Islamophobia and the therapeutic dialogue: Some reflections

In the atmosphere of fear and controversy that surrounds Muslims at this moment in time it is hardly surprising that they feel unable to voice their fears and concerns openly. Added to this is the fact that Muslims already underutilize mental health services (Patel et al., 2000 Patel, N, Bennett, E, Dennis, M, Dosanjh, N, Matitani, A, Miller, A and Nadirshaw, Z. 2000. Clinical Psychology: ‘Race’ and ‘Culture’: A training manual, Leicester: The British Psychological Society.  [Google Scholar]). In the counselling arena four distinct aspects of the counselling relationship are affected. First, the therapeutic alliance, second, the socio-political context in which counselling occurs, third, the awareness of personal characteristics and competencies that facilitate multicultural counselling and, finally, the training requirements of multicultural counsellors. This paper seeks to consider each of these aspects of the therapeutic encounter with regard to Muslim clients.     

阿部正雄的宗教对话理论初探

文章简要介绍和分析了阿部正雄对当代宗教对话理论问题的思考。首先,针对世界诸宗教的当代处境,阿部指出目前宗教对话最根本的目标在于宗教间创造性的相互转化,只有这样宗教作为一个整体才能有效回应当代反宗教意识形态的挑战;其次,针对宗教内部的多元化问题,阿部提出了以佛教“三身佛”理论作为整合世界诸宗教之多元性和统一性的工作假说。笔者认为这一假说在一定程度上论证了宗教间的相互学习和转化的可能性和必要性,但另一方面又体现了某种程度的佛教优越感,难以真正为佛教和其他宗教“平等”的相互转化提供理论基础。     

On Being Lutheran In A Religiously Plural World

Abstract : For those of us who are self‐consciously Lutheran, the reality of contemporary religious pluralism engenders important theological questions. The thesis of this essay is that “being Lutheran” within the context of contemporary religious pluralism requires the creation of “Lutheran identity” that is pluralistic in structure, while simultaneously avoiding either theological exclusivism or theological inclusivism. The implications of this thesis are that (1) dialogue with the religious traditions of the world is of primary importance for thinking Lutherans, and (2) the church's witness and mission needs to be reconfigured in light of the practice of interreligious dialogue.     

PERSONAL ATTACHMENT TO BELIEFS

Abstract: There is a tendency in philosophical discussions to see beliefs as belonging to specific people—to see things in terms of “your” belief, or “my” belief, or “Smith's” belief. I call this “personal attachment to beliefs.” This mindset is unconscious, deeply ingrained, and a powerful background stance in discussion and thinking. Attachment has a negative impact on the quality of philosophical discussion and learning: difficulties in acknowledging error and changing beliefs, blindness to new evidence, difficulties in understanding new ideas, entrenchment in views, rancorous behavior, and the encouragement of competitive personal contests rather than collaborative searches for the truth. This article investigates the nature of attachment and traces out some of the undesirable consequences for classroom philosophical discussion, thinking, writing, and learning. It presents an alternative model to attachment and offers constructive suggestions for implementing the results of the investigation in the philosophy classroom and elsewhere.     

FIRST PERSON PLURAL: SELF‐UNITY AND SELF‐MULTIPLICITY IN THEOLOGY'S DIALOGUE WITH PSYCHOLOGY

In contradistinction to the contemporary human sciences, recent theological accounts of the individual‐in‐relation continue to defend the concept of the singular continuous self. Consequently, theological anthropology and the human sciences seem to offer widely divergent accounts of the sense of self‐fragmentation that many believe pervades the modern world. There has been little constructive interdisciplinary conversation in this area. In this essay I address the damaging implications of this oversight and establish the necessary conditions for future dialogue. I have three primary objectives. First, I show how the notion of personal continuity acquires philosophical theological significance through its close association with the concept of personal particularity. Second, through a discussion of contemporary accounts of self‐multiplicity, I clarify the extent of theological anthropology's disagreement with the human sciences. Third, I draw upon narrative accounts of identity to suggest an alternative means of understanding the experiential continuity of personhood that maintains the tension between self‐plurality, unity, and particularity and thereby reconnects philosophical theological concerns with human‐scientific analyses of the human condition. Narrative approaches to personhood are ideally suited to this purpose, and, I suggest, offer an intriguing solution to understanding and resolving the problem of self‐fragmentation that has caused recent theological anthropology so much consternation.     

FRANK CONVERSATIONS

I contend that Jews, Christians, and Muslims who seek peace should not be reluctant to acknowledge the existence of their sometimes profound disagreements, or to affirm the truth of their own beliefs and practices. Since this places me at odds with John Hick, I analyze his views, granting the strengths of his critical realism and arguing that his revisionist–pluralist theory of religion has significant limitations for interreligious dialogue. Since the veridical–pluralist alternative I propose facilitates rather than stifles disagreement, I examine three different conceptions of dialogue that acknowledge the importance of disputes among those searching for truth. I also discuss three virtues—honesty, empathy, and humility—whose cultivation would make us less likely to fail in our search for truth and the peace that is its sign and fruit.     

Liberation as a Correlate of Religiosity: a Christian–Muslim Perspective on Fundamental Trust

This article explores the dialectical relationship between liberating trust in reality and religious faith in God, interpreted from a Christian–Muslim perspective. An underlying conviction is that liberation constitutes a necessary mutual correlate of a “true” religiosity, i.e. liberation is to be conceived as both prerequisite for and realization of a genuine religiosity, and vice versa. As opposed to a “true” religiosity, born from liberating trust and finding its fulfilment in prophetic action aimed at liberation of human realities, religious belief and practice that stem from fundamental mistrust are likely to deteriorate into either religious fundamentalism or indifferentism. The article focuses on fundamental trust in reality as capable of evoking the liberating and uniting force of religious theory and praxis. It aims to render explicit the religious and ecumenical potential (hitherto not fully realized) of the theological–ethical considerations of Hans Küng, in particular within a Christian–Muslim framework. The first part of the article, more conceptual in character, examines Küng's views on fundamental (mis)trust and its religious implications. The second part seeks to identify theological insights that shed light on the specifically Christian and specifically Muslim interpretations of liberating trust. My hope is that this study may contribute to a truly global ecumenism whose objective is to render religion an instrument of liberation, not oppression.     

The Ahmadiyya and the Study of Comparative Religion in Indonesia: Controversies and Influences

As an organization of foreign origin, the existence and contribution of the Ahmadiyya in Indonesia has been a subject of debate. Some scholars ignore it completely as unimportant, while others consider that it has had significant influence. The contribution of the Ahmadiyya to Indonesian Islam most asserted by the movement itself is its efforts to check and respond to Christian missionary activity. In what way has the movement actually made a contribution to that effort? How widespread is the influence of the Ahmadiyya in the discourse on Christianity, in particular, and the study of comparative religion, in general, in Indonesia? Why has the Ahmadiyya paid more attention to the issue of Christianity than other Muslim groups? This article aims to answer these questions by analysing literature on Christianity written and distributed by the Ahmadiyya in Indonesia and the effect this has had on relations between Islam and Christianity in two fields – religious mission and academia. The article presents three propositions. First, Ahmadiyya literature, with its apologetic, polemical and controversial character, had a significant influence on the academic study of comparative religion during two periods of instability: the late colonial era and the first two decades after the declaration of independence in 1945. Second, Ahmadiyya literature on Christianity has been most influential through the way it sets out to create a sense of the superiority of Islam and its compatibility with modernity. Third, for the Ahmadiyya, the issue of Christianity, particularly the death of Jesus, has been used as evidence that Mirza Ghulam Ahmad is the second Messiah.     

Interfaith Dialogue in Lebanon: Between a Power Balancing Act and Theological Encounters

This essay explores trends and directions of interfaith dialogue in Lebanon with a special focus on developments since the Ta'if Agreement (1989) signed at the end of the civil war. While viewing the encounters of interfaith dialogue in Lebanon against the background of political and social developments, the particular focus of this study is the ventures and potential of “inter-theological dialogue.” In particular, it explores the new initiatives whose focus is on theological and spiritual dialogue, since they seem to have been virtually ignored by recent studies in the field, even though inter-theological discussions have constituted an important part of inter-religious dialogue in Lebanon. The article proposes that theological dialogue in Lebanon is necessary in order to reach true ta?āyush (living together), particularly because politics and religion are intricately intertwined. Focusing on two initiatives within the past 15 years, it shows how they strive to make theological discourse – sometimes a merely intellectual exercise – relevant for society.     

Variations in Philosophical Genre: the Platonic Dialogue

The primary function of the Platonic dialogue is not the communication of philosophical doctrines but the transformation of the reader's character. This article takes up the question of how, or by what means, the Platonic dialogue accomplishes its transformative goal. An answer is developed as follows. First, the style of reading associated with analytical philosophy is not transformative, on account of its hermeneutical attachment and epistemic equality in the relationship between reader and author. Secondly, the style of reading associated with the genre of commentary is transformative because it is governed by a principle of authority. When the commentary model is applied to the Platonic dialogue, it can be seen that the dialogue mimics the function of the authority principle in transforming the reader into a commentator, that is, someone who reads from a position of detachment and accepts responsibility for himself as moral and epistemic agent.