Video
Twitter
Facebook
RSS Feed
Faith-Based Diplomacy
FAITH IN ACTION
By Katherine Marshall
How can the United States harness the extraordinary organizational capacity of global religions and turn them into a force for peace and welfare? That's a question the Obama administration should confront early on. The faith factor can and should be a critical part of America's public diplomacy--and not a piece apart but integrally linked to the core question of how the "smart" new diplomacy needs to unfold.
President Obama has yet to put forth the specifics of his faith-based policies. But as they develop, he should not shrink from using them on the international stage. He should not let divisive topics dominate the conversation--topics like reproductive health or religious conflicts. The main purpose needs to be service and the religious drive to "perfect the world" - embodied in the Jewish tradition of Tikkum Olam. The reason for engaging faith-inspired organizations, after all, is that they have so much to give.
The array of potential for good is enormous. Name a pressing topic (climate change, sanitation, tuberculosis, well management, microcredit) and there are faith groups working on it. In Uganda, schools and hospitals founded by an array of Christian entities are celebrating their centenary anniversaries - a testimony to the deep roots of religious work in Africa. The courage of faith leaders who speak out against abuse of power and for human rights is often inspirational - monks in Burma, priests and nuns in Zimbabwe, and Jewish groups who refuse to let the complexities of Darfur's challenge obscure the horrors taking place there. Every time I visit orphan programs or soup kitchens for the homeless and elderly run by very different religious groups, I am awed by the human capacity for good.
That's not to say that all goes smoothly; shoddy work and slippery financial practices happen among faith groups too, intolerance creeps in all too often, and human capacities for tension, squabbling, and self-aggrandizement are too common. Partnering with faith-inspired organizations is rarely easy, partly because they are NOT contractors at the beck and call of public authorities, but complex institutions with an array of objectives. But the complexities should never be allowed to drown out the central message: that a vast array of people and institutions are deeply committed to making a better world. Working together, working through the many issues and different perspectives, offers huge potential for good. And for presenting the best faces of America to a world that is ready for hope and change.
This Friday, April 17, in New York, Georgetown University is hosting a Global Forum addressing the leading issues on the global agenda. The Forum, an annual Georgetown tradition, offers an exciting line up: President Clinton, Mohamed Yunus, Wendy Kopp, and Greg Mortenson are among the best known speakers. The Forum starts with the economic crisis, highlights the theme of bold new partnerships among public and private, corporate and civil society.
One panel (which I will chair) focuses on the faith factor. It will grapple with the issues but above all look to the potential that faith-inspired leaders and organizations offer for change.
Tim Shriver urged in a recent column that we "take another chance at life because whether we be Jew or Christian, believer or non-believer, from east or west, we are pulled toward a hope that cannot be dashed, driven by a love that cannot be ended, strengthened by a source we cannot name."
That's what the faith-inspired approach to hope and change should be about.
Visit www.GeorgetownGlobalForum.com for information on the Global Forum; participate in the live webcast (available at the site). Georgetown is also on Twitter, Flickr, YouTube, Facebook, and Fora.TV:
Twitter: http://twitter.com/georgetown
Flickr: http://www.flickr.com/people/georgetownglobalforum/
YouTube: http://www.youtube.com/georgetownglobal (the recorded webcast will be cut into videos and placed here)
Facebook: http://www.facebook.com/pages/Georgetown-University/8825331245
Flora.TV: http://fora.tv/partner/georgetown
Katherine Marshall is a senior fellow at Georgetown's Berkley Center for Religion, Peace and World Affairs, a Visiting Professor, and a senior advisor for the World Bank.
By Katherine Marshall |
April 16, 2009; 12:00 PM ET
| Category:
Faith in Action
Save & Share:
Previous: Confronting the Taliban Thugs |
Next: A Difficult and Dangerous Chess Game
Posted by: cacxo | April 19, 2009 3:37 AM
Report Offensive Comment
I just had a better idea:
http://vbox7.com/play:a77867d2
Posted by: cacxo | April 19, 2009 3:35 AM
Report Offensive Comment
Hmmm, so "penis Bill" Clinton was a featured Forum speaker. Did anyone check out his zipper before he started??
We hear he charged the "Georgetown Lovers of Mu-slim-e" money to keep it up!!!
And why wasn't Ayaan Hirsi Ali one of the main speakers?? Or Sir Salman Rushdie??
Posted by: CCNL | April 18, 2009 12:36 PM
Report Offensive Comment
Hmmm, so "penis Bill" Clinton will be a featured Forum speaker. Check out his zipper before he starts.
He will probably charge the "Georgetown Lovers of Mu-slim-e" money to keep it up!!!
And why isn't Ayaan Hirsi Ali one of the main speakers?? Or Sir Salman Rushdie??
Posted by: CCNL | April 18, 2009 12:32 PM
Report Offensive Comment
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uzIqAaYCXrA
(ahem .. :)
Posted by: cacxo | April 18, 2009 6:03 AM
Report Offensive Comment
Oh, and, he has to practice admitting being wrong more often.
Posted by: cacxo | April 18, 2009 5:34 AM
Report Offensive Comment
Not all of the USA is composed of such idiots, and there are people who know what 'legal', 'law' and 'justice' are, regardless of what the president says, and these are the exact same people upon which democracy depends for its existence.
So, if Obama fails to exercise some sound judgment of his own, and act upon it, things will keep sinking. And he has to do this very fast, otherwise he'll be damned if he does it after the majority mob demands it of him and he'll be damned if the majority mob does not demand it of him.
Posted by: cacxo | April 18, 2009 5:30 AM
Report Offensive Comment
The problem might be that the whole presidency thing has gone to Obama's head. He might even be intoxicated by the popular acceptance and adoration (the Obama mania), the very same popular acceptance that he, as black man, probably didn't have much of, in his life. It might even be tempting to suck it up to rest of the country that does not seem to accept him.
Anyway, he is not elected to dance to people's whims and desires, whether it's the whims of the majority or the whims of the minority. This is not leadership, it is the same 'decisiveness' that W. had, except, rather than sucking it up to a cabal of aides like Cheney, he has extended the circle. It is sucking up to immaturity and the fantasy world of fools who know nothing, see nothing, do not think with their heads and who will say one thing today and another thing tomorrow without breaking a sweat.
Posted by: cacxo | April 18, 2009 5:29 AM
Report Offensive Comment
What it also does in to probably antagonize the people who were vocal against the past administration lawlessness, some of them, actual pentagon lawyers. The message it gives is that it is pointless to speak up and put your trust in democracy, because what comes next gets similarly corrupted in less than a year. For all intents and purposes, the present condones that very same past, in action (nevermind the words).
It is just as ruinous because it shows that democratic process (and the election of a seemingly different administration) is not the answer. What is the answer then? Not speaking up? Never trust elected government again, of any color? Does Obama think he would get elected without the people who have spoken up against the total moral corruption of the past administration?
Posted by: cacxo | April 18, 2009 5:28 AM
Report Offensive Comment
If this is so, then he is a continuation of the last administration's policies, namely, "I am the law, and the law is what I say"(not. presidents do not get to decide what the law and the constitution are, or if they apply). 'Reconciliation' is not about undoing the rule of law - the rule of law just gets replaced with the rule of the mob.
In this case, it is the rule of the mob that teabags him, and that doesn't put him in a good light, nor does it actually reconcile them. It merely turns him into a w***e.
Posted by: cacxo | April 18, 2009 5:27 AM
Report Offensive Comment
By cleaning up its own s**t. Unfortunately, Obama seems to have decided to build the better future on the past's pile of s--t, which means it will sink into that very same s--t. He seems to have decided to not hold accountable the last administration for things like torture, at least the people who carried it out physically. I suspect he will not take action against the people who ordered it either.
Posted by: cacxo | April 18, 2009 5:26 AM
Report Offensive Comment
test
Posted by: cacxo | April 18, 2009 5:23 AM
Report Offensive Comment
I want to say how much I appreciate this essay by Katherine Marshall. The only qualification I would make is that I would add the impact that religious communities can have in eliminating the threat of nuclear war and nuclear terrorism.
As Advocacy Director for Faithful Security, a partnership of 14 national religious organizations working for the abolition of nuclear weapons, I am aware of the work of numerous religiously based organizations dedicated to eliminating the nuclear weapons danger. They are engaged with public officials working for ratification of the Comprehensive Nuclear Test Ban Treaty. President Obama in his speech in Prague on Palm Sunday provided a much needed vision for nuclear weapons abolition, and as is written "Without a vision the people will perish."
Posted by: lpullen | April 17, 2009 4:24 PM
Report Offensive Comment
The comments to this entry are closed.
('the end of the line' by metallica)