An image from an earlier Dialogue.
At the beginning of June I had the incredible experience of observing the fifth dialogue between Shia clerics from the Ayatollah Khomeini Institue in Qom, Iran, and Mennonite theologians from across North America (including [shout out to] my own two amazing professors, Dr. Derek Suderman [Old Testament] and Dr. Jeremy Bergen [Systematic Theology]). There is so much to say on this experience that I realize I will need more than one post. This will be the first – introducing what the Dialogue is.
When I first began my Master’s program, I knew I was interested in interfaith dialogue, and as soon as I learned about this ongoing Dialogue I was intrigued. I knew I wanted to attend, but I didn’t expect what I got.
Let’s start at the beginning. In 1990 there was a large earthquake in Iran (Iran is one of the most seismically active regions in the world) and Mennonite Central Committee responded to the humanitarian crisis. As the MCC staff worked alongside Iranian spiritual leaders, they decided a student exchange between the Ayatollah Khomeini Institute and the Toronto School of Theology would be a good thing. The exchange proved quite successful, and several years into this the participants agreed that it would be really great if they could get articulate Shia and Mennonite theologians together to, well, talk theology (what else?) So here we are, in 2011, with the fifth such dialogue. It is held every two years and alternates between Iran and Canada (although there is hope an American school will host in the future).
Now, not everyone is a fan. Aside from the likes of Terry Jones, intelligent and thoughtful people oppose the Dialogue for different reasons. Some say the Mennonites are playing with fire, associating with Iranian leaders. I just tend to disagree with 
them (such thinkers don’t usually grasp the methodology of dialogue, nor would understand our pacifist theology). But there is also a very important population whom we shouldn’t ignore, and to whom we need to reach out – Iranian Canadians who fled Iran after the Revolution. When Dialogue III was held in Waterloo, such protesters shut down the Dialogue (read an article about it here.) They were not impressed with Canadian Mennonites speaking with representatives of the government they fled. So MCC and other Mennonite leaders did a lot of explaining on what our theology says about befriending your enemy (which in turn took some explaining to our Iranian friends who wanted to know why we referred to them as enemies). That experience led to this Dialogue being much more private, with invited guests only, so that the theologians could talk theology.
But this, too, leaves me with questions. Theology (as any decent theologian will tell you) is not merely esoteric ideas, but tangible, operative, and lived out. And while I completely agree that our guests should feel welcome and safe, and that for a discussion to be productive it needs to have parameters, do we do ourselves and our neighbours a disservice when we don’t allow more vociferous dissent? Dialogue III was stopped by the protesters because the Mennonite organizers were not comfortable blocking protests altogether, and in fact met with them earlier. MCC was specific that they had no desire to deny the experiences of those who had suffered under the current Iranian government. As a humanitarian organization MCC in particular, and as people of faith we Mennonites in general have an obligation to respect the dignity of both sides. Not easily done!
But back to this dialogue. The theme this year was Human Nature and Destiny: Explorations into Theological Anthropology. The papers were as follow:
Mohammad Ali Shomali, “Human Nature According to the Qur’an”
Gordon Zerbe, “Human Nature in Biblical Perspective”
Mohammad Fanaei Eshkevari, “The Concept of Perfect Man in Holy Qur’an”
Jo-Ann Brant, “The Way of Perfection”
Aboulhassan Haghani, “The Way of Perfection”
Harry Huebner, “Sin and Grace”
Ali Mesbah, “Religion, Culture, and Social Well-Being from Islamic Perspective”
David Shenk, “Culture and Faith in a Mennonite-Christian Perspective”
Aboulfazl Sajedi, “Islam and Human Rights”
Peter Dula, “Theological Assessment of Human Rights Language”
Mohammad Motahari Farimani, “The Role of ‘Turning to the Self’: Introspection in the Qur’anic Discourse”
Jeremy Bergen, “Conscience: The Role of Individual and Community”
Abbas Ali Shameli, “The Engendered Islamic Culture of Development”
Derek Suderman, “Created as Male and Female”
Really, really interesting papers. And here was my biggest shock of the conference – it wasn’t the conference itself I was drawn to, but rather the theological exchange of ideas. I had my two favourite groups of people side by side – Mennonite Central Committee workers (fellow observers) and theologians (I was one happy kid!). And it was the academic intellectual conversation, more than the human interest and cultural exchange (as great as that was) that enthralled me. I’m hooked. I mean completely and totally hooked. I knew it would be good, but I had no idea it would be this good!
In my next posts, I’ll explore some of what I found challenging, what I found especially enjoyable, and (best of all!) the theology itself.
In the meantime, here are a series of interesting blog posts participants who went to Qom, Iran, for the last dialogue wrote:
http://jdarylbyler.wordpress.com/
[...] of Iran and its policies comes from having met Iranian mullahs in dialogue (see post on this here). They were extremely gentle in their beliefs and demeanor. When I pushed a bit with one cleric in [...]