What do you think?
Rate this book
Sacred Ground: Pluralism, Prejudice, and the Promise of America
There is no better time to stand up for your values than when they are under attack.
In the decade following the attacks of 9/11, suspicion and animosity toward American Muslims has increased rather than subsided. Alarmist, hateful rhetoric once relegated to the fringes of political discourse has now become frighteningly mainstream, with pundits and politicians routinely invoking the specter of Islam as a menacing, deeply anti-American force.
In Sacred Ground, author and renowned interfaith leader Eboo Patel says this prejudice is not just a problem for Muslims but a challenge to the very idea of America. Patel shows us that Americans from George Washington to Martin Luther King Jr. have been “interfaith leaders,” illustrating how the forces of pluralism in America have time and again defeated the forces of prejudice. And now a new generation needs to rise up and confront the anti-Muslim prejudice of our era. To this end, Patel offers a primer in the art and science of interfaith work, bringing to life the growing body of research on how faith can be a bridge of cooperation rather than a barrier of division and sharing stories from the frontlines of interfaith activism.
Patel asks us to share in his vision of a better America—a robustly pluralistic country in which our commonalities are more important than our differences, and in which difference enriches, rather than threatens, our religious traditions. Pluralism, Patel boldly argues, is at the heart of the American project, and this visionary book will inspire Americans of all faiths to make this country a place where diverse traditions can thrive side by side.
From the Hardcover edition.
In the decade following the attacks of 9/11, suspicion and animosity toward American Muslims has increased rather than subsided. Alarmist, hateful rhetoric once relegated to the fringes of political discourse has now become frighteningly mainstream, with pundits and politicians routinely invoking the specter of Islam as a menacing, deeply anti-American force.
In Sacred Ground, author and renowned interfaith leader Eboo Patel says this prejudice is not just a problem for Muslims but a challenge to the very idea of America. Patel shows us that Americans from George Washington to Martin Luther King Jr. have been “interfaith leaders,” illustrating how the forces of pluralism in America have time and again defeated the forces of prejudice. And now a new generation needs to rise up and confront the anti-Muslim prejudice of our era. To this end, Patel offers a primer in the art and science of interfaith work, bringing to life the growing body of research on how faith can be a bridge of cooperation rather than a barrier of division and sharing stories from the frontlines of interfaith activism.
Patel asks us to share in his vision of a better America—a robustly pluralistic country in which our commonalities are more important than our differences, and in which difference enriches, rather than threatens, our religious traditions. Pluralism, Patel boldly argues, is at the heart of the American project, and this visionary book will inspire Americans of all faiths to make this country a place where diverse traditions can thrive side by side.
From the Hardcover edition.
224 pages, Paperback
First published January 1, 2012
39 people are currently reading
718 people want to read
About the author
Eboo Patel
33 books76 followersNamed by US News & World Report as one of America’s Best Leaders of 2009, Eboo Patel is the Founder and President of Interfaith Youth Core (IFYC), a Chicago-based organization building the global interfaith youth movement. Author of the award-winning book Acts of Faith, Eboo is also a regular contributor to the Washington Post, USA Today and CNN. He served on President Obama’s inaugural Advisory Council of the White House Office of Faith-based and Neighborhood Partnerships and holds a doctorate in the sociology of religion from Oxford University, where he studied on a Rhodes scholarship.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 30 of 56 reviews
September 2, 2013
Eboo Patel is a Muslim interfaith leader of Indian descent who is arguing that the faith line has replaced the color line as the salient social issue in America. Furthermore, he argues that freedom of religion and the acceptance of all faiths is the American way, and that the originally Protestant America has in the past stretched to encompass Jews and Catholics. Now, he says, it's Muslims' turn to be accepted.
In the rhetorical sense, then, the book is deliberative in type, since the author is focused on the direction in which we should be going.
Christians being in the majority here, he's primarily speaking to Christians. He examines anti-Muslim polemic from the conservative Church. In doing so, he's speaking primarily to liberals--liberal mainline Christians, post-Christians, liberal Jews, and others he considers to be in the category of "liberal." He thinks of atheists--post-Christians and others who describe themselves as not having a religion or faith--as also being a "faith group."
He has tried to confront measures of effectiveness suggesting that anti-Muslim feeling in America was increasing despite his efforts. As a result, his group, Interfaith Youth Core (IFYC) is now less diffuse and primarily focused on college campuses.
While I was reading the early chapters, I was thinking, "He's preaching to the choir," and, lo and behold, he admits that's what he's doing, arguing that's how to build a movement.
Assuming his argument is logical (while knowing from recent reading in the area of rhetoric and cognitive psychology that the point is communication, not logic), it still is a weak argument. While reading, I was reflecting on why his argument comes across as weak, since I support his position that religious pluralism is a positive social value.
His approach is the familiar one of viewing the Left as reasonable and rational while the Right is irrational and prejudiced. His choir being the Left, then, he's making, or letting stand, a lot of assumptions that it's not to his benefit to examine. It's always easier to criticize "the other guys," whoever one isn't speaking with at any given time.
His general approach of defending "the American way" is a reflection of the difficulty of arguing specifically for justice and acceptance for one's own group, whichever one it is. For example, in Price of Whiteness: Jews, Race & American Identity, that author said American Jews seemed confined to advocating for themselves via general American causes rather than directly; I talked a little about that in my review of that one. Or, looking at race, the Nigerian-American author of Americanah said, in an interview I found, that she knew she wasn't supposed to write a novel that's about race directly because then she would be accused of "hectoring:" http://artsbeat.blogs.nytimes.com/201...
In America today there is a myth we are all supposed to conform to in the public square, the myth that we're all Americans, all accepted and treated as equal. If black people point to anything beyond that, they will be accused of "playing the race card." If gay people have anything to say about their treatment, someone will say they are "bullying" the rest of us. And should a Jew have anything to say about any teachings, speech, or behavior, he or she will be charged with making accusations of antisemitism. Politically, it is a sort of Libertarianism that claims that certain minority groups "used to be" mistreated but the problem is long since fixed and now they themselves are spoiled, privileged groups who are using guilt to abuse the rest of us.
No wonder, then, that Eboo Patel takes evasive action, but it weakens his approach.
As a result this is the type of book that can be studied by liberals, who will see it as a call to fix society by fixing others while remaining mostly blind to what it says to them.
Nevertheless, there are some strong points he makes to the majority, points that needed to be made. I hope they aren't watered down in the rest of the book and lost.
By pluralism, he doesn't mean diluted. He thinks people should be authentically rooted in their specific religions. Then, in one of his strongest points, he quoted seminary professor Kenda Dean, who has written a book called Almost Christian, as to why that does not happen:
It's a problem, and one that's only indirectly addressed by the author, that a great deal of Christian language has to do with touting the superiority of Jesus' ways over, in the view of the tellers, Judaism. All too often, the tellers mistake theology for eye-witness history, Christian narrative about Judaism for the actual religion of Jews, and, ultimately, triumphal narrative for historical fact. That leaves Christians stuck with symbolism unsuitable for the public square--not language about Jesus per se but, rather, symbolic discourse about the superiority of their own religion over that of a minority group. That perception of being silenced by "PC" then can lead to shame and resentment, and, then, to something else that human beings do: justifying attitudes and abusive discourse on the grounds that its targets deserve it--this entire chain of events being partly fueled by having to be silent, which is not a natural state for humans.
Eboo Patel goes into a story about fish who have only known their natural medium of water being oblivious to it, so they have no way of knowing that there are other creatures that live on land and so have lungs and legs instead of gills and fins.
Those fish are like people in the majority who have never yet experienced pressures that would stimulate them toward development of those lungs and legs, in other words, cultural demands that would necessitate their looking at their religious views about others in a manner other than literal, even when not in the public square.
Another, prior intellectual who took a nuanced view in favor of people of different faiths and cultures getting along was Albert Camus, and I read a quote about how it was that he left many people dissatisfied with his stance (Paul Berman, writing in the August 19 issue of The New Republic):
Well, that's quite stringent, and whether either Camus or Eboo Patel should be held up to it, I'm not sure.
Even if Patel fails somewhat in intellectual strength, in his conclusion he largely redeems himself by including this Martin Luther King Jr. quote:
Addendum: In reference to my above examples of minorities that are disrespected for their particularities, I fortuitously happened to be rereading Hauerwas and Willimon's Resident Aliens, which reminds me that at least some people think Christians who are actually being Christians should themselves be like minorities in a culture which is not Christian.
In the rhetorical sense, then, the book is deliberative in type, since the author is focused on the direction in which we should be going.
Christians being in the majority here, he's primarily speaking to Christians. He examines anti-Muslim polemic from the conservative Church. In doing so, he's speaking primarily to liberals--liberal mainline Christians, post-Christians, liberal Jews, and others he considers to be in the category of "liberal." He thinks of atheists--post-Christians and others who describe themselves as not having a religion or faith--as also being a "faith group."
He has tried to confront measures of effectiveness suggesting that anti-Muslim feeling in America was increasing despite his efforts. As a result, his group, Interfaith Youth Core (IFYC) is now less diffuse and primarily focused on college campuses.
While I was reading the early chapters, I was thinking, "He's preaching to the choir," and, lo and behold, he admits that's what he's doing, arguing that's how to build a movement.
Assuming his argument is logical (while knowing from recent reading in the area of rhetoric and cognitive psychology that the point is communication, not logic), it still is a weak argument. While reading, I was reflecting on why his argument comes across as weak, since I support his position that religious pluralism is a positive social value.
His approach is the familiar one of viewing the Left as reasonable and rational while the Right is irrational and prejudiced. His choir being the Left, then, he's making, or letting stand, a lot of assumptions that it's not to his benefit to examine. It's always easier to criticize "the other guys," whoever one isn't speaking with at any given time.
His general approach of defending "the American way" is a reflection of the difficulty of arguing specifically for justice and acceptance for one's own group, whichever one it is. For example, in Price of Whiteness: Jews, Race & American Identity, that author said American Jews seemed confined to advocating for themselves via general American causes rather than directly; I talked a little about that in my review of that one. Or, looking at race, the Nigerian-American author of Americanah said, in an interview I found, that she knew she wasn't supposed to write a novel that's about race directly because then she would be accused of "hectoring:" http://artsbeat.blogs.nytimes.com/201...
In America today there is a myth we are all supposed to conform to in the public square, the myth that we're all Americans, all accepted and treated as equal. If black people point to anything beyond that, they will be accused of "playing the race card." If gay people have anything to say about their treatment, someone will say they are "bullying" the rest of us. And should a Jew have anything to say about any teachings, speech, or behavior, he or she will be charged with making accusations of antisemitism. Politically, it is a sort of Libertarianism that claims that certain minority groups "used to be" mistreated but the problem is long since fixed and now they themselves are spoiled, privileged groups who are using guilt to abuse the rest of us.
No wonder, then, that Eboo Patel takes evasive action, but it weakens his approach.
As a result this is the type of book that can be studied by liberals, who will see it as a call to fix society by fixing others while remaining mostly blind to what it says to them.
Nevertheless, there are some strong points he makes to the majority, points that needed to be made. I hope they aren't watered down in the rest of the book and lost.
By pluralism, he doesn't mean diluted. He thinks people should be authentically rooted in their specific religions. Then, in one of his strongest points, he quoted seminary professor Kenda Dean, who has written a book called Almost Christian, as to why that does not happen:
"We need a language that maintains our own distinctiveness and truth claims while respecting the goodness in others and, above all, affirming the holiness of relationships. The most prevalent Christian language in the public square is the language of domination. Because that language is so ugly and destructive, we race away from it, but we run so far we find ourselves in a land devoid of Christian symbolism entirely."
It's a problem, and one that's only indirectly addressed by the author, that a great deal of Christian language has to do with touting the superiority of Jesus' ways over, in the view of the tellers, Judaism. All too often, the tellers mistake theology for eye-witness history, Christian narrative about Judaism for the actual religion of Jews, and, ultimately, triumphal narrative for historical fact. That leaves Christians stuck with symbolism unsuitable for the public square--not language about Jesus per se but, rather, symbolic discourse about the superiority of their own religion over that of a minority group. That perception of being silenced by "PC" then can lead to shame and resentment, and, then, to something else that human beings do: justifying attitudes and abusive discourse on the grounds that its targets deserve it--this entire chain of events being partly fueled by having to be silent, which is not a natural state for humans.
Eboo Patel goes into a story about fish who have only known their natural medium of water being oblivious to it, so they have no way of knowing that there are other creatures that live on land and so have lungs and legs instead of gills and fins.
Those fish are like people in the majority who have never yet experienced pressures that would stimulate them toward development of those lungs and legs, in other words, cultural demands that would necessitate their looking at their religious views about others in a manner other than literal, even when not in the public square.
Another, prior intellectual who took a nuanced view in favor of people of different faiths and cultures getting along was Albert Camus, and I read a quote about how it was that he left many people dissatisfied with his stance (Paul Berman, writing in the August 19 issue of The New Republic):
Albert Memmi took the position that Camus had failed to run the risk of a proper intellectual, which is the risk of being denounced as a traitor by his own people.
Well, that's quite stringent, and whether either Camus or Eboo Patel should be held up to it, I'm not sure.
Even if Patel fails somewhat in intellectual strength, in his conclusion he largely redeems himself by including this Martin Luther King Jr. quote:
We have before us the glorious opportunity to inject a new dimension of love into the veins of our civilization.... The end is reconciliation, the end is redemption, the end is the creation of the beloved community.
Addendum: In reference to my above examples of minorities that are disrespected for their particularities, I fortuitously happened to be rereading Hauerwas and Willimon's Resident Aliens, which reminds me that at least some people think Christians who are actually being Christians should themselves be like minorities in a culture which is not Christian.
July 22, 2013
An excellent if basic introduction to the importance of Interfaith efforts in the modern world. Patel draws on his experiences leading the Interfaith Youth Corps to describe much of what works and what doesn't. I wish he went into more depth and offered more practical advice for promoting interfaith activities. Nevertheless, the book clearly articulates the need to find a way to honor ones own faith without denigrating the faith of others. This alone makes it well worth the read.
February 14, 2024
My favorite class reading I’ve ever been assigned. Loved the commentaries on pluralism and 9/11. Very insightful and well written.
August 24, 2017
"Sacred Ground: Pluralism, Prejudice, and the Promise of America" by Eboo Patel is the selection for this month's S.E.E.D. (Seeking Educational Equity and Diversity) Book Club.
Upfront. I am generally not a non-fiction fan. And I do not consider myself a religious person, spiritual maybe, but not religious. I was brought up in a very religious home. However, when I look around the world, it is clear that many of the world's greatest conflicts and most heinous acts, both past and present, come directly from religion and the hypocrites who call themselves "religious." As Patel says, "Human history is littered with examples of different identity groups at war with each other. More frequently that the faithful would like to admit, religious belief has fueled the fighting." Therefore, though I believe that that religious pluralism is important if our world is to survive, I feel totally detached from interfaith efforts, such as those described by Eboo Patel in "Sacred Ground." I believe, as Cantwell Smith is quoted as saying in the book: "'The problem is for us all to learn to live together with our seriously different traditions not only in peace but in some sort of mutual trust and mutual loyalty,'" but I don't feel compelled to enter the fray to make this happen.
With that said, here are some thoughts I had while reading "Sacred Ground."
1. This book, published in 2012, reads differently in 2017 than it might have when it was first published. Though the "Muslim issue" continues to be relevant throughout the world, the book seemed outdated.
2. I did appreciate the historical aspects of "Sacred Ground" (a review of the post 9/11 controversy over the building of Cordoba House, a proposed Mosque to be built in NYC on the "sacred ground" surrounding the what had been the World Trade Center and how it pertains to the idea of religious pluralism in America). I didn't appreciate the "how to" nature of the book. Though there might be an audience for this aspect of "Sacred Ground," I am not that audience.
3. I agreed with many aspects of the book.
p. xi - The work of the Interfaith Youth Core and the Cordoba House is important. But I don't necessarily think we need to ask youth to shoulder the entire responsibility for the mess "religious" "adults" have made of this world.
p. xii - "...different religious communities can live in the same place and not simply coexist in a lukewarm tolerance, but rather actively cooperate and mutually thrive."
p. xv - "...the great fault line in the world is not between Americans and Arabs or Muslims and Christians. It is between the moderates of all traditions and the extremists who belong only to one - the tradition of extremism."
p. xxv - "There is no better time to stand up for your values than when they are under attack, that bigotry concealed doesn't go away, it only festers underground. It's only when the poison of prejudice emerges out in the open that it can be confronted directly." Yeah, think the election of Donald Trump. Think Charlottesville. Think. Think. Think.
p. 15 - "Respect, relationship, and commitment to the common good - those were Washington's three pillars of pluralism in a diverse democracy."
p. 17 - "'We weren't fighting for black civil rights,' [Jesse] Jackson told his audience. 'We were fighting for your civil rights. You have a choice right now: you can talk about an America where your people don't get sent to the back of the bus, or you can talk about an America where no one gets sent to the back of the bus.'"
p. 18 - You quickly realize that other people's struggles have secured your rights
p. 30 - Is still the thinking in 2017? - "...the industry of Islamophobia was simple and clear: Muslims are preparing a takeover of America because their religion requires them to. There is no such thing as a good Muslim. There is no such thing as moderate Muslim. There is no such thing as moderate Islam. They are not like us. They are against us. We have to stop them now."
p. 33 - "When it comes to Gingrich and irony, it's hard to know where to start." HA! isn't it the truth. The same could be said of Donald Trump and many others.
p. 53 - "Catholics have gained significant influence in American society, even while some of the most respected members of their fold have been guilty of abusing the power of their collars in the most reprehensible ways. The American public has made little connection between the two."
p. 55 - interesting discussion of Evangelicals
p. 56 - "When Evangelicals change, America changes." Hmmm...40% of our nation? Really?
*p. 62 - "...there were two key levers to changing people's attitudes about other religions - the knowledge they had about a particular religion, and the people they knew from that community."
p. 67 - I have been enraged about religious "leadership" and its unwillingness to enter into the fray of this issue publicly and call for interfaith work - to call out those within their fold for their less than loving words and behaviors. "She was treating me as an agent, not a victim, effectively saying, 'Your job is to do something about it...'"
p. 68 - "...convince people that religious prejudice is a serious problem, and that it ought to be considered just as unAmerican as racism or sexism." Are there really individuals who don't know this? I might add other "isms," like "sizeism" to the list.
pp. 70-71 - "Where diversity is a fact, pluralism is an achievement - it means deliberate and positive engagement of diversity; it means building strong bonds between people from different backgrounds."
p. 73 - "'...how does Interfaith Youth Core measure effectiveness?...Investments are what I do...The return on an investment in the social world is impact. I invest in fields an organizations where I see effective work being done...But I don't know the specific objectives of your activities. I don't know your definition of success. I don't understand how you've chosen your strategy, and I don't know the metrics you use to track progress. Bottom line: I can't measure the impact of my investment, and when that's the case, I don't invest.'"
p. 74-6 - the concept of "social capital" - "...diversity actually reduces social capital...America's social capital tends to be...bonded...bridging, or working together, both increases social capital and strengthens social cohesion....you've got communities that encourage high participation within the group but little involvement with other groups within the broader society."
p. 76-7 - "America is one of the most religiously diverse countries in human history and by far the most religiously devout nation in the West." It is? "Social Scientists measure America's religious diversity in three basic ways...attitudes...relationships...knowledge..."
p. 78 - "...people's regard for entire religious groups improves through a positive, meaningful relationship with even one member of that group...There is also good evidence that knowledge of other traditions correlates strongly with positive attitudes."
p. 86 - "'Everybody wants to hear the story of the idea, but having the idea is actually the easy part. The hard work is setting goals and building an organization that accomplishes those goals. Your organization exists to get results. Define those results clearly and pursue them relentlessly.'"
p. 87 - "how much of an art it is to apply a science well." (Think S.T.E.A.M, not just S.T.E.M.!!!)
pp. 89-94 - the value of preaching to the choir - "He was basically telling us that being in the choir was great, singing the song of interfaith cooperation was great, but we all had to go a step further. He wanted us to become preachers and start new choirs."
p. 95 - "He wanted people to do more than recognize the terms of discourse in a religiously diverse society. He wanted people to like one another, learn from each other, build bridges, form friendship, work together, thrive together."
p. 95-6 - interfaith literacy - 1. "appreciative knowledge of other traditions" 2. "ability to identify values that all religions share - compassion, mercy, hospitality, service." 3. "developing your own theology of interfaith cooperation, based on the texts, stories, and rituals of your own tradition."
p. 102 - "...the kind of society we seek is intimately connected to the type of education we offer." Bingo!
p. 112 - "There was the ludicrous belief that only people with interesting stories to tell were people of color, and that the most interesting parts of those stories were the parts about being oppressed. It meant that people woke up in the morning, looking for ways they were marginalized, and if they couldn't find any, inventing them" Thank you for saying this. ALL of us have stories to tell!
p. 120 - "What if colleges took religious diversity as seriously as they took other identity issues?"
p. 123 - "This story is a perfect illustration of why college campuses are an ideal civic laboratory for interfaith cooperation....The most critical factor in nurturing young leaders is giving them a place to apply their leadership skills, to form an idea, and to make it a reality. I have trouble with this...College students are still impressionable. I was. They are exploring and finding their way. It seems a bit Big Brotherish to swoop down on the impressionable.
* p. 136 - "The question was how to have a vertical relationship with one's own understanding of the divine, and a horizontal relationship with the diversity of the world...to arrive at a point where one 'can appreciate other men's values without losing allegiance to our own.'"
p. 141 - "He's a nominal Catholic with a big humanist heart, aware of how faith has inspired service but not willing to overlook the violence that religion caused." Boy, can I ever relate to that.
- the "Seminaries" chapter - Yes, interfaith teaching and discussion belong here! Religious leaders need to jump into the fray - it is their JOB to enter the fray! I am constantly disappointed in the silence of religious leaders when religious issues and conflict occur.
- p. 147 - "One of the hidden dimensions of interfaith cooperation is how it strengthens your own tradition, precisely because when other people ask searching questions...you go back to the sources of your faith to find the answer." And, I might add, this soul searching may lead one to question his/her faith. And this is not a bad thing either.
- p.151 - "'The Hindu-Muslim-Christian-Jewish-Buddhist belief about ultimate reality...is that the force of love is the supreme unifying principle of life.'" Take that all of you "religious" hypocrites out there!
I am so curious as to what my fellow book clubbers will have to say about this book. I will be very interested to hear what personal religious history they brought to the reading of this book and will bring to our discussion.
(to be continued)
Upfront. I am generally not a non-fiction fan. And I do not consider myself a religious person, spiritual maybe, but not religious. I was brought up in a very religious home. However, when I look around the world, it is clear that many of the world's greatest conflicts and most heinous acts, both past and present, come directly from religion and the hypocrites who call themselves "religious." As Patel says, "Human history is littered with examples of different identity groups at war with each other. More frequently that the faithful would like to admit, religious belief has fueled the fighting." Therefore, though I believe that that religious pluralism is important if our world is to survive, I feel totally detached from interfaith efforts, such as those described by Eboo Patel in "Sacred Ground." I believe, as Cantwell Smith is quoted as saying in the book: "'The problem is for us all to learn to live together with our seriously different traditions not only in peace but in some sort of mutual trust and mutual loyalty,'" but I don't feel compelled to enter the fray to make this happen.
With that said, here are some thoughts I had while reading "Sacred Ground."
1. This book, published in 2012, reads differently in 2017 than it might have when it was first published. Though the "Muslim issue" continues to be relevant throughout the world, the book seemed outdated.
2. I did appreciate the historical aspects of "Sacred Ground" (a review of the post 9/11 controversy over the building of Cordoba House, a proposed Mosque to be built in NYC on the "sacred ground" surrounding the what had been the World Trade Center and how it pertains to the idea of religious pluralism in America). I didn't appreciate the "how to" nature of the book. Though there might be an audience for this aspect of "Sacred Ground," I am not that audience.
3. I agreed with many aspects of the book.
p. xi - The work of the Interfaith Youth Core and the Cordoba House is important. But I don't necessarily think we need to ask youth to shoulder the entire responsibility for the mess "religious" "adults" have made of this world.
p. xii - "...different religious communities can live in the same place and not simply coexist in a lukewarm tolerance, but rather actively cooperate and mutually thrive."
p. xv - "...the great fault line in the world is not between Americans and Arabs or Muslims and Christians. It is between the moderates of all traditions and the extremists who belong only to one - the tradition of extremism."
p. xxv - "There is no better time to stand up for your values than when they are under attack, that bigotry concealed doesn't go away, it only festers underground. It's only when the poison of prejudice emerges out in the open that it can be confronted directly." Yeah, think the election of Donald Trump. Think Charlottesville. Think. Think. Think.
p. 15 - "Respect, relationship, and commitment to the common good - those were Washington's three pillars of pluralism in a diverse democracy."
p. 17 - "'We weren't fighting for black civil rights,' [Jesse] Jackson told his audience. 'We were fighting for your civil rights. You have a choice right now: you can talk about an America where your people don't get sent to the back of the bus, or you can talk about an America where no one gets sent to the back of the bus.'"
p. 18 - You quickly realize that other people's struggles have secured your rights
p. 30 - Is still the thinking in 2017? - "...the industry of Islamophobia was simple and clear: Muslims are preparing a takeover of America because their religion requires them to. There is no such thing as a good Muslim. There is no such thing as moderate Muslim. There is no such thing as moderate Islam. They are not like us. They are against us. We have to stop them now."
p. 33 - "When it comes to Gingrich and irony, it's hard to know where to start." HA! isn't it the truth. The same could be said of Donald Trump and many others.
p. 53 - "Catholics have gained significant influence in American society, even while some of the most respected members of their fold have been guilty of abusing the power of their collars in the most reprehensible ways. The American public has made little connection between the two."
p. 55 - interesting discussion of Evangelicals
p. 56 - "When Evangelicals change, America changes." Hmmm...40% of our nation? Really?
*p. 62 - "...there were two key levers to changing people's attitudes about other religions - the knowledge they had about a particular religion, and the people they knew from that community."
p. 67 - I have been enraged about religious "leadership" and its unwillingness to enter into the fray of this issue publicly and call for interfaith work - to call out those within their fold for their less than loving words and behaviors. "She was treating me as an agent, not a victim, effectively saying, 'Your job is to do something about it...'"
p. 68 - "...convince people that religious prejudice is a serious problem, and that it ought to be considered just as unAmerican as racism or sexism." Are there really individuals who don't know this? I might add other "isms," like "sizeism" to the list.
pp. 70-71 - "Where diversity is a fact, pluralism is an achievement - it means deliberate and positive engagement of diversity; it means building strong bonds between people from different backgrounds."
p. 73 - "'...how does Interfaith Youth Core measure effectiveness?...Investments are what I do...The return on an investment in the social world is impact. I invest in fields an organizations where I see effective work being done...But I don't know the specific objectives of your activities. I don't know your definition of success. I don't understand how you've chosen your strategy, and I don't know the metrics you use to track progress. Bottom line: I can't measure the impact of my investment, and when that's the case, I don't invest.'"
p. 74-6 - the concept of "social capital" - "...diversity actually reduces social capital...America's social capital tends to be...bonded...bridging, or working together, both increases social capital and strengthens social cohesion....you've got communities that encourage high participation within the group but little involvement with other groups within the broader society."
p. 76-7 - "America is one of the most religiously diverse countries in human history and by far the most religiously devout nation in the West." It is? "Social Scientists measure America's religious diversity in three basic ways...attitudes...relationships...knowledge..."
p. 78 - "...people's regard for entire religious groups improves through a positive, meaningful relationship with even one member of that group...There is also good evidence that knowledge of other traditions correlates strongly with positive attitudes."
p. 86 - "'Everybody wants to hear the story of the idea, but having the idea is actually the easy part. The hard work is setting goals and building an organization that accomplishes those goals. Your organization exists to get results. Define those results clearly and pursue them relentlessly.'"
p. 87 - "how much of an art it is to apply a science well." (Think S.T.E.A.M, not just S.T.E.M.!!!)
pp. 89-94 - the value of preaching to the choir - "He was basically telling us that being in the choir was great, singing the song of interfaith cooperation was great, but we all had to go a step further. He wanted us to become preachers and start new choirs."
p. 95 - "He wanted people to do more than recognize the terms of discourse in a religiously diverse society. He wanted people to like one another, learn from each other, build bridges, form friendship, work together, thrive together."
p. 95-6 - interfaith literacy - 1. "appreciative knowledge of other traditions" 2. "ability to identify values that all religions share - compassion, mercy, hospitality, service." 3. "developing your own theology of interfaith cooperation, based on the texts, stories, and rituals of your own tradition."
p. 102 - "...the kind of society we seek is intimately connected to the type of education we offer." Bingo!
p. 112 - "There was the ludicrous belief that only people with interesting stories to tell were people of color, and that the most interesting parts of those stories were the parts about being oppressed. It meant that people woke up in the morning, looking for ways they were marginalized, and if they couldn't find any, inventing them" Thank you for saying this. ALL of us have stories to tell!
p. 120 - "What if colleges took religious diversity as seriously as they took other identity issues?"
p. 123 - "This story is a perfect illustration of why college campuses are an ideal civic laboratory for interfaith cooperation....The most critical factor in nurturing young leaders is giving them a place to apply their leadership skills, to form an idea, and to make it a reality. I have trouble with this...College students are still impressionable. I was. They are exploring and finding their way. It seems a bit Big Brotherish to swoop down on the impressionable.
* p. 136 - "The question was how to have a vertical relationship with one's own understanding of the divine, and a horizontal relationship with the diversity of the world...to arrive at a point where one 'can appreciate other men's values without losing allegiance to our own.'"
p. 141 - "He's a nominal Catholic with a big humanist heart, aware of how faith has inspired service but not willing to overlook the violence that religion caused." Boy, can I ever relate to that.
- the "Seminaries" chapter - Yes, interfaith teaching and discussion belong here! Religious leaders need to jump into the fray - it is their JOB to enter the fray! I am constantly disappointed in the silence of religious leaders when religious issues and conflict occur.
- p. 147 - "One of the hidden dimensions of interfaith cooperation is how it strengthens your own tradition, precisely because when other people ask searching questions...you go back to the sources of your faith to find the answer." And, I might add, this soul searching may lead one to question his/her faith. And this is not a bad thing either.
- p.151 - "'The Hindu-Muslim-Christian-Jewish-Buddhist belief about ultimate reality...is that the force of love is the supreme unifying principle of life.'" Take that all of you "religious" hypocrites out there!
I am so curious as to what my fellow book clubbers will have to say about this book. I will be very interested to hear what personal religious history they brought to the reading of this book and will bring to our discussion.
(to be continued)
October 23, 2012
I was so excited to have received this book through GoodReads First Reads - I consider myself a Christian Universalist and I tend to be both pluralistic and syncretic in my beliefs, so the idea of interfaith relationships and plurality is something of utmost importance to me. Add that to the very deep affection and respect I have for the religion that is Islam, and I was absolutely overjoyed reading this - it has really become one of my favorite books, out of all I have read. I have a great respect for the author's interfaith efforts, and a great admiration for his personal faith.
This book, which is about "the promise of American pluralism" (page xxv), is divided into three sections. The first section looks at the issue of the Cordoba House (of which I was in great support) in light of the history of pluralism in our country, the negative perception of Islam (especially in light of 9/11), etc. The second section looks at the "science" of interfaith cooperation and the "art" of interfaith leadership, and gives a lot of information. The last section addresses how we can apply this science and art in our colleges, in seminaries, and in our parenting to help in the promotion of pluralism.
I absolutely enjoyed this book, the author's writing style, the personal feel. It was moving, it was inspiring, it really is one I am glad to have in my collection. But many people may not appreciate this book as I do. Misconceptions about Islam and those who follow it abound, and exclusivity within religious belief is also a huge problem when speaking about plurality and positive relationships between faiths. The idea that only the Christian faith is valid, for example, that is held by many Christians (though not all of us, I assure you) is one example of how such exclusive thinking can cause negative effects in regard to positive interfaith relationships and how it can set people in the frame of mind where they are not even open to seeing another faith, or a follower of that faith, outside of their pre-established way. Pluralism is often believed to be a negative thing by people who subscribe to such an exclusive interpretation of any faith, and so I am afraid this book will be lost on those who do not see the virtue in such a premise, whose preconceptions cause them to dismiss or vilify ways of belief different from their own, especially given that its author is one who subscribes to the religion that is most dismissed and vilified at this point in our country's history. The sad thing is, it is exactly those people who need to read this book, though I recommend it to everyone regardless of religious affiliation or association. The message of pluralism, of positive interfaith relationship, is one, obviously by its very nature, not bound to one specific way of thought or belief. It is a message everyone should hear, a message I know I'm determined to instill in my child and promote in whatever ways I can because it is a message that is a huge part of who I am, what I believe. And I am thankful for people like Eboo Patel, people who work so diligently in this area.
While there were many passages of this book that stood out to me, especially, I think my absolute favorite passage was found in the introduction (page xxiii), and I'd like to conclude this review by quoting it now :
"Pluralism is not a birthright in America; it's a responsibility. Pluralism does not fall from the sky; it does not rise up from the ground. People have fought for pluralism. People have kept the promise. America is exceptional not because there is magic in our air but because there is fierce determination in our citizens."
This book, which is about "the promise of American pluralism" (page xxv), is divided into three sections. The first section looks at the issue of the Cordoba House (of which I was in great support) in light of the history of pluralism in our country, the negative perception of Islam (especially in light of 9/11), etc. The second section looks at the "science" of interfaith cooperation and the "art" of interfaith leadership, and gives a lot of information. The last section addresses how we can apply this science and art in our colleges, in seminaries, and in our parenting to help in the promotion of pluralism.
I absolutely enjoyed this book, the author's writing style, the personal feel. It was moving, it was inspiring, it really is one I am glad to have in my collection. But many people may not appreciate this book as I do. Misconceptions about Islam and those who follow it abound, and exclusivity within religious belief is also a huge problem when speaking about plurality and positive relationships between faiths. The idea that only the Christian faith is valid, for example, that is held by many Christians (though not all of us, I assure you) is one example of how such exclusive thinking can cause negative effects in regard to positive interfaith relationships and how it can set people in the frame of mind where they are not even open to seeing another faith, or a follower of that faith, outside of their pre-established way. Pluralism is often believed to be a negative thing by people who subscribe to such an exclusive interpretation of any faith, and so I am afraid this book will be lost on those who do not see the virtue in such a premise, whose preconceptions cause them to dismiss or vilify ways of belief different from their own, especially given that its author is one who subscribes to the religion that is most dismissed and vilified at this point in our country's history. The sad thing is, it is exactly those people who need to read this book, though I recommend it to everyone regardless of religious affiliation or association. The message of pluralism, of positive interfaith relationship, is one, obviously by its very nature, not bound to one specific way of thought or belief. It is a message everyone should hear, a message I know I'm determined to instill in my child and promote in whatever ways I can because it is a message that is a huge part of who I am, what I believe. And I am thankful for people like Eboo Patel, people who work so diligently in this area.
While there were many passages of this book that stood out to me, especially, I think my absolute favorite passage was found in the introduction (page xxiii), and I'd like to conclude this review by quoting it now :
"Pluralism is not a birthright in America; it's a responsibility. Pluralism does not fall from the sky; it does not rise up from the ground. People have fought for pluralism. People have kept the promise. America is exceptional not because there is magic in our air but because there is fierce determination in our citizens."
October 12, 2012
The timing is perfect! This morning, I finished Sacred Ground and tomorrow I will attend the open house for the new mosque in our community. Eboo Patel's words have encouraged me to find new ways to build and strengthen relationships with my interfaith neighbors. His stories of the work of IFYC on college campuses has taken me back to my own college experiences of multi-faith study and relationships.
These words, from page 138, caught my attention ...
"Interfaith - how our orientation around our religious traditions impacts the relationship we have with the diversity around us, and how our relationships with the diversity around us shape the way we orient around our religious traditions."
Engagement with those of other/no faith has always served to enrich and deepen my own faith, not threaten it. It's time to find some concrete, practical and visible ways to give expression to this reality.
These words, from page 138, caught my attention ...
"Interfaith - how our orientation around our religious traditions impacts the relationship we have with the diversity around us, and how our relationships with the diversity around us shape the way we orient around our religious traditions."
Engagement with those of other/no faith has always served to enrich and deepen my own faith, not threaten it. It's time to find some concrete, practical and visible ways to give expression to this reality.
February 4, 2014
I read this leading up to, during, and finished just after the IFYC Interfaith Leadership Institute in Atlanta. What I instantly appreciated about this book is it take Patel's idealism around this issue and confronts it with the realities of challenging situations we face in society today. Patel is authentic in explaining his own development on these issues and uses stories again to show how the interfaith cooperation framework the IFYC espouses came to be. This work is really important and I am encouraged by the enthusiasm of the students in attendance at the conference. The book is no substitute for the hands-on experience of the institute but it is a good start.
December 16, 2014
Eboo is a great speaker on finding what's right and good about diversity, especially religiously speaking. He is a good story teller but more important a crusader for the good of the world and America. Important read.
October 10, 2012
This book, once again, gives me hope, challenges my ministry, and inspires me to do more than I thought I could.
Read
March 17, 2013Important words - it really resonated with me
September 8, 2018
After Interfaith Youth Core reached out to me earlier this year, I decided to listen to Eboo Patel's book to find out more about IFYC and their work. The book is very well written. The style is engaging as is the journey that Patel has been on to make IFYC a multi-million dollar organization focused on solving one of the most pressing problems facing the world today: how to raise a generation of young people who can be true to their own religious identity and make room for others to do the same. Despite Patel's adamant insistence that he is not pushing ecumenicism, the rhetoric sometimes sounds like it. But I do trust that his and IFYC's intentions are to promote what Steven Vryhof called "rooted cosmopolitans." Patel's argument that young adults with the right knowledge, respectful attitudes, and good relationships can make a positive difference in the world has been yielding promising results for many years. And I hope that his work will continue to lead us closer to a world where everyone can live out the best that is in their worldview, religious or secular, so that we can turn back the tide of divisiveness, anger, distrust, suspicion, and violence to help America fulfill its destiny as sacred ground.
May 2, 2023
My mother gave me Patel's first book for a long ago Christmas. And I returned to his writing because I'm distressed by recent faith-based fear-mongering in politics and I needed to be reminded that ideally religion is love and acceptance.
I really liked the chapter "the science of interfaith cooperation" as a lesson in the operation of impact-based nonprofits. The specific objectives, definition of success, reasoning for a particular strategy, and metrics to track progress are important for any new organization.
I was also struck by Patel's insistence that we use religious-based languages to affirm positive change, abolition, and fighting for justice rather than falling back on "moralistic therapeutic deism" (which is where I am ngl).
I really liked the chapter "the science of interfaith cooperation" as a lesson in the operation of impact-based nonprofits. The specific objectives, definition of success, reasoning for a particular strategy, and metrics to track progress are important for any new organization.
I was also struck by Patel's insistence that we use religious-based languages to affirm positive change, abolition, and fighting for justice rather than falling back on "moralistic therapeutic deism" (which is where I am ngl).
April 2, 2024
Very neoliberal in many ways. Panders to white, Christian Americans with a “See, we Muslims aren’t all that bad!” type of attitude. The problem is that his loyalty to American politics and “democratic values” is ultimately damaging to Muslims both locally and internationally when we see how oppressive immigration laws functionally are, and this should go without mentioning, but the military industrial complex. This man worked for the Obama administration, so considering this context, it kind of makes sense. I do enjoy the pluralist sentiments and general theme, but it lacks strength in today’s standards for how we currently engage in cultural differences/exchange in America.
August 7, 2018
Great quotes and thoughts and arguments (like for people arguing that muslims will push sharia law on us, without considering canon law of the catholic church, etc). The education section was particularly relevant for our division, as I had never before really considered how much focus there is on other areas of diversity - multicultural, feminism, LGBT - but not on religion.
I read this book for a book discussion with the division and Eboo.
I read this book for a book discussion with the division and Eboo.
February 26, 2024
I was a little worried this would be heavy on the universalism or anti-Christian rhetoric, but I saw none of that. Eboo Patel humbly shows the places he went wrong and the hopes he has for the future (notwithstanding that interfaith dialogue so far appears to be losing the war) in using what he has learned from the Dalai Lama and others about learning from diversity of perspective over proclamations of a diversity of identities.
September 23, 2021
Although it was a very interesting book and it provided a lot of valuable information, I just couldn’t get into as much as I wanted to. I did enjoy reading about the common things Christianity and Islam have (even though I already knew they were similar). The example Patel added made everything better to understand and read which helped me not be so bored with the book
January 4, 2021
A very personal account of Eboo's Patel work with the Interfaith Youth Core in Chicago as well as dealing with harsh public backlash of Muslims in America in the decade following 9/11.
A challenging read for people of faith on the concept of a pluralistic American society.
A challenging read for people of faith on the concept of a pluralistic American society.
December 2, 2024
A little dated and lacked focus at times, but the ending where discussions on specific fields of interfaith Leadership was talked about was helpful! This one is more historical and autobiographical than practical, but it's still great to spark ideas on dialogue!
August 24, 2025
excellent book talking about the power of interfaith leadership and efforts. I think anyone who plans to lead a group of people would benefit from this discussion specifically on how to be more inclusive and intentional for our Muslim colleagues
February 22, 2017
I enjoyed the relation to politics in connection to the Cordoba House and the events after 9/11. I liked how it talked more about the story of Interfaith Youth Core and its journey.
November 7, 2018
An excellent book on interfaith dialogue in the United States about where we are heading and where we need to go.
October 22, 2019
A slow starter but ended well.
June 21, 2021
An insightful read of where our country as a religiously diverse democracy has been, is, and where it could be.
October 1, 2024
I only read bits and pieces assigned to me for a class but what I have read was absolutely incredible! So eye-opening and inspiring for me.
January 2, 2025
A thought provoking, insightful read into religion and culture in America.
December 6, 2025
Final book for my theology class!
March 14, 2017
A timely book to read about the author's determination to enable people from different religious beliefs to accept each other. The book explores the issues keeping people apart and ways to overcome them.
June 17, 2013
It's hard to argue with the underlying message that Mr. Patel puts forward. Members of different faiths have more in common than differences, and the way forward is through cooperation. As an atheist, though, I found myself dissatisfied with the book's exclusive focus on coming together over (or in spite of) matters of faith. Those of us who define our world-view in ways other than through faith in some being greater than man have always found these sectarian conflicts to be missing a larger point - humans should treat other humans with respect, dignity, and love. So in some ways, we want to say, "Welcome to the party. We've been waiting for you to reach these conclusions for a while." On the other hand, though, if we insist on always framing our discussions and inclusions around issues of faith, we atheists will be left out of the cold. We have nothing to add to the subject of faith that those of faith will be able to hear - we don't have any. In our view, faith is lacking in the fundamental curiosity and methods to provide answers, so any answers it provides to others are usually non-starters for us.
Read
November 22, 2012Not much here that is new to me since attending one of IFYC's leadership institutes, so Eboo is still preaching to the choir. But I would sing in Eboo Patel's choir any day of the week. Why? Because this is the gospel I've been waiting to hear since I was six years old, when my first questions surfaced about how Mom's church was different from Dad's church and what to do with my divided loyalties. In all that time, not one person told me that I could celebrate religious diversity as a full and faithful Christian. It's not that my parents and others didn't provide good examples. It's just that Patel is right--we didn't have a language for it. He articulated convictions that I had to work out day by day in the real world, and it was such a relief to hear them. I could not have predicted that the person to give me the greatest comfort in a Christian identity would turn out to be a Muslim. But as he says, "Sometimes you need a bird to tell you that it's cool to be a fish."
I want to be that relief to somebody else.
I want to be that relief to somebody else.
May 9, 2012
A quick read outlining his work and experiences as the founder of Interfaith Youth Core, Eboo Patel's Sacred Ground touches upon the oppression, insecurity, and victimization people of all religious backgrounds have felt and responded to. Furthermore, this book shows readers why working with people of other faiths and backgrounds is the way to a better tomorrow. I enjoyed the pieces where Patel draws from his own experiences as a youth and also as a father. A positive book that draws from many different voices, perspectives, and religious texts. [[Reviewed from page proofs. OSD is scheduled for September 4, 2012.]]
Displaying 1 - 30 of 56 reviews