In response to Chris Stedman’s thoughtful article where he claimed “…a call is something you can’t not do” and concluded by asking, “What is your call?” I firmly believe my call is to make interfaith organizing more inclusive of people with diverse racial identities. I see far too few people of color seated at the table of interfaith exchange, and this needs to change in order to have an accurate and honest dialogue.

While working on the program for the 2009 Parliament in Melbourne, I realized that, even though the Council provides some economic resources for those at the margins to attend with the event, it is easiest for those who are privileged to attend. I worked with hundreds of presenters from across the world, and it became evident that I was dealing with people who had high levels of education and economic resources. This experience connected to me on a deeply personal level.

I have been haunted by this question for the last year and a half: does interfaith organizing subvert or support structures of discrimination?  I usually think of discrimination in terms of racial identity, but there are many forms. Interfaith organizing can support existing structures of oppression both implicitly and explicitly.

An example of explicit discrimination is seen when people are blatantly excluded based upon economic resources, racial identity or sexual orientation. The classic example of this is noted in the 1893 World Parliament of Religions, where Native Americans and all but two African Americans were excluded from official proceedings. As Kelly Figueroa-Ray in Blessed are … points out, discrimination can exist based on sexual orientation as well.

Implicit discrimination occurs when interfaith organizers do nothing to work against existing forms of exclusion based upon orientation, racial identity or economic status. It occurs when they conveniently ignore the impact of their privilege. My favorite example of this is when I go to an interfaith exchange and there is only one person of color at the event, especially when the context of the interfaith exchange is multi-racial.

Providing an example from my immediate context: this can occur when official dialogues between Christians and Muslims when the Muslim perspective is limited to either Arabic communities or African American communities and not both.  Chicago has a large population of both Arabic and African American Muslims, so to entirely ignore one segment would be a form of discrimination.

After the Parliament concluded, I started to do a little research exploring how local interfaith organizers work against systems of oppression. I interviewed Chicago interfaith leaders, most notably at the Interfaith Youth Core, the Council for a Parliament of the World’s Religions and Faith in Place. I had a specific objective: I wanted to discover and document if these organizations had methods of working against the racial segregation within their contexts of operation.

I found these organizations worked to include those who were racially and economically discriminated against, but this work often included competing massive systems of discrimination and economic resources. This work of inclusion is hard, but necessary.

I am not criticizing those who are privileged. I am privileged and I know that developing a guilt complex about this isn’t going to do anything for anyone. However, I do think I need to become aware of this privilege and take responsibility for it, especially in interfaith organizing. For me this responsibility has turned in to a calling: I cannot not look around and wonder who is being excluded, question normative modes of inclusion (a method I learned through conversation on this topic with Dr. David Daniels) and work to establish ways to be more inclusive.

Part of the reason why I am involved with State of Formation is because of the commitment to continually increase the contributions from a diverse range of people. There is a vibrant awareness that this conversation is good, but needs to include more people from different backgrounds. Part of my work on the executive committee is to take some responsibility for making this happen.

The interfaith movement was born within the consciousness of academic arena, and thrives too frequently only among those with academic degrees; however, the future of the movement must grow in the hearts and minds of community members across the world. Interfaith organizers need to fight against the existing systems of discrimination in order to be inclusive of the diversity within their contexts. We are all privileged here with education, time and technological resources, and it is necessary for us to consider what taking responsibility for this looks like.