We Need to Build

This week Eboo Patel, a Muslim pioneer in interfaith work, joins David and Curtis to ...

By
12

This week Eboo Patel, a Muslim pioneer in interfaith work, joins David and Curtis to discuss his book, We Need to Build. They discuss the need to allow people of different faiths to be able to bring their whole selves, including real and significant religious disagreements, to these conversations. Eboo also helps us understand why it is so important to do more than criticize what we don’t like in the culture, but instead to adopt the more mature approach of actually building what we want to see in society.

Show Notes:

–We Need to Build: Field Notes for Diverse Democracy by Eboo Patel

-Sign up for David’s French Press newsletter

-Follow Curtis’ work at RedeemingBabel.org

By
Comments (12)
Join The Dispatch to participate in the comments.
 
  1. Avatar photo
    Tracie

    Posted July 3, by New Yorker cartoonist Ellis Rosen:

    https://www.instagram.com/p/CfeDjCGuCQY/?igshid=MDJmNzVkMjY=

    Our times.

    Collapse
  2. Kris

    I really appreciated this week's discussion and the model of interfaith engagement that was discussed in this conversation.

    The discussion of the plurality of our nation and the challenges of developing civic minded populace frequently emphasizes the need to appreciate the larger systemic diversity, focusing predominately on diversity as a feature outside the self (or outside the communities that we may inhabit if we our living predominately in ethnically homogenous neighborhoods and settings). I wonder if this view perhaps limits the conversation of how to participate in a society with diverse values, that a lack of attention to how the negotiation of pluralism as an inherent part of the internal experience of persons can further the discourse and provide useful inroads, particularly among those struggling to value this as a necessary precondition of liberal democracy.

    This got me thinking. As a clinical psychologist, it is very apparent to me that "the person/self/individual" is not a univocal or homogenous entity, although it's sometimes easy to view it as such. Perhaps it is not evident to all, however. In fact, to understand persons in this way is to radically reduce the internal complexity and diversity of thoughts, motivations, aspirations, values that may at times work harmoniously, but often as much (maybe more often) are in competition and conflict. Our own assertions that we feel conflicted on a certain matter reveal that our internal states are far from always aligned and that we may have competing objectives. To presume that this is a neat and tidy process that occurs without conflict is to ignore the many tensions that exist within and in between our internal experience and how we negotiate external reality. Our theological history would also point to the presence of internal divisions, as Paul identifies clearly in Romans, but I don't want to collapse the consideration of internal diversity with Paul's distinction between the flesh and the spirit. Many of our internal and internal-external conflicts are not a question of sin but of competing aims. Furthermore, there are aspects of identity that are not inherently in conflict other than the fact that socially they are encouraged to be be mutually exclusive, necessitating one's ability to negotiate the suppression of one for the allowance of the other at circumscribed times, such as a sexual identity and an employee identity. The ability to effectively work between varying aspects of self with diverse motivations (or diverse actualizations of common motivations, such as various forms of fulfillment, in the case of a sexual self or a professional self) requires a complex overarching framework to moderate and mediate between various aspects of the person. However, all of these facets of the person require some capacity to negotiate the complexities and find some kind of harmonious process, otherwise exist in constant tension (as too many people do).

    The "self" can be thought of that organizing principle that seeks to reconcile the sometimes converging, often diverging elements of our biopsychosocial-spiritual world. It is an "emergent property" of being that is greater than the sum of its parts. The self negotiates the varying aspects of what comprises the complex identity of a person whose being extends well beyond their physical body and is present in the minds of others and in the space between our physical self and the persons who know us and the larger systems we navigate within. It is more of a complex process than a static object.

    It is in thinking about the complexities of how an individual negotiates this for themselves that connections can be drawn to the larger dynamic of doing this on a societal level. In order to help citizens engage this on a societal level, the capacity must be present (or at least the building blocks of these capacities must be present) to apply these complex skills to the social milieu. It seems to me that there has been a lack of appreciation, in conversations about negotiating pluralistic society and developing an appreciation for these competing needs of diverse individuals and communities, that this must also be sufficiently present within and around individuals in a parallel or analogous fashion.

    Although this is conjecture and perhaps from anecdotal experience, I postulate that individuals who likely struggle to engage in a pluralistic society very likely experience a corresponding difficulty negotiating their own internal experience in a comparable manner. I definitely see this at an extreme level in working with the seriously mentally ill and those with severe personality disorders. The presence of problematic internal superordinate self-structures in these individuals typically mirror problematic structures and systems in our society: totalitarian, fractious, deeply cynical, paranoid, maligned, etc. These individuals often struggle to engage their own internal complexity, frequently making them ill-equipped to participate in the same necessary capacities at an interpersonal and societal level. Even those of us who don't have severe mental illness are still prone to similar kinds of emotional and cognitive problems that prevent a more robust civic engagement, succumbing to deep fears, resentments, biased thinking, cognitive errors, and a host of other kinds of internal and interpersonal barriers. The erosion of social spaces where this kind of internal character can be developed is making it more and more difficult to develop these capacities on an individual level and risking the potential for it to be available on a societal level.

    Collapse
    1. Avatar photo
      Curtis Chang

      Fascinating conjecture, Kris! I think you are on to something. The humility and maturity required to change one’s mind requires the ability to disagree with one’s past self - and still accept that past self. It’s the same move we have to make with other selves in the present.

      Collapse
      1. Kris

        Thank you for your reply Curtis!

        I would agree and add that in addition to the capacity to integrate aspects of past selves is also the ability to negotiate between present selves and possible/undesirable future self aspects. Various psychological theorists who have clinically studied the psyche have proposed methods for doing so, some arguing that the manner in which we address external others is so much a projection of how we are managing our internal self-aspects. Contemporary relational and intersubjective theories really dig into this complex matrix of internal/interpersonal dynamics to examine how experiences throughout one's life (pos/neg attachment, success/failure, trauma, etc.) impact the genetic/temperamental foundation that a person enters the world with. These are mutually influencing and a deep understanding of a person involves exploring these intersections and how they co-shape/co-regulate one another.

        All this "psychology nerding out" (to go with your "theological nerding out") hopefully points back to the complexities of making societal changes and increasing the capacity for individual members, families, and communities to better understand these factors in order to best negotiate the larger societal complexities of liberal democracy. And, the identification of this needing to happen most effectively at both an individual and societal levels simultaneously is an essential component it would seem to me. Therefore, moving forward, it appears necessary to consider how we make incremental changes in parallel at multiple levels of society. Easy peasy! :D

        Collapse
  3. Richard Kennedy

    Best. Podcast. Ever! Sometimes I think that standing for various aspects of what I believe is like standing on a beach against a tsunami. Discussions like this remind my of good civic duty is an expression of faith. And also, …and stand he will, for his Master is able to make him stand.”
    It would be great for Eboo to be a regular guest.

    Collapse
  4. Avatar photo
    Will Roberts

    It was good to hear David's acknowledgment that perhaps it would benefit him to be a little more positive in his writings than to critique everything that is wrong. I think his critiques are correct that he has become of a bit of a Jeremiad. Frankly if I had committed myself to the Republican party and they cast me out like a leper and many of Trump's supporters threatened to gas my adopted African daughter I would be tempted to be a Jeremiad as well. But while Jeremiah was obedient to the call God had for him he wasn't all that effective in persuading people. Sometimes God calls people in scripture to show as much what doesn't work as what does work.

    That being said I am not convinced that Eboo's relentlessly positive approach is the solution either. As a minister I have tried every approach under the sun. I have been resentful and negative. I have been shiny and positive. Either side is hard to sustain. They are both a bit of an act. I have found the relentlessly positive approach doesn't help solve problems. You can build something positive as a shining beacon on a hill and if the unhealthy system is stronger they will just come and knock you down. Unhealthy systems are contagious. Healthy systems take a lot of work. But the nature of sin is it creeps in eventually. And I have found if you simply sweep it under the rug and focus on the positive it doesn't go away either.

    Instead the Apostle Paul calls us to have Sober Judgment (Romans 12:3). We associate sobriety with the N.A and A.A movement and thus with abstinence. But that is not what the word means in the Greek. It is derived from the same word we derive the word diaphragm, the muscle under our lungs which helps regulate our breathing. It basically means to be self regulated. To be able to expand one's self image or shrink it. To see objectively where one has done well and where one needs to do better. Sin is as much about missing the good as it is denying the bad. The fact of the matter is many institutions are a mix of good and bad and we are not going to build better institutions by being cynics or by being naive. We are going to build better institutions by being able to look at problems soberly and come up with solutions without loosing our shit.

    I give thanks for good faith as I do for David and Curtis. I listen to them each week and they help me think about my faith as it relates to many issues. I don't always agree with what is said. But I always find the debate thoughtful and stimulating. Another reason why a Dispatch membership is worth it's weight in gold.

    I have spent some of my career working in interfaith spaces and have benefited a lot with it.

    I appreciate that Eboo doesn't come at his work as just talking with squishes. I am glad he allows people to hold their deep beliefs and speak them freely.

    But I do feel in this interview the two of you were being "squishes" and I do wish you had stood up to defend the Christian faith at certain points. I would guess you were trying to be hospitable to your guest. And I admire that. You don't want to be rude. But at times it is more important to be hospitable to God's Word.

    I was not offended by Curtis' closing remarks challenging us to ask ourselves why we are uncomfortable listening to a Muslim guest. Because I am not offended by listening to a Muslim guest. One of my best friends is from Pakistan and a sincere and sweet man. I love him deeply. And I respect his convictions. That being said I want him to know Christ. Because I think this is a greater good than cooperating on social efforts. I get that there is a difference between knowing theology and knowing God. As our Lord said not everyone who calls me Lord knows me as such. And in my ministry I am reminded of that often, sometimes through others who call themselves Christians but who's behavior suggests otherwise, and sometimes through my own behavior. I think a little fear of the Lord. A little questioning of one's salvation is not a bad thing. For me it increases my desire to run the race well to take hold of that which is truly life.

    That being said doctrine is not irrelevant. And when your guest says things that are openly in defiance of good doctrine and you don't speak up it hurts me as much as if someone insulted my wife and I said nothing. Because we are Christ's bride. We are not to be ashamed of him even in interfaith dialogue. Eboo is not offended by honests beliefs he says. So you should have taken the opportunity to see if he is committed to that belief or if it is just word service.

    Collapse
    1. Avatar photo
      Will Roberts

      A couple of points in what he said. The thing that distressed me the most was when he compared Muhammed to Jesus, Peter, and Paul combined. Jesus being the messenger, Peter being the founder of the church, and Paul being the spreader of the church. I think from Eboo's expression this distressed David for he noted his facial expression. He explained his remarks. But even after his explanation one of you should have called him out. Because from the Christian faith perspective this is simply inaccurate, heresy, and deeply disrespectful and dishonoring to our Lord Jesus Christ.

      Clearly from a Christian perspective Muhammed will never be the equivalent to Jesus, Peter, and Paul. Perhaps this would have been acceptable if he had just kept it to Peter and Paul for they were only men. But not to Jesus. One of you should have stopped the conversation right there and said sorry Eboo but interfaith dialogue is about having respect for each other's traditions and calling Jesus merely a messenger is no more respectful to our tradition than if we were to say to his face that Muhammed was a false prophet who made everything up. Regardless of what we believe to be true the fact of the matter is both statements are horrible disrespectful to foundational beliefs of both religion. Jesus is no mere messenger as Muhammed was. He is God's only Begotten Son of God who I love and I hope the two of you love with all your hearts. To not say so out of some desire to be respectful is denying our Lord and frankly shameful. It would be like if someone called your wife a whore and you said well that's fine there coming from a different culture and tradition. I know Muslims believe that Jesus was just a messenger or prophet. At least in this regard they are better than Jews who don't even give him this respect. But to not speak up and say he is not just a messenger to us he is God's only Begotten Son, is to do a disservice to our faith. And I hope you will apologize and repent publicly for this mistake.

      It offended me as much as what someone did to me after the Dobbs decision. I had posted Psalm 139 on my facebook wall "you are fear fully and wonderfully made". One of my friends from high school replied that the Dobbs decision would invalidate my own marriage (I am married to a lovely woman from Africa). I responded why this probably would not be so citing many of the reasons on A.O. And then she had the audacity to post on my facebook wall, in public, on my wedding anniversary "Happy Anniversary have fun raping your wife." To say the least I was shocked and dumb founded. It was as if someone had covered my house in human waste. I think her reasoning was if Loving was overturned I would be a rapist. Which made no sense. She just did it to hurt me. And it was the most hurtful thing anyone has ever said to me. Well you letting a Muslim call Jesus a mere messenger while saying nothing raises the same level of hurt in me. Because as much as I love my wife I love Jesus more. And you should as well. And that means standing up for him when someone smears him whether well intentioned or not.

      I removed that post from my wall. But I considered letting it remain. Because I understood that woman was angry and I wanted to love my enemies. Ultimately I took it down because I knew it would break my sweet wife's heart rather than the fact that it offended me.

      So if I could consider leaving on my facebook wall a post that called me a rapist perhaps you can get over yourselves in regards to business advertising political beliefs you disagree with. Why not extend this logic to famous sports players like Jackie Robinson or Colin Kaepernick who David has defended in his writing. It is the same logic. Stay in your lane.

      I frequent Chick Fil A which supports traditional marriage as I do . I also frequent a pizza place that has gay pride flags everywhere. Unless a business is actively supporting whipping out a race like the weger's, I don't see the big deal. People need to grow a thicker skin and get over themselves. Disagreement to me is an opportunity to witness. I want people to express their beliefs as freely as possible whatever they are selling. Stay in your lane is a stupid argument that David wouldn't make in the sports arena. So I don't know why he is making it in other businesses.

      I can relate to the listener who heard Curtis say anxiety is not a sin and he just had to turn off the podcast. I had some questioning thoughts as well and found some of his logic on the issue hard to listen to. But I kept listening. I think it is a good spiritual discipline to resist the urge within us which wants to cut someone off or throw them off a cliff. That is what got Jesus crucified. That is what is wrong with the world.

      A lot of mainstream coverage around abortion, particularly the coverage around the very flawed turn away study, causes a sense of disgust in me and sometimes I turn the radio off. Ben Shapiro goes to far too and sometimes I turn him off. But then I remind myself that it is a good thing to deeply listen to people you disagree with and I turn the podcast back on. If I gave in to that impulse I would have never found the Dispatch for I was a lot more liberal several years ago. And I would be worse off for it.

      Dialogue requires a big heart and a thick skin I have found. This podcast has help me grow both. Just don't let someone call Christ the Lord a mere messenger again without saying anything

      I won't stop listening. That would be immature.

      But still it makes my blood boil as much as the person who accused me of raping my wife.

      As it should for anyone who is Christ's bride.

      Collapse
      1. Ed VW

        I had the same reaction to Eboo's comment. Two Christian participants said nothing in response. How is that meaningful interfaith dialogue?

        Collapse
  5. Joy Lamentation

    Something worth considering regarding those that are distrustful of institutions is that many value the stated purposes of the institutions but are now distrustful because of the corruption of those institutions by unethical people. It seems if we don’t deal with that reality, we will just end up building more of the same. Proof of this reality is all the church planting that has gone on and all the devastation coming out of many of those church plants. The answer isn’t to plant more churches, it is to submit to the sanctifying work of Jesus in self and the community by walking in the light and calling others to the same.
    Guys, as leaders, the number one thing you can do is hold other men accountable for the lack of integrity in their lives especially if they are Christians. And for men to stop keeping secrets amongst the guys. Let your sisters in Christ in on the schemes of the enemy playing out amongst powerful Christian men. Sadly, instead of being warned, prepared and made partners to stand against the darkness, we women have been kept in the dark inevitably leading to immense suffering. This should not be.
    Please, before building more with the same issues, clean up the mess that’s right in front of us and let everyone know the true reality of that mess. We cannot be Christians and continue to ignore the darkness plaguing the institutions our forebears built. Let’s build, but let’s do the work that Jesus called us to first so that what is built is good.
    Also, when the powerful tell those without power not to critique and to just be grateful, that is a red flag (not saying that was what Eboo was saying -reminders to gratitude are good and important). Critique is the power of the powerless and the responsibility of the powerful is to humbly heed that critique with wisdom and a heart to make changes that will cause the community to flourish (even if it means the powerful must sacrifice much of their power to do so). Gratitude is important and should be a core value of all but it cannot be used to keep harmful status quos or to diminish or ignore the cries of the suffering.

    Collapse
  6. Joy

    As a reluctant agnostic and former mormon, I listen to good faith regularly. It is a beacon of hope. I envy believers their faith. That said. I worry about my transgender child who recently moved to Texas with her partner. The culture war, the proliferation of guns, the rise of white nationalism need to be countered somehow.

    Collapse
    1. GregS

      As a Texan and a follower of the Flying Spaghetti Monster (Sauce Be Upon Him) I pray that their pasta be always perfectly al dente.

      Seriously though, if they're in big city Texas, they will have plenty of like-minded and supportive people around. The culture war is more online and less in-person...

      Collapse
    2. Avatar photo
      Charles Rankin

      I'll be sure to pray for them, friend.

      Collapse