing the “opening ceremony” that begins

the evening. Hosts review conversation guidelines that include

exhortations to “listen to and respect all points of view…suspend

judgment as best you can…seek to understand rather than persuade…

[and] speak for yourself about what has personal heart and

meaning” (Conversation Café, 2007). After two rounds that

involve the talking peace in a round-robin format, participants

are able to share more freely, but the host and all participants

reserve the right to take the piece and place it in the center to

pause the conversation, as needed, to dissipate any discomfort.

Early rounds often focus less on specific issues and more on an

individual’s story, which can help create more common ground than

participants may think they possess (Pranis et al, 2003, 2036).

Later rounds may delve more deeply into community issues like

homelessness, the intersection of war and faith, and the

definition of education, and a closing round or ceremony allows

for reflection and the sharing of particularly powerful

sentiments with the entire audience (Pranis et al, 2003, 2099).

While Red Bench dialogues are intended primarily for an exchange

of viewpoints and ideas and secondarily to help participants find

Restorative Justice Practice Paper Larry Schooler Page 4

consensus or develop plans of action, long-term relationships and

other collaborations often result from bonds first forged at a

Red Bench event.

One particular Red Bench represents the potential power such

a circle-style dialogue can have for a community wrestling with

troubling issues. In 2010, Interfaith Action of Central Texas

(iACT) hosted a special Red Bench discussion as New York Muslims

were making plans for a community center near the “Ground Zero”

region of Manhattan where the attacks of September 11th, 2001,

occurred. A standing-room-only crowd filled a local synagogue

during the Muslim holiday of Ramadan to discuss, “How do we deal

with the fear of Islam and the consequences of our own fears?"

(Spencer, 2010). A panel that included a Muslim filmmaker, a

rabbi, and a professor of Islam from a Presbyterian seminary

opened the evening, and filmmaker Naeem Randhawa suggested to the

crowd: “Learning to trust, and building on that trust, can get

you anywhere!” (Brown, 2010). At one table, hosted by a Muslim

man, a woman who was not Muslim admitted that, when she thinks of

Muslims, she thinks of terrorists; the host welcomed her honesty

and engaged her in a respectful conversation (Khataw, 2010). At

Restorative Justice Practice Paper Larry Schooler Page 5

other tables, participants offered support for the Muslim

community and a desire to understand their belief system better,

eschewing the violence, vandalism, or Koran burning in other

communities (Shupe, 2010). One observer even noted that a

collective groan passed over the crowd when organizers announced

the event was ending (Folberg, 2010, 19). One participant wrote

in a letter to the editor of the Austin American-Statesman, “At the

simplest level, this fear is a matter of "us" and "them," which

can only be healed by knowledge and acceptance of the ‘other’”

(Scribner, 2010). Another commented, “What a great way to

discuss our fears, hopes and desires for the current and future

state of our country and the world” (Folberg, 2010, 19). This

Red Bench thus gave participants a chance to address their

conflicting feelings about the Ground Zero Islamic Center

directly, side-by-side with Muslims, who could openly and freely

mark their Ramadan observance in a synagogue without fear of

reprisal—a remarkable tableau in a nation gripped by furor over

the New York plans.

Such circle-style interfaith dialogues represent one of a

wide array of interactions between faiths—some of which stand in

Restorative Justice Practice Paper Larry Schooler Page 6

stark contrast to the safe space a circle keeper tries to create.

Examples of negative, stereotype-driven, rhetorical interactions

between faiths abound. From as far back as the founding of

Protestantism, Martin Luther was quoted as saying, “What then

shall we Christians do with this damned, rejected race of Jews?

First, their synagogues… should be set on re… covered… over fi

with dirt… their homes… broken down and destroyed” (Folberg,

2010, 13). Leaders as diverse as Iran’s Islamist President

Mahmoud Ahmadinejad and Israeli Chief Rabbi Ovadia Yosef have

also taken fiercely antagonistic rhetorical stances against

people of other faiths, like Ahmadinejad’s denial of the

Holocaust and Yosef’s call for wiping out the Palestinian people

(Folberg, 2010, 13-14). While full-scale wars fought in the name

of religion may have declined, recent acts of terrorism—from the

shootings at the Fort Hood Army base to the assassinations of

Middle Eastern heads of state and attacks on Christian minority

communities—are still tinged with hints of religious antipathy,

even intra-religious hatred in the case of the killing of Israeli

Prime Minister Yitzhak Rabin at the hand of a fanatical Jewish

assassin (Folberg, 2010, 13). In place of dialogue, clerical and

Restorative Justice Practice Paper Larry Schooler Page 7

political leaders throughout the world have often harangued their

perception of another religion, leaning heavily on stereotypes

rather than relationships with actual adherents of other

religions.

Some religious leaders within Judaism have even taken the

unusual step of prohibiting certain forms of interfaith dialogue.

In a letter attributed to the Lubavitcher Rebbe, an esteemed

spiritual leader within Orthodox Judaism, he argues against any

interfaith dialogue out of fear that it would convince Jews to

choose other religions: “Even those Jews to whom the Torah is not

yet, unfortunately, their Pillar of Light to illuminate their

life, but who still wish to preserve their Jewish identity and,

especially, the Jewish identity of their children -- even they

should clearly see the dangers of intermarriage and complete

assimilation, G-d forbid, lurking behind these so-called

‘dialogues,’ and should reject them in no uncertain terms”

(L’Chaim, 2001). Another Rabbi, Dr. Joseph Soloveitchik, argued

that Jewish-Christian interfaith relations “must be outer-

directed and related to the secular orders with which men of

faith come face to face. In the secular sphere, we may discuss

Restorative Justice Practice Paper Larry Schooler Page 8

positions to be taken, ideas to be evolved, and plans to be

formulated” (Unger, 2010). In other words, dialogue related to

doctrine was discouraged, though coalition-building around social

justice concerns could be permitted. Meanwhile, Muslim scholars

like Yousuf Al-Qaradhawi have expressed a desire for dialogue

with Christians, but not Jews: “I cannot be a part of a

conference in which wrongdoing Jews participate. They have

committed great injustice, and I cannot possibly shake hands with

them. Their hands are soiled with blood. They have murderous,

violent, and oppressive hands. I cannot soil my hands by shaking

theirs” (Geller, 2013). Thus, while numerous other interfaith

dialogue endeavors have taken hold (Garfinkel, 2004), it has

taken some time to move beyond the anger and pain adherents have

felt about crimes committed against them in the name of another

faith.

Some interfaith encounters have involved the sharing of

rituals and sacred space, like a Thanksgiving service hosted by

Interfaith Action of Central Texas that includes clergy and

liturgy from multiple faiths. The annual event sparked

controversy after a Baptist church that had committed to host the

Restorative Justice Practice Paper Larry Schooler Page 9

service in 2007 rescinded its invitation days before the event

when it learned that Muslims would participate in the service and

offer Muslim prayers at the church (Casey, 2007). A local

synagogue stepped in to host, winning praise from across the

country and earning the rabbi an award from the local dispute

resolution center (Folberg, 2010), but not before numerous

leaders from a variety of faiths excoriated the Baptist church

for its decision. The church argued that “although individuals

from all faiths are welcome to worship with us at Hyde Park

Baptist Church, the church cannot provide space for the practice

of these non-Christian religions on church property" (Casey,

2007). For the church, a single, ecumenical service attended by

people of varying faiths differed from the use of its space for

worship by members of a different faith—worship that Congregation

Beth Israel ultimately permitted when it hosted the interfaith

Thanksgiving service (Folberg, 2010). Interfaith ceremonies like

the Thanksgiving service in Austin have occurred elsewhere,

including an interfaith Seder (service for the Jewish holiday of

Passover) that took place at a Washington-area mosque (Scham,

2013). Such ceremonies speak to the power that a less verbal,

Restorative Justice Practice Paper Larry Schooler Page 10

more symbolic exchange of experiences can also help promote

greater understanding of faith traditions.

Interestingly, many interfaith exchanges seem to have

focused less on interpersonal dialogue about a person’s faith and

more on macro-level coalition building for secular causes, like

civil rights. Rev. Dr. Martin Luther King’s friendship with

Rabbi Abraham Joshua Heschel, highlighted by Heschel’s march

alongside King in Selma, Alabama, become symbolic of widespread

Jewish support for African-American Christian theologians

leading the civil rights movement (Herschthal, 2011). The Appeal

to Conscience Foundation, founded in 1965 around the time of the

civil rights movement, is believed to be one of the first

interfaith groups set up to help facilitate interfaith

communication among religious leaders in areas of conflict

(Garfinkel, 2004, 2). The Foundation takes its place amongst

many other interfaith dialogue efforts, as Renee Garfinkel

outlines in her report on such efforts for the United States

Institute for Peace:

High-level religious leaders (elites) have convened to speakcollectively as advocates for peace. Elite interfaith

Restorative Justice Practice Paper Larry Schooler Page 11

bodies have engaged in conflict mediation between combatants. Grassroots participants have come together across religious divisions to promote cross-community interaction and to develop participants into agents of reconciliation. Theological and scriptural similarities among hostile religious groups have been highlighted to mitigate the hostility engendered by theological differences. Dialogue during conflict has been organized asa step toward ending the conflict or, in the post-conflict period, as a step toward reconciliation. Conflict resolutiontraining for an interreligious group has served as a vehiclefor interfaith dialogue (Garfinkel, 2004, 2-3).

As examples, the Alexandria Agreement in Egypt involved religious

elites across the region in fostering moderate leadership, while

the Tolerance Project provides resources to educators and

activists on pluralism and tolerance. The Muslim/Christian Youth

Dialogue Forum focuses on the grassroots, giving young people “a

secure place to learn about other groups, teaching them ways in

which their own religious tradition supports peaceful

coexistence, training them in conflict resolution skills, and

addressing their personal, practical life issues” (Garfinkel,

2004, 5). Thus, it is clear that interfaith dialogue has taken

place at multiple levels worldwide for decades.

Scholars at Harvard University have also identified a wide

array of such interfaith organizations and dialogue efforts

Restorative Justice Practice Paper Larry Schooler Page 12

across the United States, noting “exponential growth” in such

organizations after the terror attacks of September 11th, 2001

(Eck, 2012). Some, like the Interfaith Alliance, champion

religious freedom; others, like Interfaith Power and Light,

respond to climate change challenges; and still others like the

Interfaith Hospitality Network are aimed at ending homelessness

and poverty (Eck, 2012). Meanwhile, groups like the Jewish

Council for Public Affairs and the Hebrew Immigrant Aid Society

have rallied social justice organizations from multiple faith

traditions to advocate for shared public policy goals like

poverty reduction and refugee resettlement—with much of the

exchange happening at the national leadership level, though some

occurs among local civic leaders of varying faiths

(Wojciechowski, 2010). Most of the groups studied by Harvard

researchers listed “relationship-building” as their

organization’s prime purpose, with education and dialogue as

close runners-up, while service and spiritual development were of

lesser importance nationally (Eck, 2012). Interestingly,

Harvard’s study also found that many groups identified one

particular challenge: ““elephant in the room conversations” (Eck,

Restorative Justice Practice Paper Larry Schooler Page 13

2012). Discussions of sensitive topics like the Middle East

conflict have spurred many of these groups to develop diverse

reading lists and involve outside facilitators in dialogue, and,

in a nod towards some of the principles of a circle process,

“participants in this intensive seminar are encouraged to tell

their colleagues what they need as a Christian/Jew/Muslim in

order to feel respected by the other groups” (Eck, 2012). This

reinforces a point made by Rabbi Eric Yoffe of the Union for

Reform Judaism, who calls much of the interfaith dialogue in

which he participates “boring” because “most of the time there is

a tendency to manufacture consensus, whether it exists or not.

Most of the time we go to great lengths to avoid conflict”

(Yoffe, 2011). Instead, Yoffe and others argue, interfaith

dialogue should enable participants to discuss their differences,

“give expression to their religious passions,” and reveal their

sense of exceptionalism for their own faith tradition—their

belief that some elements of their own faith “stand above and

apart from what other religions offer” (Yoffe, 2011). For Yoffe

and others, those moments of deep truth—perhaps more likely to

occur in a smaller, safer setting like a circle than in a more

Restorative Justice Practice Paper Larry Schooler Page 14

public setting among leaders or elites—make the dialogue all the

more worthwhile and fulfilling.

Thus, the use of circles in an interfaith dialogue context

has become something of a national and global trend—signaling

what one longtime leader in interfaith work has dubbed

“Interfaith 3.0” (Eck, 2012), a maturation of dialogue efforts

beyond the mere exchange of pleasantries or good wishes during

holidays. While hatred between adherents of differing faiths

continues to fester and some exchanges are marked by stereotype-

driven vitriol, numerous interfaith organizations have begun

facilitating dialogue at multiple levels—from elite leaders to

common citizens. Such dialogue appears to have helped reduce or

resolve conflict, or prevent it, by building deeper levels of

understanding among adherents about what their faith really means

to them. Through the use of circles, participants of varying

faiths can find a safe space to offer heartfelt expressions of

their faith, confident that others will respect differences and

hopeful that discovery of both differences and commonalities will

create stronger bonds in the future.

Restorative Justice Practice Paper Larry Schooler Page 15

Larry,

This paper provides a very comprehensive overview of interfaith dialogues, particularly among Jewish, Islamic, and Christian faith communities in North America (although there are some references to international dialogues, particularly in the MiddleEast). This latter point could’ve been stressed a bit more just to clarify how this type of dialogue might fit into the worldwidespectrum of religious interfaith dialogue. I thought that there could’ve been some more explicit linkages to restorative justice theory and practice, discussing the questions posed in a little more detail (e.g. similarities/dissimilarities with other RJ practices, weaknesses, effectiveness, etc.). With your citations,a page number or kindle area is only needed for direct quotes with quotation marks. You provide a lot of evidence for your assertions although there were a couple that couple that could’vebeen stronger with a citation (e.g. “Wars fought overtly on the basis of religion seem to have declined, though acts of terror connected to an adherent’s faith have continued, while groups orchestrating interfaith dialogue have begun to proliferate.”). Overall the paper is well organized and well written.

Assignment grade – 18.5/20

Restorative Justice Practice Paper Larry Schooler Page 16

References

Barenblat, R. (2007, November 19). Interfaith thanksgiving in

Austin. Retrieved from

http://velveteenrabbi.blogs.com/blog/2007/11/interfaith-

than.html

Brown, S.R. (2010, September 9). Interreligious ministries

engages residents on Islam, N.Y.

mosque fears. Pflugerville Pflag. Retrieved from

http://archive.pflugervillepflag.com/2010/09/09/interreligious-

ministries-engages-area-residents-on-islam-n-y-mosque-fears/

Casey, R. (2007, November 21). A story of thanksgiving for our

times. Houston Chronicle.

Retrieved from http://www.chron.com/news/casey/article/A-

story-of-thanksgiving-for-our-times-1547995.php

Conversation Café. (2007). Conversation agreements. Crozier, VA:

Richmond Action

Dialogues.

Restorative Justice Practice Paper Larry Schooler Page 17

Donaldson-Evans, C. (Performer) (2007). Interfaith group moves

thanksgiving service after

church forbids non-Christian prayer on property [Television

series episode]. New York,

NY: Fox News. Retrieved from

http://www.foxnews.com/story/2007/11/19/interfaith

group-moves-thanksgiving-service-after-church-forbids-non-

christian/

Eck, D., et al. (2012, February 27). America’s interfaith infrastructure: an

emerging landscape.

Retrieved from http://www.pluralism.org/interfaith/report

Folberg, S. (2010, September 17). Kol nidre sermon. Retrieved from

http://www.bethisrael.org/_kd/Items/actions.cfm?

action=Show&item_id=1563&desti

ation=ShowItem

Restorative Justice Practice Paper Larry Schooler Page 18

Fults, S. (2010, September 23). AAIM red bench emergency Muslim

dialogue

meeting. Examiner.com. Retrieved from

http://www.examiner.com/article/aaim-red-bench-emergency-

muslim-dialogue

meeting

Garfinkel, R. (2004, July). What works? Evaluating interfaith dialogue

programs. Retrieved

from http://www.usip.org/sites/default/files/sr123.pdf

Geller, P. (2013, May 3). Muslim Brotherhood spiritual and

leading scholar Yousuf Al

Qaradhawi refuses to participate in interfaith dialogue with

Jews. Atlas Shrugs.

Retrieved from http://atlasshrugs2000.typepad.com/

Herschthal, E. (2011, January 1). King and the Jews: beyond

Heschel. The New York Jewish

Restorative Justice Practice Paper Larry Schooler Page 19

Week. Retrieved from

http://www.thejewishweek.com/arts/herschthal_arts/

king_and_jews_beyond_heschel

Khataw, A. (2010, September 1). Interview by L.S. Schooler. Red

bench debriefing.

Korn, E. (2003, November 23). The man of faith and religious dialogue:

Revisiting

"confrontation" after forty years . Retrieved from

https://www.bc.edu/content/dam/files/research_sites/cjl/

texts/center/conferences/so

oveitchik/Korn_23Nov03.htm

Pranis, K., Stuart, B., and Wedge, M. (2003). Peacemaking Circles:

From Crime to Community.

Kindle Edition. St. Paul, MN: Living Justice Press.

Scham, P. (2013, April 1). A very different interfaith Seder.

The Daily Beast. Retrieved from

Restorative Justice Practice Paper Larry Schooler Page 20

http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2013/04/01/a-very-

different-interfaith-seder.html

Scribner, M.E., et al (2010). Letters to the editor. Austin

American-Statesman. Retrieved from

http://www.statesman.com/news/news/opinion/screaming-

cartoon-austins-rich

history-and-toleran/nRxWt/

Shupe, D. (Performer) (2010). NYC mosque dialogue in Austin

Tuesday; local religious leaders

address fears of Islam [Television series episode]. Austin,

TX: KXAN-TV. Retrieved from http://www.kxan.com/news/nyc-

mosque-dialogue-in-austin-tuesday

Spencer, T. (2010, August 30). How do we deal with the fear of

Islam and the consequences of

our own fears? Austin American-Statesman. Retrieved from

Restorative Justice Practice Paper Larry Schooler Page 21

http://www.statesman.com/news/news/opinion/spencer-how-do-

we-deal-with-the

fear-of-islam-and-/nRxQN/

The rebbe writes. (2001, June 8). L'Chaim, 672, Retrieved from

http://www.lchaimweekly.org/lchaim/5761/672.htm

Unger, A. (2010, January 6). A modern orthodox approach to interfaith

dialogue. Retrieved from

http://www.jewishideas.org/abraham-unger/modern-orthodox-

approach-interfaith

dialogue

Wojciechowski, J. (2010). Reflections on the JCPA Mission to

Birmingham. The Jewish

Council for Public Affairs. Retrieved from

http://engage.jewishpublicaffairs.org/blog/comments.jsp?

blog_entry_KEY=5052&t=

Restorative Justice Practice Paper Larry Schooler Page 22

Yoffie, E. H. (2011, May 29). Why interfaith dialogue doesn't

work -- and what we can do about

it. Huffington Post. Retrieved from

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/rabbi-eric-h

yoffie/why-interfaith-dialogue-d_b_867221.html