From War Culture to Cultures of Peace:
Practices of Peace in Religious Communities

Keynote Address, Friday, March 26, 1999
by Victor Kazanjian
Dean, Religious and Spiritual Life, Wellesley College

Introduction

What a joy it is for me to be here, among so many of you who as friends and partners in the work of peace building and peace being have inspired me and shaped my life and work ... and also what joy to be among the rest of you whose friendship and partnership I look forward to in the days ahead. Before I begin my reflections, there are certain rituals that are important as we begin a gathering such as this that remind us of the sacredness of the moment and its relationship to a long history of moments of people gathering as part of a movement committed to peace.

The first is the honoring of our elders in this movement and there are many. But there is one whose life continues to have a particular impact on this movement and on my life. Elise Boulding, both in the unique beauty of her personhood and in the long legacy of peacemakers whose spirits come alive in her, is our mother and we pause to praise the power and passion with which she gives us life.

Then we must also give thanks to the gatherers, those who give shape and form to vision by creating a space and structure for the movement to express itself. To Ginny Straus, Karen Nardella and all those here at the Boston Research Center for the 21st Century, we pause to praise the instinct and insight that has given us place and space to deepen our work.

And finally, we bring to mind those who are engaged in the struggle of building cultures of peace in the face of the day to day violence of a culture of war. Each of us can no doubt bring to mind those people engaged in peacemaking efforts across the world: from negotiators engaged in international situations of conflict; to community organizers working to empower local communities to build a peaceful and just future; to women and men giving their lives to creating a culture of peace and aliveness with their partners and within their families. We honor all of these peacemakers. Tonight I am particularly thinking of two friends of mine whose work at creating a culture of peace in their lives amidst the culture of war brought about by cancer has been fundamental to shaping the words that I offer this evening. On behalf of all those engaged in the struggle, I offer praise and thanks to my friends Dick Nodell and Kate Harper-Nodell, and their commitment to seeking aliveness in the face of deadness and peace in the face of war.

I would like to begin with a moment of reflection assisted by the transformational jazz riffs of John Coltrane and then a poem by Howard Thurman.

Jazz is for me central to an understanding of moving from the culture of war to cultures of peace. Jazz takes us beyond the rigid forms and structures of our lives and invites us to flirt with the chaos of new possibility. After a bit of Coltrane (accompanied by McCoy Tyner), the poem that I will read is from Howard Thurman, an African-American mystic, an author, a poet who was Dean of Marsh Chapel at Boston University. Although I knew him only as child knows a great-uncle, his gentle spirit which I knew as a child has become embodied in his words as I have encountered them as an adult.

    ["Love" from John Coltrane's "First Medications"]

    There is a sense of wholeness at the core of humanity
    that must abound in all we do;
    that marks with reverence our every step,
    that has its sway when all else fails;
    that wearies out all evil things;
    that warms the depths of frozen fears
    making friend of foe;
    and lasts beyond the living and the dead,
    beyond the goals of peace, the ends of war!
    This we seek through all our years;
    to be complete and of one piece, within, without.
Go beyond the goals of peace, beyond the end of wars. That is what I would challenge us to do tonight and tomorrow to go beyond our familiar conversations about ending war and establishing peace and to envision a new paradigm, a peace culture that is about completeness, about wholeness, drawing on the particular wisdom of religious communities and also rooted in the spiritual principles that ground our common life. I would urge that our discussions not become some airy philosophical discourse but rather be called forth from us as if we were holding the blood-drenched body of a young man for whom honor was standing up for his brothers in a gang war, or as if we were smelling the stench of rotting flesh coming from the earth where a mass grave marks the trail of those for whom national pride and religious fervor found expression in ethnic cleansing, or as if we were embracing the bruised and battered body of a young woman violated by those for whom power over another found expression in rape. Peace is never simply a philosophical discussion, particularly when it comes to religion, but rather peace is both, a practice, as taught by Thich Nhat Hanh, a practice of cultivating a peacefulness within one's self which then expresses itself in action; and peace is a process, as taught by Elise Boulding, a process of imagining into reality a world not based on the principles defined by the culture of war but rather a world transformed by cultures of peace.

In my reflections this evening, I am going to suggest that although there have been many and varied forms of peacemaking philosophy and action that have emerged from religious traditions, by and large they all remain attached to and defined by a culture of war and thereby are unable to offer a new vision for the wholeness of humanity that is necessary for peace. I will also suggest that the single most destructive form of this attachment by religious traditions to the war culture is their explicit or implicit exclusivist claims to truth. I will then propose that if religious traditions are to play a positive role in the building of peace cultures in the next century, they must first transform themselves by moving from exclusivism to pluralism and from tolerance to interdependence.

Before I delve any further into these reflections, I would like to share with you just a bit of my own experience that grounds me as I approach moving from a culture of war to cultures of peace. I am the grandchild of survivors of the Armenian genocide, raised on the stories of the atrocities committed against the people whose body is mine. Images of mass slaughter, of families separated, of communities displaced and in Diaspora, stories of escape and separation, of loneliness and loss, were a part of my childhood anthology. As an adult I carry these stories as memories etched upon my soul, inscribed upon my flesh, never to be forgotten, always remembered as that evil of which human beings are capable. Yet beside these memories is the image of my Armenian grandfather, his face shining with hope, love, compassion and life; devastation and hope side by side, reality acknowledged and yet possibility undenied. Here was a man who had experienced the depths of human cruelty and emerged with a belief in the possibility of the healing of humankind.

In the first part of this series, "From War Culture to Cultures of Peace," we focused on creating cultures of peace within family life and education.

In her talk entitled "Navigating the Waters of Human Potential," Maria Guajardo Lucero talked about being taught "to navigate the waters of human potential" by her three sons. I loved what she said about how her sons had taken her "to depths of self-exploration that were previously unknown to her and that the core of family life is respect for human dignity." In her remarks she stated, "if one accepts this core of human dignity, then one must decide if a culture of peace is to guide one's family life. In order to make this shift in consciousness, this shift in being--as an individual and as a family--there needs to be a determination. A conscious decision to make a break with those habits that allow a culture of war to define our existence."

My experience as a parent and partner, as a son and grandson and as particularly as a father confirms these powerful insights. There is a way in which the circle of our intimates provides the ground from which all of our peacemaking efforts grow.

A second aspect of my life's experience which forms the foundation of my approach to cultures of war and peace has to do with the faces of the people who lived around St. Ann's Episcopal Church in the South Bronx in New York City where I lived and served as a seminarian. Here was a community all but forgotten and dismissed by society. Here were the throwaway people of America, the disposable ones, blamed for their own demise. These beloved people were to become my teachers, my guides and sages towards a deeper understanding of hope and peace. Jonathan Kozol writes about this community in his powerful telling of life in the South Bronx in a book called Amazing Grace(1). Here he writes about what I lived, on St. Ann's Avenue: love and despair, life and death occurring simultaneously. As I read his words, I could once again see the faces of children beaming with life even as their bodies wasted away with illness and malnutrition. I could once again feel the power of community even as I could smell the odor of greed always in the air as building after building was burned for profit.

In the second conference in this series, Gar Alperovitz challenged us to consider the importance of a new economic paradigm to creating cultures of peace. I believe this--the South Bronx taught me that--and I take to heart his challenge that neither the reform of existing economic systems, nor a revolution which merely replaces one manipulative system with another is the answer that we need. It is, in his words, the reconstruction, or in the words of my friend and colleague Donna Bivens, the transformation, of our economic structures into a new system based on principles of cooperative engagement and the common good which is needed.

As a community organizer for most of my adult life, I have no illusion about the difficulties of a dream of a just and peaceful society and yet it was precisely the emergence of the human spirit out of the devastation of genocide and injustice that has confirmed my belief that any real change must emerge from an inner transformation, a spiritual awakening to the radical possibilities of the human heart loosed from the oppressive chains of resignation to the status quo. It is here that the religious communities have much to offer our quest for building cultures of peace.

And so this evening, and tomorrow, we focus our thoughts and actions on exploring the role of religious communities in this transformational process of moving from a culture of war to cultures of peace.

What comes to your mind when you think about religion and peace? Take a moment and try and identify for yourself some of the associations that you have with the role of religion in issues of violence, war and peace.

The Historic Role of Religions in Defining Cultures of Peace

In my experience, religion is equally as praised for being a catalyst for peace as it is condemned for being a cause of violence. On the one hand I have within me vivid images of religiously inspired peacemakers engaging a violent world towards the ends of peace. There are those, mostly men, whom we most often identify as famous religiously inspired peacemakers: Buddha, Mohammed, Amos, Jeremiah, Jesus, Gandhi, King. But there are so many others. I hear the words of Jain Acarya Tulsi; Confucianist Pan Chao; Buddhists Thich Nhat Hanh, Tsunesaburo Makiguchi and Ueshe Tsogyel; Sappho of Greece; Baha'i prophet Baha'u'alah; Hindus like Sri Chaitanya Mahaprabhu and Mirabai; of Native American peacemakers Chief Joseph and Wilma Mankiller; Muslims Rabi'a and Badshah Kahn; Christians Lucrecia Mott, Sojourner Truth and Oscar Romero; Taoist Li Ch'ing-Chao; Jews like Nelly Sachs and Abraham Joshua Heschel; and perhaps most of all, the millions of activists whose names we will never know, those women, men and young people whose daily acts of peacemaking make manifest the religious traditions from which they draw inspiration and understanding.

And yet, on the other hand these same traditions have been used to justify horrendous atrocities. My mind is filled with horrific images from history: of genocide in Armenia and in America, of the organized policy of extinction called colonial expansion, of the crusades, of the holocaust, of slavery, of apartheid. And this continues today, in Northern Ireland, in Rwanda, in the Balkans, in the Middle East, and in America, both in its extreme form as white supremacists and their dressed up cousins the religious right spew anti-multicultiural, anti-gay, anti-women hatred and also in its more socially accepted form of the kind of triumphalist rhetoric used against Iraq. In each of these, cases religion has been and continues to be used to justify acts of aggression and of war in the name of a higher power or on behalf of divinely given authority.

What are we then to make of the role of religion when it has both been central to the development of some of the world's greatest peace movements and been a contributing factor if not the contributing factor to some of the world's most horrific human tragedies?

There is no doubt that religious traditions have given much to our understanding of building cultures of peace and no doubt that we still have much to learn from the wisdom therein. In preparing for this conference, I had intended to spend time in my reflections reviewing some of the powerful peacemaking philosophies and practices from each of the religious and spiritual traditions in the world. But I'm not going to do this. Instead I would refer you to a collection of articles in the book Subverting Hatred, published by the Boston Research Center which beautifully describes the peace cultures of many of the religious and spiritual traditions of the world. I have chosen a different path this evening because I believe that, as powerful as the vision of peace that these traditions offer is, ultimately this power is undermined by their attachment to the principles of the culture of war and it is here that we must begin.

In his paper, Peacework 3 the World of Cancer, Richard Nodell speaks of how our world, even our peacemaking efforts, are attached to the world of war. He writes,
    Our common world is a world defined by war. War is our walk of life. Peace is often defined as the end of war not as its alternative. We live a life of campaigns. Success is victory. Health is the eradication of disease. We have wars against poverty and injustice. We fight for morality and preservation of values. And we do this all very well, perhaps as well as it can be done.
We have constructed a world in expectation of warfare. We dream of opposition and overcoming. Our traditions of learning, law and medicine derive from ancient chivalric orders. Schools are competitive, justice adversarial and medicine treats disease as the enemy. We know all this and it has been written a thousand, thousand times.

There are any number of traditions that offer alternative modes of being yet for all of their wisdom and deep understanding, even these traditions fail to offer a viable alternative way of being in the world. (Often they are most successful in either ignoring the world or creating a niche in it.)

What is the world of war and where does it come from? Crudely and simply put, it comes from our fear. We are by nature weak and defenseless creatures, mid-sized mammals with no claws, fangs or even fur. Our will, intelligence and group coordination have nonetheless succeeded so that we are the dominant predatory species on the planet. And behind all this will, intelligence and coordination stands our fear, our unifying principle.

So what are some of the essential characteristics of this (fear-based) world of war? We know it as life in opposition of struggles and obstacles, of either/or of me and not-me. When we occupy this world we are motivated by fear which can be excited into anger (and leads to violence)."

The Role of Religions in Defining the World of War

Religion is deeply invested in this culture of war. Movements which in most cases began as an inspired vision of a new way of being in the world based on principles of spiritual aliveness, quickly became institutionalized in a way that adopted the psychology, structure, language and principles of a world where insight and understanding are possessions in a competitive game of survival, a world at war.

Religious Identity

Religious identity is as often defined as what one is not as what one is. Rather than simply identifying oneself as a follower of a particular spiritual practice, among a variety of different practices, religious traditions often require what amounts to an oath of allegiance to a particular system of beliefs and/or institution which views itself as threatened by other, different religious communities. This relationship to otherness, in the words of Richard Wentz in his book The Culture of Religious Pluralism, leads to the human response to diversity of being either conquest or conversion, both of which are acts of war.

Institutional Structure

Religious institutions have often modeled themselves in ways that adapt structures created by a war-based world. The world of war is the world of power over rather than mutual empowerment and in as much as our religious institutions reflect this philosophy of power over in their structure, they are attached to the world of war. This inequality may appear as hierarchical structures which offer special status based on gender, race, sexual orientation, age, or class background. It is one thing to honor members of a community who perform a particular role within the community as a teacher, elder, or ritualist. It is quite another matter to privilege some in ways that diminish others.

The Language of War The Language of Exclusive Claims of the Truth

Many religious traditions have adopted trumphalist or fear-based language that encourages a convert-or-conquer attitude among its members. In these traditions the simple act of speaking, singing about or practicing one's religious beliefs sets that person in an adversarial relationship to others who are not of that tradition. Exclusivist language is an especially pernicious form of this language of war and religious traditions are rife with it. It is in this language of war that is used to express religious identity, that religion is particularly susceptible to becoming entangled with nationalism. History is filled with situations where the rhetoric of nationalistic identity becomes infused with the rhetoric of religious identity. Religious songs about vanquishing negative spiritual power, become patriotic anthems calling for the destruction of evil regimes. According to Richard Wentz, Columbus, in his Book of Prophecies, spoke of his mission as the "conquest of a new continent, the conversion of its inhabitants and thereby the destruction of the Anti-Christ." Hear these words of Columbus and then listen to the rhetoric of Slobodan Milosevic as he combines nationalistic fervor with Christian claims of truth to justify his ongoing acts of genocide--a rhetoric, by the way, which we in this country were deaf to for the longest time because of our own attachment to Christian rhetoric of exclusivism. Where would we be now had we heard the cries of Albanian Muslims in Kosovo ten or fifteen years ago when they were pleading for assistance?

The Transformation of Religion

Certainly the history of religion is in part a history of reform, but I believe that the reform of our religious traditions is not enough. We need to transform them, to disentangle them from their attachment to the war culture and recreate them, so that they might provide the spiritual energy necessary to create and sustain cultures of peace.

There are two movements that I would like to suggest as central to the transformation of religion. The first is the movement from exclusivism to pluralism and the second from tolerance to interdependence.

From Exclusivism to Pluralism

I have the privilege of sharing in the lives of more than 3,000 students, faculty and staff and some 33,000 alumnae at Wellesley College as we attempt to create a learning community which respects and draws upon the great diversity of human experience. It has become clear to us as we attempt to nurture community among diversity that we must reach beyond the usual superficial levels of communication and tap into a much deeper source of understanding if we are to cross the barriers that have historically divided human beings one from another and understand the meaning of pluralism in the world. In creating new paradigms, Elise often asks us to use our imaginations to envision that which we have not yet experienced ... so I want you to use your imaginations for a moment as I share with you an image, a parable really, that helps me to envision this deeper source of understanding necessary for creating cultures of peace. To do this, however, we need to create some space in our bodies, so why don't we stand as you are able, stretch and use a few deep breathes to clear some space within you. Please be seated.

Imagine, if you will, a group of people, a small community, living together in a harsh, dry, barren land. At the center of this community is a well--dug deep into the ground--from which the people who gather around it draw the water that sustains them in the harsh environment of their lives. In fact, there are scattered across this desert many communities, gathered around many wells, but because of the distance and danger that separates them, each community lives in relative isolation from the other. The people of each well believe that they have found at their well the only way to survive in the desert of their lives. They celebrate this discovery and guard their precious water that gives them life. From time to time travelers from other parts of the desert visit with stories of other wells which also provide water and similarly sustain the lives of other communities. But the people of each well generally discount the possibility that any other well could provide the kind of nourishment that theirs does. So in their separation, their lives go on.

Improved methods of transportation increase the ability of people to cross the desert. People of different wells begin to encounter one another with increasing frequency and learn more about each other. At first there is great fear and confusion at the discovery of these other foreign communities. But amidst the confusion and occasional acts of aggression, a general attitude of tolerance begins to emerge. The people of the wells learn to tolerate one another and accept the fact that each well seems to provide water of a slightly different consistency and of a slightly different flavor. While publicly and politely practicing tolerance of each other's claims, each community privately maintains the superiority of their water. Each is convinced that their own experience is evidence that their well is the true well of the water that sustains life in the desert. For many years, this tolerance continues, until one day, one memorable day, a diver exploring the deepest parts of one of the wells, makes a discovery. Far beneath the surface of the earth, beneath the harsh reality of the desert, is an endless sea of water which is the common source of all the wells in the desert.

For us to begin to understand the creative possibilities that are held within the diversity of human experience and embrace the complexity of the human community, we must take the plunge and dive deep into the waters that lie beneath the surface of our lives. We must move beyond exclusive claims of truth, whether they be religious, political, or ideological and embrace a relational understanding of how truth becomes known only as we encounter one another. If we are to move in the direction of pluralism, then like the people of the wells, we must first move out of our fearful isolation, out of the world of war and risk encounter with one another, develop a sense of mutual respect for the diversity of each other's experience and then explore the bonds that weave together our common humanity.

At Wellesley College we have established a new multi-faith model of religious life in which all religious traditions and spiritual perspectives are valued and in which no one is seen as normative. This is in contrast to usual religious life programs in which there is one dominant religious tradition, usually Protestant Christian, around whom everyone else must orient themselves. The program currently involves thirteen different religious traditions, including, Baha'i, Buddhist, Christian, Hindu, Jain, Jewish, Muslim, Native American, Native African, Neo-Pagan, Sikh, Unitarian-Universalist and Zoroastrian. In this work, I am institutionally charged to nurture all without representing any one religious tradition. I work together with a multi-faith team of advisors and student leaders to develop new models for religious life and community ritual in which each religious tradition is respected and in which no one voice dominates. We work together as a team, supporting each other's individual group life, while exploring in depth the possibilities of interdependence and inter-religious cooperation. Our primary work, however, is not theoretical but relational, the intentional nurturing of relationships with each other and within the community. The one thing that I am disappointed in about the timing of this gathering is that it is spring break at Wellesley. Now that seems like a strange thing to say, but because it is spring break, I was unable to bring with me the students who have been my teachers these past years. I wanted you to realize that this work is not about disembodied dialogue but about Colby, Suzanne, Sarah, Anindita, Yasmeen, Simi, Jackie, Lisa, Stacie, Des, Allaire, Meg, Shannon, Kim, Rachana and other women who have through a series of carefully structures retreats and meetings risked going deep into encounter with one another.

This has precipitated a shift from a dialogue in which people attempt to tolerate each other's claims of truth to a process in which truth is seen as residing somewhere in between us and where we understand that through our relationships with one another, we gain a more complete understanding of ultimate truth. To this end we are attempting to live out an ethic described in the work of Diana Eck in her book, Encountering God, where she speaks of the importance of religious pluralism as she describes the different responses to dealing with religious diversity.

    First there is the exclusivist response: Our community, our tradition, our understanding of reality, our encounter with God, is the one and only truth, excluding all others. Second, there is the inclusivist response: There are, indeed, many communities, traditions, and truths, but our own way of seeing things is the culmination of the others, superior to the others, or at least wide enough to include the others under our universal canopy and in our terms. A third response is that of the pluralist: Truth is not the exclusive or inclusive possession of any one tradition or community. Therefore the diversity of communities, traditions, understandings of the truth, and visions of God are not an obstacle for us to overcome, but an opportunity for our energetic engagement and dialogue with one another. It does not mean giving up on our commitments; rather, it means opening up those commitments to the give and take of mutual discovery, understanding, and, indeed, transformation.(2)
Although this concept of a shared truth is the hallmark of our work at Wellesley, it should be noted that those who hold claims to exclusive ownership of the truth are not excluded from this process. This is not simply a group of like-minded, liberals holding hands and celebrating relativism and universalism, but rather a structured place of encounter for all people where serious dialogue can occur in the context of deepening relationship. This model is about transformation. It is about transforming ourselves and others by reaching beyond self-serving ideology, learning from each other's experiences and thereby coming to understand that the future of humankind depends on our ability to realize that our lives are inextricably linked to one another in a way that is inescapable as we enter the next century.

This work has now taken on national and even international dimension with the establishing of the Education as Transformation Project, an inter-institutional program based at Wellesley which is now working with representatives from more than 400 colleges and universities to engage a dialogue and change process around issues of religious pluralism and spirituality in higher education.

Beyond Tolerance

One of the things that I have encountered in this work at Wellesley and beyond is that too often in the work of interreligious dialogue, we have settled for tolerance as our goal rather than risk the possibility that our lives are in fact connected and that it is possible to celebrate one's own experience without negating that of another and conversely celebrate another's experience without diminishing one's own. Therefore the second part of transforming religions to play a positive role in the movement from a war culture to cultures of peace is moving from tolerance to interdependence.

What then is tolerance?

Tolerance, at least as it is defined in the west, is conflict arrested. It is a great harness applied to the destructive forces of ignorance, fear and prejudice. It provides a wall between warring parties. At best it is a glass wall where protected people can see one another going about parallel lives. But nonetheless it is still a wall dividing us from each another. As such, tolerance is not a basis for healthy human relationship nor will it ever lead to true community, for tolerance does not allow for learning, or growth or transformation, but rather ultimately keeps people in a state of suspended ignorance and conflict.

In the face of a world punctuated by acts of intolerance, how could tolerance possibly be an unworthy goal for which to strive? At a time when tolerance has often been replaced by overt acts of hate in our communities and our world, a little tolerance seems a worthy goal. History, however, tells us otherwise. Tolerance as the ultimate goal has not and will not lead us to cultures of peace.

The current unraveling of social policies regarding racial justice in our society is a stunning reminder of the limits of tolerance. After nearly 35 years of legislated tolerance, it has become clear that very little has fundamentally changed in terms of our society's understanding of racial identity and prejudice. The racial Balkanization of America holds the same lessons as the ethnic fragmentation of the Balkans. Tolerance forced or legislated does not lead to mutual understanding, societal transformation and community.

If religious communities are going to play a positive role in moving us beyond the limits of tolerance, then they are going to have to move beyond the kind of interfaith dialogue where people eventually agree to disagree and tolerate each other. This is a weak alliance at best. No, religious communities must examine what is it about their own principles that keeps them from discovering the reality of our interdependence on one another.

The movement from exclusivism to pluralism and from tolerance to interdependence begins at home. Too often religious peace activists speak out against the injustice of oppressive governments and remain silent about the oppressiveness of their own religious insitutions. I have witnessed over and over again in my own Christian religious community activists who fight injustice with exclusivist words and war-like tactics which bind them to the culture of war and obscure their message of peace.

Turning Our Attention to Our Own Traditions

And so in conclusion I would like to share with you one way in which I have turned my attention to challenging my own religious tradition to rid itself of its exclusivism and move beyond tolerance. I have thought long and hard about how best to speak this message to my brothers and sisters in the Christian community about this movement from a culture of war to a culture of peace and eventually I found that the best way to communicate was to write a letter. So, this past January, as I sat on the Banks of the Ganges River in Varanasi, India I started a letter to the Christian community. It is the first of what I hope will be a series of letters on this subject.

A Letter to the Christian Community on the Violence of Christianity

Victor, a servant of God and follower of Jesus Christ, to all my sisters and brothers in the Christian Community.

Peace to you all.

I hope that this letter finds you well in body, mind and spirit and that your days are filled with meaning. Of course in as much as meaning is made not only from pleasant times but also from times of struggle and sadness, let me begin by offering my prayers that meaning be made from all the moments of your lives.

I have often sat down to write to you out of love and concern for your life as a community of faith. My concern is both political and personal. Political in the ways in which Christians continue to impact the total complex of relations between people living in this world, and personal for I myself am a priest in the Episcopal sect of your community.

I write to you from a place far away, a place very different from the country that I call home. I am in India surrounded by the beauty and complexity of manyness, which is India. I write you as a stranger as well as a friend. How strange this seems, because at this moment I feel both more connected and more alienated from the Christian community than ever before. It has only been by coming to this far-off place and allowing myself to plunge deep into the waters of the kind of pluralism that India's many cultures and religions offer that I have discovered the aliveness of God in me and around me. What irony that I came to India to learn about religions other than Christianity and yet what I found in me, was a Christianity that I had always known but never fully experienced. How far we must go sometimes to see that which is within us. And so it is from this new vantage-point that I look with fresh eyes at the Christian community in the United States, and feel both inspired and troubled by what I see.

I am inspired by the deep and abiding love that I see flow from many of you to friends and strangers as acts of kindness. I am inspired by the devotion of your worship and how through words spoken, sung, danced and played you express the wondrous wisdom which you continue to gather from scholars and sages, telling the unfolding story of that which you call the Spirit of God so alive in your community. I am inspired by your practice of prayer, spoken and silent, through which you weave together an intimate relationship with the one whom you call God. I am inspired by the spaces in which you gather whether they be arrayed in ornate splendor where color, shape and form proclaim the greatness of that which inspires you or whether they be sacred in their simplicity providing no distraction from contemplation and conversation. I am inspired by the spiritual movements which you call justice, striking out against that which oppresses the body and binds the soul. There is so much of beauty that has grown from a ground watered by the spirit carried by those who seek to be followers of Jesus. And for a long time, no doubt too long a time, I allowed myself to view mostly this part of the picture. But now my view is different. That which was obscured has been revealed and I am troubled, deeply troubled.

I am troubled by the ways in which the ancient and alive spirit of the divine expressed in the historic and contemporary Christian community continues to be the source of a violence, hatred and injustice.

Many have written from a Christian perspective on the ills of our world, decrying the immoral forces around us and calling upon Christians to stand up and speak out against such evil. Perhaps you've read this work or maybe you've been involved in standing up or speaking out. I have devoted much of my life and ministry to doing just this, to proclaiming a vision of a peaceful and just society based on principles of equity, cooperation and interdependence and critiquing aspects of our society which violate these principles. I have stood with other Christians trying to practice their faith by challenging the unjust aspects of society and I know the importance of this work.

But I am now standing in a different place, with a group of people who have looked and are looking at the Christian community itself and asking a different set of questions. Questions like: How is it that a religion based on love generates hate? How is it that a religion based on peace produces violence and war?

My dear brothers and sisters in Christ, there is something fundamentally wrong with the way in which we have come to understand and practice Christian faith. It has everything to do with an attachment to exclusivism, the belief that Christianity is the one true path to God. And I want you to know--the world needs you to know--that the only possible outcome of this belief is violence. Exclusivism is violence.

When most of us think of religious exclusivism, we think of extremists. Exclusivism conjures up images of fundamentalist Christians who make reference to biblical passages to provide justification for their every thought and action. Perhaps you have your own associations about who these exclusivists are: bible thumpers, doorbell ringing crusaders, TV evangelists, or even the more extreme cult leaders or those who bomb clinics or public buildings.

But it is not simply so-called "religious fundamentalists" who practice this exclusivism. No, there is a kind of inclusivism preached by liberal church folk which really is exclusivism dressed up in more refined garb. And these principles of exclusivism are embedded within the doctrine and dogma of nearly all of the Christian sects that I know.

If you believe that one can only be in relationship to the divine, that one can only fully know God by being a Christian, then you are practicing exclusivism and you are committing violence.

If you are not satisfied by witnessing to the fact that God has acted in the world through the person of Jesus and the presence of the Holy Spirit but feel compelled to proclaim that God has not acted as powerfully in any other way before or since then you are practicing exclusivism and are committing violence.

I write these words with love in my heart.
I am a Christian.
I make this claim with love and also with pain.

I have come to know the beauty of God and the possibility of peace through the life, death and resurrection of Jesus and through the moving of the Holy Spirit in the historic and contemporary community of followers and I have seen the destruction brought upon the people of this earth by this same community of followers as they claim exclusive ownership of the truth and provide justification for horrific acts of violence.

What a paradox that something of such beauty can cause such destruction.

We who sent our brother Jesus to the cross ... we have sent others to their death, to the crusaders sword, to the lynching tree, to the gas chamber, to the mushroom cloud, all in the name of that same Lord. And today still, in the Balkans, Serbian forces are committing the atrocities of ethnic cleansing emboldened by their identity as Orthodox Christians fighting a battle against the ungodly. Christian exclusivist claims of truth have been used throughout history by nationalists to lend credence to their claim to exclusive power.

Does it matter that others do the same thing in the name of their God?
No, it does not. We must be concerned about that which we have the power to change. Our selves and our religion.

I believe that we have a magnificent and formidable journey ahead of us. It is the reconstruction of the Christian movement in a way that rejects exclusivism and embraces pluralism.

Several months ago I wrote a letter to my brothers and sisters in religious communities other than Christianity. Let me close by sharing these words with you ...

"We walk side by side, fellow travelers on life's pathways. I speak of being awakened to the wonder and mystery of the world, using words that reflect my window to the Divine, the one whom I call my Lord and my God, Jesus, the Risen Christ. You too speak of being awakened to the wonder and mystery of the world, using words that reflect your window to the Divine through the teachings of the Buddha, of Baha'u'llah, of Lord Mahavir, of Muhammad, teachings from the Torah, the Guru Granth Sahib, and the Vedas. As I hear you speak and as I look into your eyes, I see God. I feel God. I experience God in you, not just a partial reflection of my Christian God, but the Creator, the Divine Spirit in whom we live and move and have our being. How magnificent is this Divine force that it should appear across the earth like the flowers of a garden in so many different shapes and hues.

In my work, I am surrounded by people of a myriad of religious traditions who are living witnesses to the magnificence of the Divine. At first, as we worked to understand religious diversity as a resource rather than a barrier to creating community, I came face to face with the language of Christian exclusivism that had become so deeply ingrained within me. As my heart softened, these claims of exclusive ownership over truth began to peel away like scales before my eyes. Then, I not only discovered the unique beauty and truth that lies at the heart of other religious traditions, but I also discovered, in a much deeper way than I thought possible, the unique beauty and truth that is the Christian experience, free from the idolatrous bonds of exclusivism which have held it captive for so long.

There is no place for religious exclusivism in Christianity. It has been arguably the single greatest source of human misery during the past two millennia. It must be replaced by an understanding of the interwoveness of all life, of all religious traditions. For Christians to understand the magnificence of God, it is necessary for us to bask in the beauty of the many other manifestations of this one great Divine force by looking lovingly into the faces of people of other religious traditions and thereby glimpsing a more complete image of the one whom we now see as though through a glass darkly, but only then face to face."

Finally, my brothers and sisters in Christ, farewell, for now. Be not afraid. Remember that God so loved us that we too might love, that we might give our hearts to the world. May the peace of God be with you now as always.

This evening, tomorrow and in the days to come, may we go beyond the goals of peace, the ends of war and seek through all our years to be complete and of one piece, within, without.

Notes

1. Jonathan Kozol, Amazing Grace, (New York: Random House, 1995)
2. Diana L. Eck, Encountering God, (Boston, Beacon Press, 1993 p. 168)