Sharing in others' spiritual traditions

¶ … Share in Others' Spiritual…"

Rev. Marcus Braybrooke, is very obviously an ecumenicist, though he does allude to significant inherent conflicts in his essay, "Can We Share in Others' Spiritual Traditions?" This work will be an engaging analysis of this essay, applying to it ideas and ideals associated with the development of ecumenical thought an how it could possibly be applied into the life of a believer in a single religious faith. The review will be coherent and will include the following ideas regarding the development of political social and cultural aspects as they apply to spirituality; a summary of Braybrooke's main arguments, an analysis of the strengths and weaknesses of the argument in my agreement or disagreement and finally a discussion of how the author makes implications for interfaith dialogue between those in religious conflict.

Summary of the Main Argument

Braybrooke's main argument is one that puts ecumenicism in a practical place, expressing that among all people there are common spiritual ideologies that transcend faith but are present in it and through ecumenical dialogue even very spiritual individuals may see other spiritual traditions as viable and therefore the people who adhere to them as similar to themselves. Braybrooke also stresses some of the inherent ills of ecumenical "practice" by stressing that one cannot take the good that he or she sees from many traditions and marry them to create a "whole" individual religion, as this is not practical or responsible in a spiritual sense, as it has been suggested by the quote from Dr. Sacks, that gluing Zen Buddhism, Hassidic tales, liberation theology and mysticisms would be like, "gluing together slices of a da Vinci, Rembrandt, Van Gogh and Picasso and declaring the result a composite of the best in western art." (345) Like language, music or art Braybrooke suggests that each culture and religious tradition has integrity but unlike the former it they cannot be stripped apart and added together as they are all collectively a single ideology, that broken apart loses its integrity. Braybrooke instead suggests that utilizing non-scriptural ideologies from many faiths to create a dialogue between those of differing faiths is the responsible practice of ecumenicism. This dialogue according to Braybrooke, can enlighten individuals regarding other forms of spirituality, helping them see the core good in them and possibly even "enriching" their own.

Interfaith worship is not a substitute for the regular life of prayer and worship of a particular faith community, but it is a powerful symbolic reminder of our unity in the presence of the Holy One.. In the bible all people are said to be descended from common ancestors, namely Adam and Eve. If we are to live together in one world, we need to recognize that we are one family, children of One God. (Braybrooke 346)

The reference to Moses being informed by God to "take off your shoes, for the place where to are standing is holy," is synchronistic to the ideology of ecumenicism, regardless of the fact that there is a multitude of resistance to it in the religious community.

Analysis of Strengths and Weaknesses of Argument

Braybrookes' arguments are strong, as he makes clear that the kind of dichotomous marriage of many faith's into one that best meets the needs of the individual is irresponsible, as doing such is not only difficult but will obviously result in allowing an individual to live by standards that do not adhere to the moral and spiritual obligation one feels for their "true" faith. There is likely danger in developing a "new" faith that is tailored to the individual's desire to live as he or she wishes, rather than to seek out the holistic ideologies and messages of one faith and hence live by them. I recently watched a documentary on the composer Phillip Glass, which stressed in one of the 12 of its parts the nature of Glass' spirituality, as it is expressed in his life. He refuses labels but practices many aspects of eastern and alternative faiths in a very deep way. The message to me seemed difficult to swallow as the work stressed him taking and leaving, where he finds something lacking from one faith he pulls from another. Though, Glass may very well be enlightened enough to do this, and nothing against him most people are only enlightened enough to take from each faith that which best meets their individual selfish idea of ambition. (PBS, American Masters; Philip Glass: GLASS: A Portrait of Philip Glass in Twelve Parts) in fact the synchronicity between this documentary and the article made me wonder if the ideas of the article were borrowed from the Glass work, as language, music and religion were all discussed in much the same way, with regard to Glass' life, excluding the fact that the article diverges from the Glass take on spirituality. It would seem challenging no matter the intelligence or skill of any individual to deeply understand and evoke any single faith let alone three or four in any meaningful way. The weakness of the argument is limited to the idea that the work expresses the idea that individual's who are mostly selfish and are increasingly apt to be "in a hurry" living and listening to the world as a series of sound bites, often taken to heart would really be capable of serious exposure to other spiritualities without absorbing ideas that are divergent rather than convergent of their own, reported faith. I do however strongly agree with Braybrooke in his assurance that God informed Moses to tread respectfully upon others' hallowed ground, as this message is a message seriously needed in today's multi-cultural society.

Implications of Interfaith Dialogue