II Reports

DR. WARREN LEWIS: Good morning. There will be a coffee break later this morning. Perhaps at that time, those of you who have not yet signed the book of the Congress and would like to, could avail yourselves of that opportunity. I've been informed that some of you may have to leave before then, so we are now going to move the book of the Congress to the table in the back of the room. If you want to sign it before you leave, you'll have that opportunity.

On the table at the back of the room you’ll find a variety of literature which you are invited to have free of charge in some cases, but there are two pieces that are for sale. The Proceedings of last year's Global Congress are there. Please help yourselves. In addition, copies of World Faiths Insight are available at $2.00 per copy. This is the joint publication of the World Congress of Faiths, an English inter-religious organization, and The Temple of Understanding, an American interfaith organization. This is the new series since the two journals have been united. The editors of both are with us. Dr. K.L. Seshagiri Rao was the editor of Insight. Marcus Braybrooke was the editor of World Faiths. Together they are the editors of World Faiths Insight.

Also for sale, for $15.00, is this publication by Marcus Braybrooke which has just been released: Inter-Faith Organizations: 1893 tol979; An Historical Directory, NY: Mellen Press, 1980. This is the only book of its kind covering the history of inter-religious, interfaith dialogue and cooperation. Because of its usefulness in explaining the tradition in which the Global Congress stands, we are only too happy to give this commercial on behalf of Marcus' book.

This morning we divide our activity in two. We shall hear first from Moise Adjangba, who is professor of international law at the University of Benin in Lome, Togo. He will briefly bring you up to date on the developments of the African Institute for the Study of Human Values. The African Institute and the Global Congress have made progress together. At every meeting of the Global Congress, we have given time to the African Institute to make its announcements and invite participation and support. We are happy to do that again.

Following Moise's talk and any discussion, we will hear from David Kalupahana, who is the Global Congress President for Communication. He will bring you up to date on what the trustees and their advisers have been doing in the past few days and indicate the immediate future directions of the Global Congress. Following his talk, we will again be open for discussion, for critique, and for comments. Following that there will be a coffee break. After the coffee break, we'll hear from Francis Clark. I'll introduce him at the appropriate time. So now, Moise Adjangba, Professor of International Law at the University of Benin, in Lome, Togo.

A. MOISE ADJANGBA: Good morning, ladies and gentlemen. I will be very brief. This address was to be delivered by the President of the Institute, Professor Ohin. Unfortunately he had to leave early. He asked me to substitute for him and say a few words about the Institute. As you may know, the idea of this institute has been in the offing for the past two or three years. A number of things have been done here and in Africa by Professor Francis Botchway, whom you know very well, by Dr. Ohin and by the staff of the International Cultural Foundation and the Unification Church in America. Right now we have Mrs. Masooya, helping us in Lome. She came about two months ago. She is working with us to help us to prepare for the inauguration. As you know, the headquarters of the Institute will be based in Lome. Lome is on the west coast of Africa between Nigeria and Ghana. It has a frontier with the Republic of Benin (formerly Dahomey).

There are two major factors which led to the choice of Lome as the headquarters. The first factor is political stability, racial tolerance and ethnic tolerance. Without these parameters, nothing positive can be achieved. There is also our search for dialogue and international cooperation. Lome is the location of many international conferences.

We hope that the inauguration will be held in the first part of February. We are in contact with the President of the Republic, who will be delivering the inaugural address. He is very enthusiastic about having this Institute in Lome. I think that he will do all he can, and his government will do all that it can, in order to make the stay enjoyable for those among you who will come. There is historical information about the Institute in the books of the Global Congress. Thank you.

(Editor's Note: See the Seoul meeting for a report of the inauguration of the Institute in August '81. It is reported in "A Newsletter of the GCWR" [Nov. 81], 3-4. A brochure is available with details of the program: The Institute..., Headquarters, P.O. Box 170, Legon, Ghana.)

DR. LEWIS: Thank you, Moise. Now David Kalupahana will tell us about the work of the trustees and the immediate future plans of the Global Congress. Mr. President for Communications.

DR. KALUPAHANA: Good morning. I want to say a few words before I share with you what has happened in the last two days at the meetings of the board of trustees. I think it is right that I say a few words about how the board of trustees came into existence. I understand that there are a number of misunderstandings about some people not being able to join the board of trustees, people who are really enthusiastic about our activities. The first time, to my knowledge, that the idea of organizing a GCWR came up, was in 1975. If I remember correctly, it was at the ICUS meeting in Washington, D.C. I remember Warren Lewis mentioning this to me. He was very enthusiastic about our participation. I think he consulted many people at the time, but my feeling was that he did not have that much support for the Congress. I was interested personally, but at the time I had some official responsibilities at the University of Hawaii. I do not know whether it was because I was a Buddhist that Warren Lewis consulted with me or because I was carrying that official responsibility. I was Chairman of the Department of Philosophy at the University. My department at that time had a very important role in holding conferences on Eastern Philosophy. Perhaps Warren wanted me to participate in this Global Congress in that capacity Unfortunately, since it was a state university and I was an employee of the state university, I found that it was difficult for me to participate in that official capacity. I explained to Warren that as an individual I would certainly be willing to help him in whatever way he wanted me to help him. He came to Hawaii and we had long discussions with the faculty members there. At the 1977 meeting of the ICUS we had our first regular meeting of the Conference toward a Global Congress of the World's Religions. That was in San Francisco.

There were a large number of people attending the first meeting. All kinds of ideas were expressed about such a congress. Some ideas were very negative. Some were very positive. Warren had been in touch with numbers of the people who were participating in the ICUS. I don't know who agreed at that time or who ran away from the idea, fearing that this would be an attempt on the part of the Unification Church to have a hold on the religions of the world. When I met him in 1979 in New York on my way back from my sabbatical leave, I remember him telling me that he had representatives from different religious denominations, but there was no one from Buddhism. It was at that time I volunteered. In 1975, I said I would not be able to participate in an official capacity but as an individual I could. So Warren accepted my services.

Since the first meeting there were a lot of changes. Some people dropped out while some new people came in. This is still going on. This may give you an indication as to how the board of trustees has come into existence. It was not a pre-planned thing. The idea was brewing all the time. People are coming, people are going. All kinds of things are happening. As I see it, this board of trustees has evolved after five years of discussion with all kinds of people. Some have volunteered their services while Warren asked others. We needed a committee to start this whole thing. People have been meeting in several places. The last meeting that we had was on the Hawaiian Island of Kauai. Some of the people who participated there are not members of the board of trustees now. Some have dropped out since then. We have brought some people into the board only the day before yesterday when we met for the last time here.

What we need to keep in mind is that we need to have a small group to work with. Mr. David S.C. Kim, President of the Unification Theological Seminary, who has been helping us during the last couple of years, also mentioned this idea. We need to have a small group to work with or it will be unwieldy. We have not decided how far we are going to expand this committee. The by-laws which we adopted in Kauai this past summer say that we may have up to twenty-one members on the board. Right now we have only eleven members. The people who are meeting regularly to discuss this matter have differences of opinion as to whether we should have a larger board or a smaller board. So that is how the board has come to be. It is not important, really, whether you are on the board or not. We will be having regular meetings and we will be consulting with you in all our activities. But since we need a core group to plan and arrange the meetings, we have this entity.

We have a problem which we have been discussing. The main problem is how do we go about getting representation from different religious groups, because we are here meeting as a GCWR. We want to have at least the major religious traditions represented here. That's only one of the concerns.

We need to have representation from regions. We need to have people from Australia, Asia, Europe, Africa, South America and North America. We also need representation from both sexes.

We need representation from different professions like academicians, religious leaders, lay people. We need people who are willing to work. We have had difficulties finding representatives to fit in with these requirements. We have eleven members now. We have spaces for ten more. We do not want to fill them immediately because we want to fill them from areas which are not represented on the board.

We do not have a woman member, so that is something that we must consider. At the last meeting in Kauai, we selected three presidents for three different kinds of activities. Ninian Smart will be the President for Agenda. Sri Radhakrishna, an activist involved in the Gandhi Peace Foundation, was appropriately selected to be the President for Action. I was asked to take care of communicating things. I don't know what that really means. At our recent meetings we selected a secretary of the board of trustees. Professor Archie Bahm will be serving as secretary. Professor al Faruqi was favored to be the treasurer of the board. We have a few committees as well. Dr. William Jones, Archie Bahm and Francis Clark are going to help Ninian Smart in preparing the agenda for future meetings of the Global Congress. We have a committee helping Professor al Faruqi with the finances: Gordon Melton, Jan Knappert, and Warren Lewis.

We have been discussing at length what we might do for future meetings of the Global Congress. It is understood that the Unification Church is not going to provide all the funds for us. The Global Congress is going to be an independent organization. Of course we can't go ahead at this stage without any funds. The Unification Theological Seminary, headed by Mr. David Kim, who has been constantly helping us with our meetings, hosting us wherever we went, and providing us with all the comforts that we needed, has agreed to provide limited funds which can be used for fundraising. There are expenses involved in getting the literature that we need for fundraising, the printing of the brochures, printing of the other documents that we will be carrying with us. At this stage, I cannot say where we will end up or how we will end up, but we are going to make a determined effort to go around the world and drum up support, and collect money for future activities.

This important task was assigned to several committees on a regional basis. We have a committee for South Asia which will probably include Southeast Asia. The people selected for this committee are from the board of trustees and also includes friends who are living in that part of the world. Sri Radhakrishna, who is already a member of this board of trustees, will be in charge of fundraising activities in India. Padmasiri de Silva will be our anchor man in Sri Lanka. Professor Archie Bahm and myself will be helping those two whenever we can, going around fundraising. We do not have money at this stage for the four of us to meet in that part of the world but we are doing whatever we can as individuals. I am hoping to get a research grant to go to India during the summer. I agreed to use part of my time after I finish my research project, to meet with people to see whether we can get the support of religious leaders, academicians, and others from that area.

We have a small committee concerned with the Far East. Professor Zwi Werblowsky, Professor Al Bloom, and Professor James Kodera are involved in this.

We have a committee helping us with fundraising in the Middle East. This committee is headed by Professor al Faruqi. Francis Botchway, Jan Knappert, and Matiur Rahman are on that committee. You have already been given a brief description of our concerns in Africa. Francis Botchway and Kurt Johnson are involved there on the part of the Global Congress.

These are the committees we have and some of what we plan to do during the next year or so. Thank you.

DR. LEWIS: There is also a European committee. Francis Clark is more or less in charge of that committee along with Jan Knappert, Marcus Braybrooke, Ninian Smart, and I believe, Myrtle Langley. These regional committees exist not only for fundraising, but almost more importantly, as the group which will be responsible for the organization of the regional consultations that we plan between now and our target date for the first plenary gathering of the Global Congress, 1983. It is our design to hold four or five such regional consultations in various quarters of the earth for the specific purpose of inviting the religions of the world to sit with us there and tell us what the agenda for the Global Congress should be, rather than our telling them.

Most likely our first regional consultation will take place in Lome at the inauguration of the African Institute. We hope to be able to conduct our first regional consultation with the religions of Africa. At that time, we will address ourselves specifically to the question, "What do you, the religions of Africa, say to us, the Global Congress, should be the agenda, should be the concerns, should be the issues? How shall we structure the Congress? Tb what shall we address ourselves in our first plenary meeting in 1983?" Perhaps there will be another consultation sometime during the coming calendar year. If all goes well, we at least hope to have a consultation in Seoul, more or less at the time of the ICUS.

JOHN MEAGHER: I'm John Meagher, University of Toronto. In this admirable enterprise, there is one thing that seems to be missing. It is not surprising because it's never been done before. Even on a small scale between person and person I think it's very rare. After speaking to Francis Clark yesterday, I'm truly persuaded that this is not something that the Global Congress can do right away. It is something that I think should be a long-range objective. It is this: If we are as serious as we want to be, and if we indeed respect and accept one another as much as we wish to do then part of the realization must be that we are very unfinished and foolish people. The kind of friendship which the Global Congress should envision seems to me to be a completely open one. I'm not talking about anything that would happen right away. This is for the long run. We should be free to confess to one another our biases and foolish perceptions of one another, some of which will have validity and some of which are merely conceptions on which we can be corrected. We should be open to receive in turn from the others who respond in kind, confessions of their conceptions, which will have validity or be useful corrections. It's a very difficult process. It is difficult between person and person. Between religion and religion, it is an almost insurmountable difficulty. But it is something that is profoundly worth doing. It has never been seriously attempted in the history of the world. I don't happen to know if other agencies would have a chance to do it. It can't be done right away, but I would be, for myself, deeply appreciative if this could be on our long range agenda.

DR. LEWIS: Thank you, John. Please, I'll not need to recognize you; everyone can speak and say anything you choose to say.

GORDON MELTON: I study American Religion. I'd like to speak to the issue of representatives speaking out of a tradition. I feel very uncomfortable as a Christian, being a representative of Christianity. I'm a United Methodist. I come from the Southern branch of the Church, and from the radically fundamentalist branch of my conference. I feel very uncomfortable even speaking for Methodism because there's a great diversity in the American Methodist camp. I know that most of them would disagree with anything I say. I feel uncomfortable, for example, participating in something where an Anglican or Catholic is the representative of Christianity. Anglicans and Catholics don't speak for radical free church people. The diversity is quite strong within Christianity. It goes from Christian Science to free church Mennonites to Anglicans to Roman Catholics to Lutherans. You have a range that is as wide as world religion. They just happen to be oriented around the same symbol. Perhaps we need to widen our thinking and not begin by classifying people into the great religious traditions. I remember a comment that was made to me by a Buddhist from Southeast Asia one time. I asked him to talk to me and tell me what his opinion of Zen Buddhism was. He said, "Oh, you mean Japanese Zen." He meant, the Zens were not Buddhists. We need to broaden ourselves.

We have within the United States at least 1500 different religions. Within Africa south of the Sahara there are 5,000 different brands of Christianity. Within India no one has even begun to count how many different groups there are. There is a wide range of opinion and lack of consistency on anything in these groups. The radical pluralism of religion takes us far beyond the simple terms of Hindus, Jews, Christians, Buddhists, and those rather set traditional categories.

HAMID ZAHEDI: My name is Hamid Zahedi. I am from the University of Southern California. I have a few concerns. Is the Global Congress a legal entity? What is, and where is, the constitution? Another concern is about the board of trustees being of different religions and faiths, at least the main religions, and regions and countries or both.

The third question is whether the congress is a permanent organization, which of course is related to the first question, or is it a temporary organization? If it is a permanent organization, how is the executive constituted? Of course, if there were a constitution right now, we would not have this question. Again, a legal entity has to have an administrative structure. What is the function of the different parts of the administrative structure of the Congress? What is the relationship between trustees and the committees which are going to be established in different regions? There is one more thing which I think is of prime importance. I would like to suggest that the Congress be related to a permanent organization. That organization can organize different committees in different parts of the world. People will know which body is communicating and where they can find answers. Thank you.

DR. KALUPAHANA: I want to repeat something about the philosophy that is involved which I tried to express earlier. As I see the philosophy, the Congress will go on growing for a while until it evolves into something. At this time I'm not quite sure whether we can predict with 100% certainty what this is going to be. I can give an example of one of the problems which we faced in organization. You ask about the executive committee. We had a lot of trouble deciding how the executive committee should be formed. The simple reason for that is that here is a group of people coming from all parts of the world. If they wanted to meet, there are a lot of expenses involved. People have to be brought not only from Hawaii, but also from India, Sri Lanka, Europe, Africa. So we found that it was difficult to specify an executive committee. However, legally the executive committee has to meet at least once a year. Who is going to provide the funds to bring all these people from different parts of the world whenever you want to have an executive committee meeting? We decided, therefore, to locate the executive committee as close to one another as possible. After a lot of consultation we decided to have one of the presidents available at the meeting. In addition either the secretary or the treasurer should be available for the meeting, as well as one board member. It is going to be difficult to function at this stage because we are without funds. It is a growing thing. It is not finalized yet. The board of trustees is not yet completed either. That is really the way you have to look at it at this stage. That is why I said it is a legal entity but it is not finalized.

DR. LEWIS: I'll just say a word or two more to Dr. Zahidi's questions. I heard six distinct questions in what he had to say:

1. Where is the constitution if it is a congress in any familiar sense of the word congress? In our little brochure which I'm sure you've seen there's a title, "Notes for the charter." We're in the process now of drafting a charter. That "Notes for the charter" was more or less an infusion of sentiment on the part of some of us at the Kauai meeting last August. Now we hope to elaborate upon the idea and design a charter that will make good sense to inquirers such as yourself.

2. To whom do we relate? Faiths, countries, religions, regions. We are a Congress of the World's Religions, all of them if possible. Of course, that's saying quite a bit, isn't it? Perhaps we should say, "All of them who will attend." It is our desire to bring to the same forum, to the same table, to the same place of conversation, representatives, people who stand in the traditions of as many of the world's religions as are willing to come and be with us. That's what the Global Congress shall be about.

3. Is it a permanent or temporary organization? God willing, it shall be a permanent organization, and a permanent activity and an ongoing activity. One does not foresee that the issues will be quickly resolved or that new issues will not continually arise. If we are to be that public forum where issues can be debated and thought about and work can be done toward resolution of them, then it will be, an ongoing activity. As the board of trustees develops and as we move towards our first plenary session, we probably will have to be more specific about just how things do work. At the moment we are content with our president, our treasurer, our secretary. The legal body which does exist is the board of trustees. These are the individuals who bear the responsibility for carrying the ball, and hopefully they will make a touchdown.

4. What is the function of the administrative parts to the whole?

5. How do the committees relate? Well, they relate in a very personal way. Whenever someone comes forward and says, "Look, I've got some friends in Japan and if you're going to Seoul next year maybe I could get in touch with some of my friends in Japan," and we say, "Oh good, please do that." That's how it works.

6. If the congress is to be a permanent ongoing activity, then your sixth and final question will answer itself. There will be an organization which one can comfortably relate to. But hopefully -- this is my hope at any rate -- the kind of free wheeling, personal, relaxed way that it has begun, that spirit can stay with us and permeate everything we do lest we become too official and too officious. Archie, our secretary, must make a correction at this point.

ARCHIE BAHM: I think the questions can be answered a little more definitely. My understanding is that persons who have been selected as trustees thus far are already involved in inter-religious concern through their activities. We are not representing merely one religion or one religious tradition even though some of the members do still represent a particular religion more than some of the others. But the idea of a person being already, and perhaps for some time involved in inter-religious activities was one of the qualifications for a person being selected as a trustee. I think that's important.

There was a request for a charter and you seem to give the idea that we don't have one. We have one. It is called the By-Laws, rather than a charter -- but that is a technical distinction. We have been engaged in the last two or three days in revising those By-Laws to remove apparent contradictions or inadequacies. If anyone wants to see that set of By-Laws, they're available. That's more definite than anything that we've said here thus far.

Ideally, we would go on forever. However, every trustee has a limited term, according to the by-laws. Each trustee is appointed for three years only with the possibility of a second three year term. He must be off the board for at least three years before he can serve again. This is something very definite that has not been mentioned thus far.

DR. LEWIS: Thank you. We have elected a good secretary! Next question.

SPEAKER: I understand that you want to unite all these religious traditions. Unity is in the air. We have the United Nations, and various united societies. It is important that we be united too. Of course, we already have the World Council of Churches, an organization which unites many traditions. The Roman Catholic Church is presently involved in SODEPAX (The Roman Catholic Committee on Society, Development and Peace). I was thinking it would be a good thing to get in touch with these organizations. It would be a good thing to unite with those who are already united.

DR. LEWIS: Thank you, Monsignor. That was very well said. This is the way we hope that our conferences work. When the Monsignor stands up and speaks thus, this is an indication to me that we can go to him and ask for help to unite with those societies that are already united. I'm sure Francis Clark, who is a trustee and a Roman Catholic, will be more than happy to speak with you about it following the meeting.

KURT JOHNSON: I'm Dr. Kurt Johnson. The Global Congress is a separate entity. The Unification Church is an entity. As Warren made clear the position of the Unification Church is that it is not desirable from anyone's point of view that the Global Congress be totally supported by the Unification Movement. That's been clear for a long time. One thing that may be less clear to people here is that, contrary to the perception that the Unification Church is a hierarchical and monolithic structure, it is not. You've never seen radical pluralism until you've been in the Unification Movement. The diversity of opinion can go as far as you can imagine, and the structures are equally decentralized. Now, because of this, and because the interest of the Global Congress is a world interest, there has never been a decision within the Unification Movement of how it will relate to or who will represent the interest of the movement to the Global Congress. What has been established is what is called the liaison committee. That includes myself as a representative of the American Unification Church, and the Director of Ecumenical Affairs of the national church. There's a representative of the Unification Theological Seminary on that committee. There's a representative from the Unification Church who works with the other ecumenical efforts of the movement. Warren serves in his capacity as a Seminary professor and secretary to the trustees. We act as an intermediary between the Congress and the pluralism of authoritative and funding elements within the movement itself. This is the type of relationship that goes on. There is the Congress, and there is the Unification Movement. We are always in the situation of constantly feeling out what are the legitimate and authentic directions of the Congress itself. There are no Unification Church people in any official capacity within the Congress. In our capacity, the liaison committee goes to any leader or any funding agency within the Unification Movement whom we think, because of their particular point of view, or world view, may be more likely to support the Global Congress than some other person or unit. I just wanted to make sure you know how fluid and dynamic that situation is. My hope would be that after this conference, the movement itself will do its homework and centralize its relationship to the Congress. Right now, that does not exist and causes some difficulty not only for the Congress but also for us as a liaison committee.

DR. LEWIS: I might just add before Dr. Gulek speaks, that there is an unwritten rule in the by-laws -- and by unwritten I mean exactly that -- that there are no Unificationist members on the board of trustees. I am not a Unification Church member and I have no vote in the trustees. Obviously, those of us who are working this closely to the Unificationists and to the Rev. Moon do not share the point of view that has been so generously expressed, especially in American and other media, that the Unificationists are the terrible, terrible people that they're supposed to be. At the same time, we recognize that this criticism of Unification could get the Global Congress into considerable difficulty. Therefore, we are doing everything we can to make it perfectly clear that the Global Congress is not a front organization for the Unification Movement. The Unification people do not in any way control the decisions, the activities, the policy of the Global Congress trustees or the Global Congress of the World's Religions,

itself. Really, we're all on both sides of that issue, quite pleased with the results. The Unificationists are very pleased that they are fully supporting something that is fully independent of themselves. They've accomplished something in their own eyes. We are delighted that they are content to be a patron of the Global Congress without attempting control. For the record I would like to say to you that we've been at it now for about five years and I have yet to see Mr. David Kim or any of the other Unificationists with which I work attempt any kind of sneaky, underhanded move to control the Global Congress. That simply is not their interest. They are our generous, open-hearted supporters and that's that. If anyone wants to ask you about it, you can tell them that in all good conscience. Dr. Gulek, please come, we'll have one or two other questions and then we'll take a coffee break.

DR. KASIM GULEK: I would like to support the idea of the Roman Catholic father who just spoke. The World Council of Churches does not represent Catholics, but it does include Greek Orthodox. It is not only one sect. It is a whole group. If there are other organizations in other religions similar to that, we should be in contact with them. On the relationship of the Global Congress and the Unification Church I do not think there is any contradiction or conflict. On the contrary, both work toward an end. We respect the religion of everyone. They are all roads that lead to God. It is perfectly all right to keep the religion into which you were born. But let us be in touch. Let us talk to one another and let us create an atmosphere of unison among all those who believe in God. This is the essence. We do not have to stress the differences. Let's leave those aside.

But there is one important aspect on which we all unite -- belief in God and striving to grow in the Almighty.

Thank you.

RICHARD QUEBEDEAUX: My name is Richard Quebedeaux and I'm from Berkeley California. This is my first time at a meeting of Global Congress so what I have to say may have already been said many times, but let me take that risk. I'd like to know whether the Global Congress, when it gets sufficient funds, plans to establish a fulltime executive staff. My experience with consulting work in various religious organizations is that without such an entity they just do not go anywhere. Secondly, is it the intention to raise funds for endowments? Are we talking about a permanent organization, or is it simply to raise funds for projects year after year after year? If it is to raise funds for endowments, which I think is a wise thing to do, I would like to make a suggestion with respect to the church in America, particularly the Christian Church, and particularly that group of Christian churches and leaders in this country that have a lot of money. That group, which we generally call the evangelicals, includes the Billy Graham association, the television evangelists, and others. They have a lot of money and they spend a lot of money Unfortunately, until very recently, the idea of doing anything with even non-evangelical Christians, or certainly with world religions, would have been anathema to them.

For a variety of reasons, that is changing. I think that the Global Congress should be aware that most people are interested in what you can do for them, not what they can do for you. I would say that some creative thinking needs to go into this. You might even consider hiring some people who are close to the evangelical community as development consultants. Begin talking to these leaders as to how participation in the Global Congress could help them. This could help avoid the fear that they might lose their own identity, their own interests and perspectives. In the world, there are at least two kinds of religious people. There are the dialogical types. There are the conversionist types. The evangelicals in this country want to make other people Christians. This is something of a road block. But I have found that just in bringing evangelicals to meet Unificationists, and most evangelicals do not believe that Unificationists are Christians, that with this sort of first encounter, when they really see the human side of other people and other religions, they start re-thinking. So I would simply like to share this. I hope that you will try some of these organizations that you would think are the last people in the world who would give money or support. I was a World Council of Churches scholar at Oxford. My experience with the World Council of Churches, is that when it really comes down to money, I can get more money from conservative people, much easier. I think we need to go to all the different groups. But I would like to ask the question whether endowment is sought and whether there is going to be not just a volunteer executive committee but an office with full-time staff?

DR. LEWIS: Archie, would you like to respond to that?

ARCHIE BAHM: I'd like to recommend that we grab him as a volunteer and appoint him as chairman of the committee for the American fundraising program.

DR. LEWIS: All in favor say "aye!" In answer to your two questions, in order, yes and yes. We will have to establish some kind of a permanent, visible office to handle the mailing and the rest of it. It's clear that that will have to be done. Will a part of our funds be used to endow the Global Congress? I think we have more or less agreed that that is clearly the thing to do. There's something distasteful about having to go around hat in hand every time you want to do something. If an appropriate amount of the funds were appropriately and wisely invested, over a period of many years a rich endowment could be built for the Global Congress and its activities. When one wants to bring people together who are not wealthy, and the money has to be forthcoming from somewhere, one just cannot expect that perhaps someone from an underdeveloped country can pay $2,000 to fly to the other side of the globe to participate in a two or three day conference. We recognize that and we intend to do something about it. That is why we have established our fundraising committee. We are going to do a lot of hard work thinking it through, and Richard, welcome to the committee!

KHURSHID AHMAD: I am Professor Khurshid Ahmad of Pakistan. I think we have a number of organizational questions. I would like to make two suggestions, more about our approach and attitude, and less about organization. First, what type of people should we be interested in? There are many people who talk about religion without necessarily belonging to a religion. There are many academicians, intellectuals who deal with world religions, world faiths and what not. I think if it is going to make some real impact and make a unique contribution, the Global Congress should keep this in mind. We should be a body of those who actually belong to religion, who have some commitments, who regard themselves as being people of a tradition, who want to live by that tradition. Karl Marx talked about religion. You do not become a part of religion merely by talking about religion. I do not think the Global Congress should consist of people who are just interested in religion as outsiders. It should consist of those who belong to a religious tradition. These are the ones who should meet in this project to see how they can contribute one, toward understanding each other better; two, to finding out where they can cooperate with each other in the achievement of their common objectives and for solving common problems. The other point that I want to make is that perhaps we can make a unique contribution if instead of just extending our biases, we try to adopt a new approach. Let us try to see each religion and each religious tradition in the light of the beliefs of those who belong to it.

Instead of talking about Islam, finding out what the so-called experts on Islam have been telling us all along during the last 300 years, let us try to understand Islam as Muslims believe, as Muslims practice it. Let's try to understand Christianity as Christians believe it, Buddhism as Buddhists believe it, Hinduism as Hindus believe it, and not as the academics, or the so-called experts have been telling us all these years. Now this may be a very unique approach but perhaps the difference between the dialogical approach and intellectualizing approach will become meaningful if we have dialogue of this type. I will submit that we need a really fresh approach to religion. Instead of talking about each other, let us talk to each other about ourselves, share with others our traditions, our faith as we believe in it, as we understand it.

In this spirit, I will listen to my Christian brethren, hear what they stand for, and that is how my own biases, my own ignorance will be automatically reduced. That is how this Global Congress will really be a Congress of the world's religions. Let us start sharing in a different way, that of being involved, getting more involved and sharing with others about our own faith. This would be a really different approach from the approach of simply dealing with different religious traditions. That is how we can make a unique contribution and can really grow into a real Global Congress of the World's Religions.

CHUNG YING CHENG: My name is Chung Ying Cheng. I am very much impressed with the elegant community of this organization. I am concerned with the substantial development of the organization. It is said that by your fruits you will become known, so what I think would be most important is planning for the future. Now here I think there are certain problems that I would like to point out for your consideration for a better future for the development of the Congress. First of all, I think there is the problem of representation which we have talked about. It is apparent that we could organize the congress in terms of regions and major faiths. Of course here is the underlying problem of east/west dialogues or concord. I heard people saying that you have to believe in God first. The term God had been used in several ways. Here it must be considered in the most broad way. In the eastern religions or religious practice, there are other terms being used. I would say we should look into the broadest definition of religion with enough open-mindedness to encompass all. In that regard,

I would say the eastern traditions of Confucianism and Taoism, both of them born in China, also have to be taken into account.

For the organization of this congress, I feel a planning committee has to be set up for the conference in 1983.I don't know what has been planned for that conference, but it is clear that we have to carefully search for right topics to make communication possible. It is not too early to think about it. In order to implement what would be the best form of communication, I would suggest that the Congress set up committees like outreach committees, committees which would relate to other groups.

I believe that philosophy or philosophy of religion should play an important part in the Congress. Many of you, including my colleague. Professor Kalupahana, are philosophers. We must recognize the importance of philosophy of religion. We should have philosophers so that we can become more effective in our communications. I think we should develop a more mature concept of what our Congress will become. I would like to suggest that perhaps in the words of Buddhism, we would like to have this Congress as one where harmony prevails. Thank you.

DR. KALUPAHANA: Just one brief comment about some of the things which were said earlier. I do not think it is right on our part to start with definitions of religion. I just received this note saying the first agenda of the GCWR "includes being devotedly religious without necessarily having to believe in God." I agree. You may remember the preamble that we read yesterday before signing this book. The board of trustees and the advisers and participants in the Kauai conference spent fourteen hours just trying to put together this little statement of that brochure. I think it was finally on the advice of my friend, brother Francis Clark, that we put in this sentence. "We undersign our names -- both those who call on God and those who do not -- and invite others of like persuasion to join with us and sign their names." So at this stage we need not bother about our definitions. We certainly have different persuasions, we are from different religious beliefs. We are not going to equate one with the other. We are going to keep all those things open and see what happens in the future. Let it bloom like a lotus and the unity can come. Thank you.

MOHAMMED FADHEL JAMALI: I am Professor Jamali, University of Tunis. I am a Muslim. I have lived as such from my youth till today. My wife is a devout Christian. I am a devout Muslim. We have lived for fifty years together, and we have lived in peace (applause). I would like to make two points about this Congress. I myself belong to several organizations, for example, The World Conference on Religion and Peace. I was on the board of that organization. There are Councils of Churches. There are many organizations. Now where does this Global Congress stand? Is it going to be the meeting place of all those organizations or is it going to be of individuals, individuals from all religions, irrespective of their persuasions or organizations? In other words, is there going to be a common denominator for these organizations? Is it going to be a uniting force for those organizations? My next point is functioning. Is it going to be an educational institution to help us understand each other's point of view, learn from each other, what each has to share, and enlighten us on other people's religions and attitudes? Or is it going to go further and try to resolve interfaith conflicts? Where does it stand vis-à-vis human rights? You have to make a charter which guarantees religious freedom for all the people of the world. These are practical things on which I'm not very clear. I would be very grateful for any clarification.

ARCHIE BAHM: My understanding of the major part of the purpose of the regional meetings that are planned in the next one, two or three years, is to ask people to answer that question. The group in charge of planning will not start off with their own ideas which may not work, but will gather information from each region with regard to what the Global Congress deals with. It’s ambiguous at this point partly because there's a search for answers on the part of people in each of the regions. There may be different answers.

DR. LEWIS: What you had to say, Dr. Jamali, moved me to think that we ought to invite you and Mrs. Jamali to lead a section at the first plenary meeting of the Global Congress on how to have a successful inter-religious marriage. That's a serious problem for a good number of people. If you've been doing it successfully for fifty years, you have a good track record. That's a whole new dimension.

You asked two questions that I heard. We have specifically said to ourselves and say to you that we want to relate to individuals in all of the religions. We also want to relate to all religions that are organized in such a way as to send official representatives. We are interested in individuals and we are interested in organized religions. In addition to that we also very much want to relate to those organizations which are neither simply individuals nor are they the religions, the faiths, but are rather bodies of interest that have been organized for the specific purpose of facilitating inter-religious dialogue, like the World Congress of Faiths in England, like the Temple of Understanding, like some of the Muslim organizations, like the World Conference for Religion and Peace, the WCRP. We very much want to reach out to these institutions and work with them and through them and let them be with us so that the Global Congress of the World's Religions will work with as many individuals, religions and groups as are willing to work with us.

The second question was whether or not we intend to be educational only. No. With you we agree that if the Global Congress is to be anything more than just another conference it has to go to work on these areas of conflict. I might just say that perhaps this is as good a time to begin as any. I think my wife would like to make a proposal and we'll let her make that proposal. Judy Reel.

JUDY REEL: You may be aware that we've had difficulty with the hotel management regarding the dietary needs of our Jewish, Muslim, and vegetarian friends. I was not raised with any kind of religious dietary restrictions. I was raised with other kinds of religious restrictions. Yet I certainly respect my friends' convictions regarding their instructions. I was very disturbed this morning when a Muslim friend sat down at our table and in our attempt to get a non-pork meal for him, the waitress actually refused to do anything for him. I propose that we as the GCWR write a letter to people running the ICUS, to the hotel management, and to anyone else to whom it would be appropriate, protesting this and suggesting that they respect religious traditions which may be different from their own.

DR. LEWIS: The issues of the vegetarian options have been added, not only for people who are restricted to vegetarian diets religiously, but for people who for health reasons have chosen a vegetarian diet. So those elements should be added to the list as well. Is there anyone who would strongly oppose the idea of our sending such a letter to the administration, to the ICUS and to the hotel in the name of the GCWR. Mr. Sonneborn.

DR. JOHN ANDREW SONNEBORN: I suggest that our concern over the dietary situation is very appropriate. It falls into religious matters. The banquet is being served by the ICUS. It is appropriate to address our remarks to them and not directly to the hotel. The ICUS will be able to report this to the hotel. It will also stimulate the ICUS' future hotel selection.

DR. LEWIS: Thank you. Would anyone else like to make a comment, or in any way amend what we're doing, or suggest some alternative. Do I take it then we are generally of one mind that it would be appropriate to do something along these lines? We'll draft a letter and have it available at lunch where you may read it, or perhaps where we can read it aloud, and then if any amendments need to be made on it at that point you can propose the amendments.

We come now to the address by Dr. Francis Clark, a trustee of the GCWR. For a good number of years Dr. Clark was a professor at the Gregorian University in Rome. He is a Christian theologian. At present he is a Reader in Religion at the Open University at Milton Keynes in England. This is the largest university in England. We are delighted that he will speak to us today on the general topic of "The Global Congress of the World's Religions -- A Hope for Mankind." Francis.