Planning for URI North America
April 4th, 2007
A few days ago I received an e-mail from an early URI supporter and member of one of our North American Cooperation Circles. He asked about the continuing role “a San Francisco based URI has… to play,” especially in light of other established interfaith groups. I thought this was an excellent question and it seems worth sharing my response here.
This question you bring up is one that has been on the minds of many. I’ve been discussing this same question, in a few variations, with a number of people. This morning I touched on it a bit with Mike Goggin, the current Chair of NAIN. I’ve spoken with the URI staff and Trustees, with Kay Lindahl, and with others. Mike was in San Francisco this week and had a chance to speak with Charles Gibbs and Bishop Swing. They apparently were touching on this subject as well.
For me, it comes down to this: URI has incredible value in the developing world, where interfaith is often a matter of life and death and where it does not have a long history. Here in the U.S. we have over a century of interfaith dialogue and a number of groups to support it, including the ones you have named. Each has its own purpose, some overlapping. CPWR exists primarily to promote the large Parliament gatherings, NAIN to connect individual groups, the World Council of Religious Leaders as a resource for the U.N. to connect with religious leaders.
Add to that Religions for Peace, which works to develop interreligious councils, and the Interfaith Alliance, who does the same but with a more activist agenda. URI fits in here somewhere by promoting grassroots interfaith cooperation, centered on the Preamble, Purpose, and Principles, but abstaining from hierarchical agendas and decision-making. In my mind, we have a role to play over the long-run in North America, but it is understandably difficult to gain traction here.
And yet those of us called to support this notion of an end to religiously-motivated violence, this notion of enduring dialogue and this notion of a culture of peace — we need to persevere in encouraging support for the URI in North America. The rest of the world needs a strong North American URI presence. Not only does North America have the funding and resources to be of assistance to the rest of the world, but they are also looking to us. They are looking to see that we are truly attempting to change the entrenched attitudes of Americans towards the rest of the world. From that, people derive hope that the global interaction of civilizations can become a true two-way dialogue rather than a clash.
So I hope that more people like you will ask such a wonderful and sincere question. And that we can continue to develop this notion and pose the questions — where do we go from here? Where does the URI fit — practically, not just idealistically — in a crowded interfaith space in North America and beyond?