Globalization, Gender, and Peacebuilding: The Future of Interfaith Dialogue

by Kwok Pui-Lan

Religion has played an enormous role in contemporary politics and in the discussions of war and peace, identity and tradition, authoritarianism and democracy. In the Madeleva Lecture for 2011 Kwok Pui-lan, one of the most prominent postcolonial feminist theologians, discusses the future of interfaith dialogue. She shows how globalization has impacted interreligious relationships and dialogue and argues that the future of interfaith dialogue must include those marginalized voices that have not been invited to the table, especially women. In discussing issues on gender and interfaith dialogue, she explores concerns that have been raised by women, such as the Orientialist construction of religious difference, reciprocity, and misappropriation, and multiple identities and hybridity. Finally, a central focus for interfaith dialogue is peacebuilding, and in this context Dr. Kwok explores the concept of polydoxy, which goes beyond the logic of the One to embrace multiplicity and relationality. †

Genres: Religion, Nonfiction

112 pages, Paperback

First published March 1, 2012

About the author

Kwok Pui-lan is a Hong Kong-born feminist theologian known for her work on Asian feminist theology and postcolonial theology.

Reviews

[Julia Alberino · Rating 2 out of 5]

I had to read this book for Education for Ministry (EfM). I really wanted to like it, as the title held promise. But I found it full of platitudes, criticisms of the status quo without proposing solutions, and just plain bad logic. Recognizing that the book originated as a lecture, and some of what seemed stale and banal on the page might have sounded inspiring and energizing when spoken did not really redeem the book for me.

[Lawrence · Rating 2 out of 5]

I thought this book was quite interesting. It's overview of plurality was not doctrinaire, and Prof. Kwok's purpose, I thought, was to provide food for thought - even though I think she's clearly on the "leftie" side of the debate.

Here's a couple of comments or questions/comments. First, in chapter two, I like very much the lesson on misappropriation of different cultures or traditions (e.g., Native American) under the guise of honoring or benefiting from the fruits of diversity. I had never heard someone actually say that out loud. And I thought the discussion was particularly forceful because the professor was criticizing some of the layers of Western-style feminism. This discussion also spills over into the area of the "righteous critique" of what we generalize as oppression (e.g., the head scarf). So, I liked that kind of self-criticism.

My second comment is about something more troubling for me because I perceive an inconsistency and relativism. On page 14, the professor cites to Dianne Eck when she writes pluralism is not relativism, but is an " encounter of commitments". however, in the chapter on polydoxy on page 70, she writes about scholars who explore the notion that Christianity has no monopoly on revelation and that "divinity should be understood in terms of multiplicity, open-endedness, and relationality". Here, I think she reports on a point of view that does make pluralism relativistic and that seems to say that one religion is, indeed, as good as another. Of course, God is beyond us totally, and we have only the sliver of a sliver of a glimpse through the tiniest gap in a partly open door. So, in that way, the statement makes sense if multiplicity, open-endedness, and relationality are our attempts to understand this beyondness. But, really, where does Jesus fit into this? If Jesus is God's revelation, how do we accept this polydoxy? I realize that Kwok's thinkers come out of post-colonial world in which Christianity is the governor's religion. But I'm not seeing how polydoxy should discount a truth. And Prof. Kwok holds, I believe, a post in the Episcopal Seminary in Cambridge, Massachusetts. Am I misunderstanding something about Kwok's presentation? Is she just talking about behavior and not any kind of "doxy" (!) at all?

Third, I'm afraid that I find the discussion regarding multiple or hybrid identity to be somewhat b.s. Identity is complicated enough without this type of definitional tool that splits us up into more pieces. In fact, I believe the persons Prof. Kwok cites to are simply complicating the statement that identity is complicated. That is, I have one identity that is always with me, but that I react and act in ways that are appropriate to the environment I'm in or that are the expressions of a search for the appropriate way to express integrity.

[Jean Marie Angelo · Rating 4 out of 5]

I was raised believing that my religion was the one true religion. Many of us were. Once I shook off this belief in my early 20s, I was left with no religion at all for many years. Professor Kwok's thin volume — based on lectures — asserts the place for religion in our lives, and the benefit of sincere inter religious understanding.

[Terry · Rating 2 out of 5]

The author, and other authors quoted apparently never heard the advice to "eshew obfuscation". Some concepts are interesting, but made opaque by the language used.

[John · Rating 4 out of 5]

Precise and impassioned, the premise is laid out, problems identified, and way forward tentatively identified. How do we bring more people to the table when discussing differences and how do we make sure not to fall into the traps of the past. No definitive answers here, but hearing the situation so succinctly summarized with guidepost on the way forward suggested was very hopeful and enlightening.

[Alan · Rating 4 out of 5]

Quite the thought-provoking book. After laying the groundwork with chapters on "Globalization, Religious Pluralism, and Dialogue" and "Gender and Interfaith Dialogue," Kwok provocatively brings it all together in the final chapter, "Dialogue, Solidarity, and Peacebuilding." She states that "A group of scholars working on constructive theology suggested the term polydoxy to capture the ideas that Christians do not have a monopoly on God's revelation and that divinity should be understood in terms of multiplicity, open-endedness, and relationality." I think this is simply a restatement of Paul's, "For now we see through a glass darkly," in First Corinthians. The third chapter, alone is worth reading!

[Jerry · Rating 3 out of 5]

This book was described as "Shows how globalization has impacted interreligious relationships and dialogue and argues that the future of interfaith dialogue must include those marginalized voices that have not been invited to the table, especially women" I was an interesting read but difficult at times to totally grasp the many concepts presented. Although by the end of the book I didn't feel totally enlightened, I was challenged to think more about interfaith dialogue and globalization where it fits into my own faith. I would have liked to had more explanation and description as there where times when my understanding started to get lost in all the different views.

[Denise · Rating 5 out of 5]

I loved this book. Good summaries of past and present with a good scholarship view of the future. Having studied Interfaith Dialog in seminary, I followed the material very well. Yes, the issue of how to implement and lay down the rules of dialogue as she suggests are not clear. But, this is an academic lecture.

[Shifty · Rating 4 out of 5]

A lot to think about in a very small book. Richly but tightly written.

I particularly appreciated the quotes I included in my status updates, which had to be truncated.

[Darla Stonehouse · Rating 4 out of 5]

I read this for EFM. Gave me lots to think about, but I also think the author could have expounded on some of the concepts she discussed.

[Greg · Rating 5 out of 5]

An interesting perspective on the challenges facing intercultural dialogue and suggestions for making it work.

[RayDavis · Rating 4 out of 5]

enlightening and inspiring; the ground is shifting; spotlights where we need to do work and address inequality and injustice