The Center for Interreligious Understanding honored Bishop Krister Stendahl with the first-ever "Faith in Dialogue Award" for lifetime achievement in interreligious leadership on November 13, 2003 at Congregation Emanu-El in New York City.
Bishop Stendahl is among the world's foremost champions for interfaith dialogue and understanding. A leader of the ecumenical movement for more than 40 years, he has challenged religious leaders and laity to think anew about their relationship with people of different faiths. Stendahl is the former Dean of the Harvard Divinity School, Bishop of Stockholm, Sweden, and Professor at Brandeis University.
"At a time when religious conflicts divide neighbors and nations, we believe it is important to recognize extraordinary individuals who are building bridges of understanding across all faiths," said Jack Bemporad, the director of the CIU. "Bishop Krister Stendahl has dedicated his life to promoting theological dialogue, mutual respect and genuine understanding."
A renowned biblical scholar who has written extensively on the Apostle Paul, Bishop Stendahl has dedicated much of his career to counteracting negative stereotypes of Jews and women. As chair of the World Council of Church's work on "The Church and the Jewish People," he has called on religious leaders to "learn the art of living among other faiths" and to "find new ways to affirm the other's humanity" as a way of participating fully in a pluralistic society.
"Bishop Stendahl consistently reminds us that the health of a democratic society depends upon learning to examine ourselves and our traditions in the light of the other," Bemporad said. "He has challenged us to use our common religious values to build a society based on diversity, justice and peace."
Stendahl is the author of several books including Paul Among Jews and Gentiles; The Bible and the Role of Women; Energy for Life; Final Account: Paul's Letter to the Romans; and The School of St. Matthew & Its Use of the Old Testament . He is married to the writer and scholar Dr. Brita Stendahl.
9 comments:
Krister Stendahl's analysis of "The Sermon on the Mount and Third Nephi" published in Reflections on Mormonism, Judaeo-Christian Parallels (Provo, Utah: Religious Studies Center, Brigham Young University, 1978), 139-54, argues that the Book of Mormon text of the Sermon on the Mount is not a genuine translation from an ancient language but is Joseph Smith's nineteenth century targumic expansion of the English King James text. Stendahl's study has been reprinted in Meanings: The Bible as Document and as Guide (Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1984), 99-113.
In the introduction to her case study of women priests in Sweden, Brita Stendahl observes:
The last two decades have experienced radical change in that women, although they continue to serve the church, no longer are willing to be subordinate to men, letting their will be done, their values go unchallenged, their theology be the standard for all theology worth the name. Women have declared themselves ready to serve as priests. They want to do theological research to test their theological views, and they want their share in the decision-making process of the church. And in many churches they have begun to do so.
Brita K. Stendahl, The Force of Tradition: A Case Study of Women Priests in Sweden (Philadelphia: Fortress, 1985) 1.
Ins and Outs of Group Bias
In-Group Bias
If we believe that someone else is in a group to which we belong, we will have positive views of them and give them preferential treatment. This works because we build our self-esteem through belonging, and the presence of someone from an in-group reminds us of that belonging.
Out-Group Bias
The opposite of in-group bias is out-group bias where, by inference, out-group people are viewed more negatively and given worse treatment. This is the basis of racial inequality.
In-group linguistic bias
In-group linguistic bias is where out-group people are described in abstract terms (which depersonifies them) when they conform to the out-group stereotype.
Research
Henri Tajfel visibly divided people in to random groups. They rapidly found in-group people preferable to out-group people, even finding rational arguments about how unpleasant and immoral the out-group people were.
Krister Stendahl does not adhere to the orthodox LDS view of Book of Mormon origins.
Brita Stendahl has written positively about women in the priesthood.
They are not adherents, but at the same time, certainly not enemies, of the Mormon church.
Besides being a tired thought-terminating cliche, is the term "anti" evidence of in-group linguistic bias?
Is there a middle-ground between adherent and enemy that would allow believers and non-believers alike to raise issues and voice opinions without risking being slapped with a label?
btw, I sincerely thank Julie for turning me on to the Mormon blogosphere or 'bloggernacle' ... I've thoroughly enjoyed Times & Seasons (particularly this thread)
This thread at Bloggernacle Times
And this thread at Mormon Mentality
Not to mention this thread
For years, the sloppiest "anti" literature came out of the Evangelical printing houses ... but it would seem that the LDS and the EVs are now finding common political ground on which to forge a new alliance ... irony?
Unfortunately, these are two traditions that provide little guidance or solutions to "systemic" challenges (as Stendahl would note, the emphasis on charity/service of the LDS/EVs is laudable, but this falls way short of an answer for how to provide universal health care, for example).
I suppose what concerns me the most is when the LDS/EVs turn Stendahl's call for respecting diversity on its head by insisting that faith traditions deserve to be treated as if they were equivalent to gender or race ... as if their "tradition" was more than just a bunch of commonly-held beliefs ... i.e., they assign "belief" to the same category as chromosomes and melanin ... does anyone else see this as problematic?
In the spirit of G.K. Chesterton --
“It is not bigotry to be certain we are right; but it is bigotry to be unable to imagine how we might possibly have gone wrong.” - The Catholic Church and Conversion
-- I applaud the new polygamy pages on the BYU website:
New BYU Polygamy Website
The church sets a better example for its members when it attempts to grapple with, rather than ignore, its own history.
With apologies to Russell Arben Fox, here goes my adaptation of his comment today over at Times & Seasons:
[Mormon culture] reminds me of those deaf parents who are so committed to the admittedly impressive culture that the unhearing have made for themselves that they actually become hostile towards new technologies that can return hearing to babies born deaf.
There are days that I feel like the hearing son of loving deaf parents. I feel the beauty of the sacrifice and effort of my Mormon pioneer forebears, but the cruel (wonderful?) reality is that I was born with ears that hear.
Should I pretend not to hear, for the sake of keeping up appearances, for the sake of family unity, for the sake of the "culture"? Is this what is being asked of me? If I refuse, am I "anti-deaf" or am I, quite simply, whole?
I think Atrios gets it right in this Eschaton post
Post a Comment