Scriptural Reasoning, a technique developed at Cambridge University and the University of Virginia, is known as much for its peer-reviewed journal as for its august participants. But it is on the verge of going mainstream, shaking up the way we understand each other's scriptures and taking root on college campuses around the country.
Approximately twenty Scriptural Reasoning (SR) groups exist across North America and the United Kingdom. But that number is likely to balloon as college chaplains take SR to their campuses. Two leading scholars of SR, Peter Ochs, Edgar Bronfman Professor of Modern Judaic Studies at the University of Virginia, and Homayra Ziad, Assistant Professor of Religion at Trinity College, brought the technique to the annual meeting of the National Association of College and University Chaplains (NACUC) this past spring, where it was warmly received. Their goal was to share the methods of SR to ignite a movement among chaplains and, ultimately, colleges and universities.
Now, with the school year approaching, a number of chaplains have followed up with plans to start SR groups on their campuses as a way to enhance inter-religious engagement more broadly. Paul Sorrentino, Director of Religious Life at Amherst College and organizer of this year's NACUC conference, plans to do just that, noting, "I believe it is both respectful of the texts and of the people of different faiths who study them."
But what exactly is SR? According to a recent article by Peter Ochs and Homayra Ziad,
Scriptural Reasoning is the communal reading of sacred scriptures in small groups -- opening our sacred texts to others for conversation from the heart, and modeling a fellowship that sees difference as rich and illuminating. As a process, SR is relationship, through the medium of sacred texts.
Unlike other ways to study Scripture, SR tries to downplay the use of formal commentaries from a given tradition in order to give all participants, irrespective of religion, an even footing in discussions.
SR gatherings often take place around a given theme -- whether the notion of study, hospitality, or the Divine -- and a text from each tradition is carefully selected to illustrate that theme. Sessions are often informal, likely to take place around a coffee table or in a community center. Ziad and Ochs emphasize the simplicity of arranging an SR group:
The elements of SR practice are simple. Minimally, there is a table and three chairs. On the table are small translated excerpts from the three Abrahamic scriptural canons: Tanakh, New Testament, and the Qur'an. After some introduction to the scriptural passages and their plain sense, participants read the passages aloud and then question one another about puzzling or surprising features of each verse, sometimes each word in a verse. They note grammatical constructions, changes in tone, or shifts in the narrative structure. While participants may bring in observations from other textual or extra-textual sources, conversation is always brought back to the texts at hand. The texts are the anchor.
If the participants belong to any of the three scriptural traditions of reading and worship, each invites members of the other two traditions to read each canon as it were "their own." While a facilitator is present to help discussion move along, no one acts as an authority on the meanings of any of the canons, and no one assumes knowledge of how people from another tradition, or from their home tradition(s), will interpret a particular passage. At the same time, participants are welcome to speak explicitly from a faith perspective, while recognizing that theirs is only one of many interpretations of the passage in question. No one speaks too much or too little, but all share their wonderments and ideas about what a passage may mean, and each listens to the other. No sincere lines of reading and discussion are excluded
SR probably sounds easy enough, but why, you might ask, would any college student want to participate in a group rather than, say, attend a sports event, hang out with friends, go to a party, or -- heaven forbid -- do their homework?
As a recent college graduate, I think that the answer may be straightforward: students yearn for a place to openly discuss their beliefs. At largely secular campuses, many are hungry to talk about their religious or philosophical outlooks and can at times feel stymied. SR provides a means of self-exploration. It is as potent a tool for introspection as it is for inter-religious engagement.
Scriptural Reasoning may have started off in the intimate circles of great scholars, but it is on the cusp of becoming a dynamic force for study and interchange about Scripture on campus.
Follow Joshua Stanton on Twitter: www.twitter.com/dialogueeditor
Paul Brandeis Raushenbush: Finding Your Religion at College: 3 Questions to Guide You
Scriptural reasoning - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
The Journal of Scriptural Reasoning
Journal of Scriptural Reasoning Forum
The Scriptural Reasoning Society – Scriptures in Dialogue تفسير ...
The old books in every tradition all have great wisdom in them, but taking them literally destroys the ability to extract that. To understand them in the cultural context and consciousness in which they were written allows for the obsolete and prejudicial views and mythology to be ignored and the wisdom to be appreciated. When we do that across religions we all benefit. We also tend to find that the life lessons are similar. I applaud the SR movement for supporting this kind of understanding.
This is what I strive for in my face-to-face life. I get all my religion and politics talk out of my system online (and with my husband, who shares my frustrations and love of Jon Stewart.)
Love thy enemy. Turn the other cheek. A simple thought with profound meaning. If taken by itself would mean an end to war by no longer participating. If harm is done to you, remember to love the aggressor. Showing compassion to those who hate you is a powerful way to prove the goodness in you.
Now layer on the only path to heaven is through Jesus. Sinners must be converted for their own good. This does not bode well for non-violence.
What if we proselytized Jesus's philosophy and not the religion built around him?
Jesus was a inspirational figure of non-violence, too bad he had a God complex.
Nonsense. Tell it to Philo. Or Origen. Or Augustine. Or Maimonides. Or Thomas Aquinas. Or Avicenna. Or John Duns Scotus. Or Kierkegaard. Or Tillich. Or Caputo.
I love debating these crazy books
- Karl Marx, Critique of Hegel’s Philosophy of Right
Key is the demand to give up a condition which needs illusions. The condition of poverty, the condition of conflict, the condition of war, the condition of cruelty. Until such as these conditions no longer exist, the illusion or the opium of religion is necessary.
And hey, while we're at it, how about including the texts of people like Lucretius and other Epicurians, and Spinoza and Hobbes and Hume and Bauer and Marx and other possible, likely and certain atheists?
Especially in Hinduism where there are so many schools of thought (albeit they co-exist with each other), there really is no way to claim that there is universal scripture, for that religion.
Hinduism and Buddhism are more about introversion and finding one's own way than following some scriptures, so they really dont put much faith on books to the extent some other religions do.
Except for we atheists, who will shake our heads at the absolute futility of it all.
We do not need to paint Jesus on "chemical policy reform," or "new energy," programs. Must we have religious writers lay claim to the oil spill in the Gulf of Mexico, and tell us how they will help with Jesus? Will they write about opening the doors of their tax-free buildings, and succor to the poor, needy, hungry, and homeless? Must we hear about the Tea Party and Christian ethics?
Frankly, I find all of these writers to be gutless wonders. They write nice little articles exclaiming how we all can apply Jesus as if he were coat of paint. They ignore the dark shadows and bad deeds running rampant in their houses of worship.
Now, you want "scriptural reasoning?" Bull feathers!!!!!! What you need to do is your jobs. Jesus told you to love your god and do nothing to harm your fellow man. IS THAT NOT ENOUGH "SCRIPTURAL REASONING?" Do you have to examine every jot and tittle of your scriptures to find ways to paint your sky gods into new areas of social work?" Will you sit in little meetings for "reasoning" when the poor, needy, sick, and homeless need you? You're full of it!
"Scripotural reasoning groups" -- BULL FEATHERS!
Been there. Done that.