Following similar meetings in London in 2002 and Qatar in 2003, the seminar, which runs until April 1, invites scholars from around the world to focus on the understanding of prophecy in the two faith communities through intensive study of Biblical and Qu’ranic texts.

Peace and human fulfillment

Georgetown University, the oldest Jesuit university in the US, hosts the event as part of a series commemorating the 40th anniversary of the encyclical “Pacem in Terris,” issued by Pope John XXIII, which called on “all peoples to begin an authentic dialogue in the quest for peace and human fulfillment.”

In a pre-conference lecture entitled “Analysing Atheism: Unbelief and the world of Faiths,” Williams spoke about the importance of interreligious dialogue in understanding what atheism means--how we need to know which gods are being rejected and why. “It seems that, in differing degrees, most major religious discourses require and cultivate unbelief,” he said. “And so when we try to consider and understand atheism of any kind, our first question has to be what it is about some particular bit of speech about God is causing trouble, and whether it is in fact essential to a religious tradition’s understanding of what it means by God or the divine.”

Speaking to a hall of nearly 400 people, Williams explained that the challenge of atheism is one that has the potential to deepen what is said about our commitments. “To come to a point where you disbelieve passionately in a certain kind of God may be the most important step you can take in the direction of the true God,” Williams said.

Prompting awareness

Concentrating on the Abrahamic faiths--Judaism, Christianity and Islam--Williams argued that believing in a source of energy, forgiveness and love independent of ourselves requires us to establish that we are not looking to fill the gaps in our imperfect self-awareness and willingness to change if we are to prevent it from becoming a belief that weakens our responsibility and imprisons us in fantasy. Furthermore, he indicated that Buddhism’s denial of a personal God weakens the incentive for dealing with distraction or selfishness and constitutes an escape from the practical analysis of the mind’s liberation. “In other words,” he said, “for practitioners of the Abrahamic faiths, Buddhism is good for you; it asks awkward questions.”

Faced with the disbeliefs of another religious tradition, Williams said, participants [in Abrahamic dialogue] should be prompted to ask whether the God of the other’s belief is or is not the God they themselves believe in. “Part of the fascination and indeed the spiritual significance of dialogue is the discovery of how one’s own commitments actually work, and specifically how they work under pressure and under question,” he said.

Williams proposed that there is some analogy between the significance of particular unbeliefs that impact upon the self-understanding of religious discourse in general. “There is no such thing as a global system of atheism,” he said. “There are denials of specific doctrines on varying grounds, and the examination of where the points of stress are in the exposition of these doctrines very importantly allows us to test the resources of what we say as believers--and, ideally, to emerge with a more robust sense of those resources.” He added that what he had been describing is not about finding a common core, but about finding the appropriate language in which differences can be talked about rather than used as an excuse for violent separation. “I think difference is interesting, and the task of coping with difference is better than interesting: [it’s] vivifying.”

Finally, Williams suggested that we could learn better how to understand other religious believers if we learn better how to understand unbelievers. “If both enterprises lead us back to an enhanced appreciation of the resource and complexity which our faith both offers us and demands of us, so that we become more confident in dialogue, we shall not have wasted our time.”

Understanding love

At the end of the lecture Williams was asked how, in gathering a group of Muslim and Christian scholars in a world of conflict, he hoped to bridge the gap in a war-torn world.

“I hope the gathering sends a message of its own kind,” he said. “We met last year in the Middle East as war was breaking out. I hope the fact of our being there helped to send a message.” He added that to spend three days sitting with each other’s scriptures is a very important and moving occasion, which helps in understanding each other’s love. “When we understand each other’s love, we understand each other more,” he said.

Dr. John J DeGioia, president of Georgetown University, presented Williams with the university’s President’s Medal in honor of his distinguished service to the Church of England and for his work towards promoting interfaith understanding and dialogue with other religions around the world.

Other discussions this week will include: an assessment of the scripture-focused approach to Muslim-Christian conversations and whether this is an effective method of dialogue; overviews of Biblical and Qu’ranic perspectives on prophecy; and a Muslim response to Christology and a Christian response to Muslim understandings of Muhammad.