Introduction

Symposium and Report Credits

Participants in the symposium were asked to develop questions for Dr. Marty and The Public Religion Project to consider. Here are some of them.

What would it take to create rules of engagement so that people of faith could actually engage in constructive dialogue in order to have a positive impact?

How can we foster multi-religious discourse given the polarization of American culture?

How do we set guidelines for dialogue in a pluralistic society?

Are there diverse values that we all share?

How do we use the highest common denominators of all religious faiths and spiritual traditions to create a set of design principles for a just, humane society?

Is it possible to build a shared value system regardless of its basis, religious or otherwise?

What are universal values?

Is religion (in contrast to ethics, values, morals) inherently divisive?

How can religion unify rather than separate us?

How can religious involvement create community and not be divisive?

How do we get beyond majority rule? Questions

How do we protect against syncretism and the blurring of boundaries?

How do we deal with the potential conflict of being faithful to particular tenets when they may go against principles of tolerance or acceptance?

How do we combine deep convictions and tolerance?

Is future religious dialogue and experience trapped by a history of failure?

Has the free market emerged as religion and should it be separated from the state?

Does public religion limit capitalism?

What of good and what of evil does religion add to moral philosophy and ethics?

What is the role of storytelling in this endeavor - or in picturing a different future?

How do we access the sacred and the divine in public life?

What is the role of sacred knowledge?

How do we differentiate "legal"and "human"rights?

How do we keep the fringe from defining the whole?

How do we avoid encroachment of religion in solutions to public problems? Questions

When asking religions to participate in public life, can we say, "We need you, but we don't need your beliefs"?

Does the receptivity of religion in public life depend on the quality of religion (the degree to which a religion or non-religion fosters the golden rule)?

Can bringing religion out of the shadows help address issues of multiculturalism and economic equality?

Can America exist as a multicultural nation?

How do we get the concepts of charity and justice back into the dialogue around the distribution of public goods?

How can religion impact the unequal distribution of wealth?

How will more public religion bring us together or separate us?

How will it continue the transformation of society?

How do we come to terms with being connected as human beings, yet recognize the inherent diversities of us all?

When we say religion, do we mean top-down authoritative declarations or a grass-roots phenomenon?

Should religion look at its own shadow?

Should a group of 100 randomly selected people address these issues, rather than 100 chosen people representing ten "areas?" Questions

Where does ritual find its place in the hospital setting?

How can nonprofit agencies and foundations enhance their relationships with religious organizations?

Can we expect religion (whatever that is) to bring us "ultimate truth?"

If we desire to look at a "higher law,"where does it come from?

What are the implications of framing the question using the language of "shadow"and "light?"

How do we bring faith, spirituality, and religion into the American culture, if there is one?

Can you leave your self at home when you go into the public sphere?

Can the project distinguish between the centric and anthropocentric value systems?

How do we measure how religion affects the nature of discourse (social, private, educational, professional, etc.)?