I appreciate Pulse columnist Frank Shepard’s willingness to sift through weighty sands each month to present his best understanding of truth and, in the process, to challenge others to find theirs. His column in the May Pulse, “Must Religion Be Divisive?” offered useful insights on why it can be so difficult for people of diverging beliefs to have a civil and meaningful discussion.

I did, however, encounter a significant stumbling block in the following quote from that article: Those who are in [the faith conversation] have decided to keep asking questions, keep challenging their own beliefs, etc. Those who are out have decided to stop challenging their beliefs and stick to the ones they have. My point here is to encourage both those in and out of the conversation to respect each other. . . . Those who would rather not have their beliefs challenged will need to honor and respect the dignity of those who are exercising their freedom to keep looking.

Mr. Shepard is asking, admirably, for all parties to extend grace and respect to one another regarding their faith positions, but he is doing so while making (unintentionally, I would hope) an implication that one group—those who have “decided to stop challenging their beliefs”—is inherently inferior (that is, closed-minded), and thus less worthy of respect than the other group. With a negative implication such as this being made at the outset, the question of mutual respect becomes largely moot. It un-evens the playing field before the game can even get underway.

To be fair, there are certainly many adherents to fixed belief systems who would consider it an affront to be challenged; their minds indeed appear to be closed. Perhaps it is primarily to groups such as these that Mr. Shepard meant to direct his comments. If this is the case, it would be preferable (and less potentially insulting to those who strive to remain open-minded) to address them directly, rather than lumping all persons who are committed to a particular belief system into the pile marked “have taken themselves out of the conversation.”

It’s important to recognize that adherents of a particular faith can, and often do, pursue an ongoing spiritual quest, albeit one that necessarily orbits around certain doctrinal elements without which their faith would lack basis. However, those who fit that less restrictive description are not acknowledged in the article.

Note that even U2’s Bono, in “I Still Haven’t Found What I’m Looking For,” precedes his famous declaration of spiritual yearning with this unambiguous affirmation of his Christian faith: You broke the bonds / And you loosed the chains / Carried the cross of my shame . . . / You know I believe it.

If there is to be a faith conversation like the one Mr. Shepard suggests, and if it is to be fruitful and engender a spirit of mutual respect, it cannot operate under any questionable presumptions about the groups who might engage in such dialogue. Thanks, Murfreesboro Pulse, for being willing to give space to issues as weighty, controversial and potentially unwieldy as this one; thank you, Frank Shepard, for your contributions to the cause.

Steve Morley
College Grove, TN