Analysis of Braybrooke's ecumenical approach to interfaith spiritual dialogue

¶ … 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.

Implications of Interfaith Dialogue

The cultural, social and political implications of ecumenicism are important in a multi-cultural society, as learning to live, in the public, with respect of one another of varied spiritualities is essential to a reduction of social and political conflict. Braybrookes, style of ecumenical practice is therefore enriching for the individual and could potentially bring people together enough to challenge the misconceptions about serious divergence that are often present among two or more groups of "others." This is especially true with regard to faiths that have been erroneously tied to inhumane actions, such as those who will falsely tie Islam to violence toward innocents, especially considering the historical tolerance the faith has had toward other faiths. Unlike the Christians in history the core of Islam did not demand that all those of other faiths (of the book, Judaic and Christian) convert, leave or be killed once an Islamic ruler had taken power. Instead the faith, and its people recognized each of these groups as being of like mind and history and therefore loved by God. (Friedmann 23) Ecumenical studies would be one of the only places that an individual might learn such information and begin to understand how seriously divergent the extreme fundamentalists that dominate very small segments of the Islamic world really are. Innocent loss of life is not considered acceptable in Islam, or Christianity and both faiths have examples of transgressions that were and are far more authoritative and centralized than the extremism we are seeing today. It is in fact useful to look at the moral applications of both faiths in comparison to one another, as they are much more similar on the issue of morality than many today believe. The only challenge that exists is acceptance of fundamental extreme ideals that stress that there is but one faith or religion that holds value, (Neusner, Chilton, and Graham 1) rather than allowing the world to be seen as Braybrooke and many ecumenicists would have us believe as populated by many "children of One God." (346)