Vol. 4 No. 2 November 2011 Price $10

The official journal of The Council of Christians & Jews

(Victoria) Inc.

Bridge

Victor MajznerTrapped 2007Acrylic on canvas122 x 122 cmCollection of the artist

The scene is the present fertile landscape by the Sea of Galilee. The dove of peace is there but it is imprisoned in its cage. Noah’s Ark is there, too. It rests on part of a wedding ring, the Jewish sign of betrothal. I hope the bird will be let out soon.

Victor Majzner

The Council of Christians and Jews Victoria aims to:

Gesher ISSN 1037-2652

Published by The Council of Christians and Jews (Vic) 326 Church Street, Richmond, Victoria 3121, AustraliaT/F: 61 3 9429 5212E: ccjvic@bigpond.net.auW: www.ccj.org.au

Design Marchese Design, 7 Carinda Road, Canterbury 3126. T: 03 9836 2694 E: joanne@marchese.net.au

Disclaimer The views, opinions or conclusions expressed in this publication are those of their authors and not necessarily of the CCJ (Vic).

Gesher 2011Editors Anna Epstein and Dr Helen Light AM

Dr Helen Light AM was the inaugural Director of the Jewish Museum of Australia which she led for 27 years. Currently a private consultant, she is an Executive Member of the Jewish Community Council of Victoria, which she represents on the Jewish Christian Muslim Association. She is an observer on the Board of Religions for Peace (Australia).

Anna Epstein worked in intercultural relations as a journalist, radio broadcaster, and events producer for Multicultural Arts Victoria before joining the Jewish Museum of Australia where for nearly 20 years she has been an editor and occasional curator.

Helen and Anna have worked together on many publications and exhibitions.

Editorial Committee Reverend Patricia Bouma, MMin BTheol MASPEA ANSD SRNIan Rex FryWalter Rapoport

Proofing Evelyn Firstenberg

Front coverEUBENA NAMPITJINWitji 2005Synthetic polymer paint on canvas150 x 180 cmCourtesy of the artist, Warlayirti artists, and Alcaston Gallery Melbourne

Witji is a rock hole (Tjukarra) along the Canning Stock Route in the Western Desert. It is surrounded by other rock holes, Kinyu and Midjul, and sacred sites. Sand hills dominate the area. For those who know, this is a deeply symbolic painting. Eubena is a custodian of this country, a healer, and the person responsible for women’s law ceremonies.

Back coverIcon of the Hospitality of Abraham, 16th Century

• educate Christians and Jews to appreciate each other’s distinctive beliefs, practices and commonalities

• promote the study of and research into historical, political, economic, social, religious and racial causes of conflicts between people of different creeds and colour

• for the benefit of the community, promote education in fundamental ethical teachings common to Christianity and Judaism that relate to respect and understanding between people of different creeds.

Gesher 2011 1

Our symbol is the gift of the late Louis Kahan to the Council of Christians and Jews. The shell is a symbol of eternity and of pilgrimage and contained in it are a number of things which are common to both faiths and traditions.

The motifs of the tree of life, burning bush, and flames of spirit stand at the centre of the design. Behind the tree can be seen the cup of blessing, and surrounding the whole is the rainbow, the symbol of universal peace and a reminder to God and us of the covenantal promise.

From the editorsHelen Light and Anna Epstein

The Council of Christians and Jews (Victoria) Inc.

PatronThe Hon. Alex Chernov AO QCGovernor of Victoria

Honorary Life MembersRev. Prof. Robert Anderson AMGad Ben-MeirWilliam Clancy AMMichael Cohen OAMFr Paul Duffy SJRev. George Grant OAMThe Hon. William Kaye AO QCRabbi Dr John Levi AMSr Mary Lotton NDSSr Shirley Sedawie NDS

PresidentsIsabel Thomas Dobson, Moderator, Uniting Church in Australia, Synod of Victoria and Tasmania

Bishop Ezekiel of Dervis, Greek Orthodox Archdiocese

The Most Rev. Dr Philip Freier, Archbishop of Melbourne, Anglican Archdiocese of Melbourne

The Most Rev. Denis J Hart DD, His Grace the Catholic Archbishop of Melbourne

Rabbi Philip Heilbrunn, Chief Minister, St Kilda Hebrew Congregation

Rev. Alan Marr, Director of Ministries, Baptist Union of Victoria

Rabbi Fred Morgan, Senior Rabbi, Temple Beth Israel

Rev. Greg Pietsch, President, Lutheran Church of Victoria and Tasmania

The Clerk, The Religious Society of Friends (Quakers)

ChairmanRev. Graham McAnalley

Vice-ChairmanDr Philip Bliss

Hon. SecretaryAlbert Isaacs

Hon. TreasurerEdwin F Carter

Executive Committee:Rev. Anne AmosProf. Anthony BaileyMichael BodeyTzippi BorodaJohn Cohen OAMRev. Newton DaddowFreda KaufmanWalter RapoportDr Morna Sturrock AMBernard TranterThilo TroschkeMark Walsh

HOSPITALITY was chosen as the theme of Gesher 2011 after we, as incoming editors, were invited to attend an executive committee meeting of CCJ (Vic) and heard Professor Anthony Bailey give a moving homily on the role of hospitality in Christianity and Judaism. He referred the theological basis of this religious precept back to Genesis and the story of Abraham and Sarah welcoming the three angels.

The theme resonated with us because organisations such as the CCJ are predicated on opening hearts, minds, and doors to the ‘other’, and on building bridges, as in the Hebrew word gesher. To quote from the Reverend Professor Gary Bouma, “It is time for religions and spiritualities to realise their interdependence and the life-giving response of giving hospitality each to the other”.

Like Anthony Bailey, a number of our contributors trace the importance of this virtue back to Biblical times. Many of them were invited because they live hospitality – towards those of other faiths, towards the poor, the underprivileged, refugees, the ‘other’. They understand this hospitality as a tenet of faith and a moral guiding principle. Humbly, rather than just describe their admirable work, they explain the imperatives which propel them. Therefore, while there is an instructive synthesis between word and deed, this journal is as much about good will and feeling as it is about action.

The theme naturally elicited passionate consideration of those seeking political asylum in Australia. Yet rarely in our public debates has there been a more urgent need for a cool, dispassionate voice to sift through the realities. Professor Andrew Markus presents us with challenging facts, debunking myths with his nuanced views, perhaps provoking us into a reconsideration of our positions.

No-one puts a more human face to the problem than Dr Howard Goldenberg, who publishes here for the first time his disturbing accounts of his time as a detention centre medico.

We are proud to be able to illustrate this Gesher with religious art from the 2009 Parliament of the World’s Religions exhibition, The Spirit Within Australian Contemporary Art. “Its artists are unafraid to speak aloud their deepest concerns and their personal search for meaning,” says curator Rosemary Crumlin.

We hope that Gesher 2011 reflects the same courage.

2 Gesher 2011

Gesher 2011 Contents

CCJ purposes 1

Editorial 2

Contents 3 CCJ Chairman Message 5

CCJ Patron the Governor of Victoria: Messages 6

CCJ Matters 7

Letters 8

Theology and Hospitality 9 Inter-religious dialogue – open mind, open heart, open arms 10 Cardinal Wilfrid Napier

A dark and windy night 12 Rabbi Ian Goodhardt Thedivinerelationshipbetweenguestandhost

Understanding the story of Abraham and Sarah 14 Meg Warner

Hospitality as a universal obligation 17 Ian Fry

Interfaith and Hospitality 21 Multifaith initiatives in Victoria 22 Dr Anna Halafoff

Learning from other faiths 26 Reverend Coralie Ling JewishChristianMuslimAssociationConference

Time and silence for meaning 27 Sister Rosemary Crumlin Exhibition The Spirit Within Australian Contemporary Art

The Parliament of the World’s Religions 30 Professor Emeritus Gary Bouma

Being a pluralist without losing my own faith 32 Reverend Helen Summers Apersonalinterfaithjourney

St Kevin’s students attend Yom haShoah commemoration 34 Christopher Straford

CCJ Donors 35

CCJ Supporters 36

Social Justice and Hospitality 41 Humanising the face of the refugee 42 Sister Brigid Arthur EmpathyandtheworkoftheBrigidinenuns

A context for the asylum debate 44 Professor Andrew Markus

Doctor on Christmas Island I 48 Dr Howard Goldenberg Garanat and others

Doctor on Christmas Island II 51 Dr Howard Goldenberg Hungering

The ‘other’ resists, and creates a space 53 Reverend Janet Turpie-Johnstone WhatitistobeAboriginalinthelandsoftheAncestors

You were strangers 56 Gary Samowitz JewishAidworkingwithSudaneserefugees

Come eat with us! 57 Reverend Patricia Bouma StephanieAlexander’sKitchenGardenProgram

An hospitable Italian concentration camp 59 Dr Rachael Kohn

Brotherhood of St Laurence and homelessness 62 Bishop Philip Huggins

Gesher 2011 3

4 Gesher 2011

Gesher 2011 Contents continued

Arts, Books, Language 65 Exhibition ANewJerusalem 66 Christos Tsiolkas & Zoe Ali

Yiddish for tertiary students of German 69 Dr Heinz L Kretzenbacher

Reviews 71

IfYouWereInOurPlace:TheRescuersoftheVanEngelFamilyin the Netherlands in WW2 by Helen Light 71 Walter Rapoport

DietrichBonhoeffer’sLettersandPapersfromPrison: ABiography by Martin E Marty 72 Julia Hamer

BeingfaithfulinDiversity:ReligionsandSocialPolicyin MultifaithSocieties by Gary Bouma 74 Dr John Bodycomb

SongofSongs:Amulti-faithexplorationofDivinepassionandlove by Anneke Oppewal 75 Rabbi Kim Ettlinger

GoBackToWhereYouCameFrom on SBS TV 76 Laura Maitland The potential of reality television

TheBookofRachael by Leslie Cannold 78 Dr Morna Sturrock

Membership form 80

Gesher 2011 5

From our Chairman

It is a great honour and privilege to have been elected Chairman of the CCJ (Victoria).

At the outset of my term as Chairman, I want to pay tribute to my predecessor, Walter Rapoport. He served and led the Council and its Executive Committee with energy, enthusiasm and wisdom over three years. One of his important initiatives was the establishment of the Luncheon Club, which has enabled members and other interested persons working in or near the city to hear a range of interesting and knowledgeable speakers. Attendances at meetings of the Luncheon Club have continued to grow, vindicating Walter’s initial vision. The Council and its Executive are greatly indebted to Walter for his leadership, and to his wife Sandi who has so generously shared him with us.

I also want to welcome our new joint editors of Gesher. Dr Helen Light and Ms Anna Epstein bring many gifts and much expertise to their undertaking, as this issue testifies. We are grateful to them for their willingness to take on this demanding task.

Gesher – Hebrew for ‘bridge’ – describes not just the nature of this publication; it points to the role of the CCJ itself. The Council is a strong and enduring bridge between two faith communities divided from each other over the centuries by ignorance, prejudice, misunderstanding, and hostility. The last fifty years have seen major advances in overcoming these obstacles to harmony and respect between our two communities, in large measure due to the work of Councils of Christians and Jews both in Australia and many other parts of the world. We cannot, however, afford to rest on our laurels. Although much has been achieved, there remains much to be done. There is still too much ignorance, prejudice, misunderstanding, and mistrust in both communities. To overcome those things, which continue to hinder good relationships between Jews and Christians, this Council remains as deeply committed as ever.

Graham McAnalley

6 Gesher 2011

From our Patron, the Governor of Victoria

As Governor of Victoria and Patron of your organisation, it gives me great pleasure to congratulate you on your dedicated work in continually strengthening the relationship between Christians and Jews.

The example you set is admirable and is a clear illustration to the Victorian community of the importance of religious tolerance and the mutual respect and understanding that underpin it. This is particularly significant in an increasingly complex society, where we are constantly presented with challenging factors that compete with faith and religion.

The Council’s ability to work harmoniously is based upon shared values reflected in Christian and Jewish scripture. One such value is that of hospitality, the theme of this publication. While we are comfortable in extending invitations to our friends, welcoming strangers into our familiar spaces is not as easy. It requires maturity and a genuine respect for the different or the unknown, and a level of trust and openness. Yet once the stranger is accepted, our once small and enclosed familiar space is enlarged. It becomes transparent and inclusive, more open and free.

Through this fundamental core value, the Council encourages and reminds our faith communities to be models of respectful and upstanding citizens who are dedicated to promoting a peaceful and harmonious society and who accept those from all backgrounds, regardless of religious beliefs or origin.

On behalf of the people of Victoria, I commend your worthy vocation and wish you all the best for the year ahead.

The Honourable Alex Chernov, AO, QC Governor of Victoria

Gesher 2011 7

From the vantage point I’ve recently enjoyed on the Executive Committee, I take this opportunity to offer the reader a snapshot of the work of the Victorian Council over the last year. In doing so, I hope I may contribute to a better understanding of who we are and what we are doing, maybe to the point of interesting readers in CCJ membership.

For any organisation it is crucial to maintain momentum. Otherwise it will surely wane, its erstwhile objectives to be found only in print.

The Council of Christians & Jews (Vic) is indeed an organisation with momentum, providing members with the satisfaction that its events and publications smooth the progress of constructive interaction and better understanding between Christians & Jews.

The Presidents of the Council, who are the incumbent heads of Churches allied with the CCJ, as well as an Orthodox and a Progressive Rabbi, clearly demonstrate their staunch support, and display a sincere commitment to their honorary positions. Their encouragement boosts our efforts.

Our PatronThe Council sincerely appreciated Professor David de Kretser’s patronage of the Council during his term as Governor of Victoria, and his evident interest in our activities.

We are delighted that his successor as Governor, the Honourable Alex Chernov, AO QC, has agreed to follow his predecessor as patron of the CCJ. We look forward to his future association with us.

PublishingStorytellingforInterculturalConnectionsis a teaching resource for schools that has been in the planning pipeline for a few years. The project was made possible by funding from the Ian Potter Foundation, The Sydney Myer Fund, and the Pratt Foundation.

Our objective in developing this resource was to encourage, through storytelling, a better understanding between people of diverse belief systems and different ethnic and cultural backgrounds.

The project has had considerable facelifts during its development, but ultimately it will present a premium resource for schools, with publication planned in time for distribution during term one, 2012.

Gesher, our annual journal, is one of the Council’s proudest achievements. As the reader will surely attest, this edition, co-edited by Dr Helen Light AM and Anna Epstein, is yet another highly accomplished one.

The publication of Gesher is made possible by sponsorship, advertising, and the unwavering and enduring generosity of our members and supporters.

Luncheon ClubThe embryo of a luncheon club, spawned a little over a year ago, has now matured into a well attended, popular, and meaningful occasion on our calendar.

We are privileged to have garnered prominent and outstanding speakers to address the Luncheon Club.

Dr Peta Stephenson described the long history of indigenous Australians’ encounter with Muslims; Dr Piotr Cywinski spoke on his role as the Director of the Auschwitz-Birkenau Memorial and Museum; Rabbi Michael Schudrich, the Chief Rabbi of Poland, gave an account of Jewish-Christian relations in Poland today; Fr Patrick Desbois, French priest and author of HolocaustByBullets, described his life mission of locating mass graves of Jews massacred during World War II; and Helen Dwyer, a student at Ridley College, spoke of her Aboriginal heritage and her journey towards ordination in the Anglican Church.

Lectures, functionsThis past year we heard Melbourne University academic Dr Dvir Abramovich speak on Messianic Judaism in Melbourne, with a focus on one particular

congregation in South Caulfield.

Delegates from the ACCJ Israel Tour reflected on their experiences over their ten-day visit.

Rabbi Fred Morgan, Senior Rabbi at Temple Beth Israel, gave an illustrated talk on the tour he led through Jewish-Muslim-Christian Spain and Morocco.

Ministers from Melbourne Hebrew Congregation and Christ Church South Yarra Anglican Church conducted tours through their respective synagogue and church where ceremonial symbols and objects from each faith were explained and explored.

In May, I gave the address at this year’s Shoah Holocaust Memorial Service, a joint initiative of the Anglican Archdiocese, the Catholic Archdiocese, and the Uniting Church Synod of Victoria.

The Council was also co-presenter, with Tania De Jong’s Creativity Australia, of the ConcerttoRemember, staged in the music complex of Scotch College.

Wrap upMany of the profound challenges faced by councils of Christians and Jews in decades past have been dealt with and have somewhat ebbed. We can now speak amongst ourselves in a mature language, secure in our convictions, and are able to comfortably acknowledge our differences.

This Council recognises that different issues have arisen, and that new ones will most certainly arise from time to time. Our challenge is to have the courage to meet these head-on and not to recoil when controversial subjects surface.

There is so much to be done in the sphere we’ve committed ourselves to work in. We welcome your involvement.

WalterRapoportistheImmediatePastChairmanoftheCouncilofChristians&Jews(Vic)andwastheinauguralChairmanoftheInterfaithRelationsCommitteeoftheB’naiB’rithAnti-DefamationCommission.

CCJ MattersWalter Rapoport

8 Gesher 2011

Letters

Dear Albert (Isaacs),

Thank you very much indeed for sending me the November 2010 number of Gesher, which I have read with considerable interest, especially as it covers not only Jewish-Christian topics but also ‘issues of the decade’ which are significant to people of good will whatever their religious faith.

l learned much from these articles, not only about the various groupings within Judaism, but also about some of the Christian groups whose emphases were never before clear to me.

One article that particularly caught my attention was the one by Walter Rapoport based on the speech he gave in Warsaw to the Polish CCJ. I had not been aware of the degree of anti-Semitism that existed in Poland after the war, despite the horrors that the Nazis inflicted on the Poles themselves as well as on the Jews. But it reminded me that during the war, my father, a Methodist minister engaged in significant social work in support of unemployed men in Adelaide during the Depression of the 1930s, was asked by the Jewish congregation of Adelaide to assist some young Jewish refugees by accepting them into an agricultural training colony. He had established the training colony during the Depression to rehabilitate unemployed men. My recollection is that, even before war broke out, some young Polish-Jewish refugees were helped in this way, which led me to think that there was anti-Semitism in Poland even before Hitler invaded that country. However, I was only a boy at that stage, and my mother, in her biography of my father,TheLifeStoryoftheRev.SamuelForsythOBE (1952) puts it somewhat differently:

“Fifty per cent of the early Colonists came from the British lsles. Stranded lads, too, of other countries – a Czechoslovakian, a Danish lad, a Pole, and during the Hitler regime, sixteen Jewish refugees – three from concentration camps. They were very fearful of speaking of their past, because most of them had parents and other relatives left behind within Hitler’s reach and somehow he might hear what they said. The most impressive thing about Australia to them was that it was a free country. These young men had been received by the Jewish Welfare League. They were quite popular with the other Colonists and had plenty of pluck and a great sense of humour.” (p. 53)

My mother does not say whether these men were Polish or German, nor does she say how some of them managed to escape from a concentration camp, but they were certainly Jewish and probably Polish.

The story of the Jewish refugees who came to Australia during the war as internees is well known, of course, and I was privileged to have some of them as colleagues at La Trobe University many years later.

Among the other articles that interested me in this number of Gesher was your article on synagogal music, about which I know little. It is clear that there is a whole area of cultural understanding between the followers of our different faiths to be explored.

With best wishes for 2011,

Yours sincerely,Elliott C. ForsythEmeritus Professor of French La Trobe University, Melbourne

13 January 2011

Dear Executive Officer,

For many years I have received and obtained valuable information from your Gesher publication. Probably the number of years I have been reading Gesher would be about eighteen!

Please accept the cheque enclosed as a THANK YOU from me. I do not have much in the way of financial means.

For the entire length of my life – now approaching 90 years (I may not actually get to 90!!!), I have supported religious organisations and others of a social nature that seek peaceful solutions to their problems. As a veteran of the ‘last’ world war (1939-1945), I do know what actual warfare is, and also its uselessness in solving problems.

I have no intention of promoting my private thoughts about past centuries of religious-generated animosities, except that I actively urge peacefulness. How that peacefulness will be achieved is quite a problem – but magazines such as Gesher are a definite move towards a peaceful solution.

Very sincerely,Glen MarshallCulgoa Victoria

Gesher 2011 9

Theology and Hospitality

Nikos Stavroulakis (b.Greece 1932)Abraham and the Visitors 1968Woodcut on ivory-laid paper

10 Gesher 2011

Inter-religious dialogue – open mind, open heart, open arms Cardinal Wilfrid Napier

An open mind – St Francis and the sultan A graphic example of an open mind is St Francis’. One of his exploits on which I would like to reflect, pertinent as it is to our topic, was during one of the crusades against the Saracens. Ignoring the advice and better judgment of the experts, Francis and a friar companion made their way into the Saracen camp and asked to speak to the sultan. They did not end up holding their severed heads in their hands, but rather holding the memory of a warm and brotherly embrace from the sultan himself.

Here, peace and fraternal love are supreme values. The reckless action by Francis is difficult to understand if it is divorced from the deep impact that his conversion had on him. He expresses it in the first sentence of the Rule he wrote for his Order of Friars Minor or Lesser Brothers:

“The rule and life of the Friars Minor is this, namely to live the Gospel of our Lord Jesus Christ, by living in obedience, without property and in chastity.”

Since St Francis uses the Gospel as the basis for his new way of life, it is only reasonable that I too should look to the life and teaching of Jesus to inform my quest for the best ways to welcome the stranger.

Let me share with you Jesus’ dialogue with a Samaritan woman as an example of an open heart.

An open heart – Jesus and the strangerThe encounter with the Samaritan takes place on contested territory. Neither Jesus nor the woman could really claim ownership of it. That does not stop her from trying. So, which one was the stranger, the foreigner or the outsider?

Jesus makes the first overture to the stranger:

“Give me some water to drink.”She is obviously taken aback, so she meets his request rather coldly.“How can you a Jew ask me a Samaritan for a drink?”Ignoring the slight, Jesus takes the exchange to a higher level.“If only you knew the gift of God and who it is who said to you, Give me some water to drink, you would have asked him and he would have given you living water.”In response, she turns to the essential difference between them:“You Jews say X, while we Samaritans say Y. So, are you greater than our ancestor Jacob?”Once again Jesus takes her to a higher plain.“Whoever drinks of this water will thirst again, but the water that I will give him will become a fountain of water in him springing up to eternal life.”“Sir, give me some of that water, so that I will not be thirsty or have to come here to draw water”.

An open life – personal experienceAn example of an open life is my own experience of God using our faith to speak to us, so that it becomes true to say that for those who believe nothing happens by chance, God’s hand is always close by.

Allow me to change gear, to the historic days that brought the new South Africa into being.

One of the strange things that I had to do upon being appointed Bishop was to design a crest or coat of arms and choose a motto. I chose PAX ET BONUM. But little did I think of the consequences that my choice would have. With my Episcopal motto, I thought I was doing no more than following a convention.

Three principles“When engaging in ecumenical or inter-religious dialogue, do these things:

Make sure that you know your own faith well, but with an open mind so that you understand the faith of those with whom you are engaging;

Make sure that you love your faith dearly but with an open heart so that you appreciate what their faith means to them;Make sure that you live your faith with commitment but with open arms so that you include them in your thoughts and prayers.”

This talk is my expanded version of Pope Paul VI’s words to his fellow Catholics. Each of the talk’s three parts applies one of the Pope’s three principles, which I find extremely useful when engaging in ecumenical or inter-religious dialogue.

Theology and Hospitality

Within two years it was a different story. My brother bishops elected me Vice-President of our Conference and within a very short time I found myself engaging in the sort of dialogue that gave a very different meaning to Pax et Bonum. It was no longer a motto, but a major challenge to walk a very difficult but necessary path as mediator and negotiator together with the likes of Cardinal McCann, Abs Denis Hurley, Stephen Naidoo and Peter Buthelezi on the Catholic side, Desmond Tutu, Peter Storey, Khoza Mgojo, Stanley Mogoba, Beyers Naude and Johannes Heyns on the Protestant side.

It all began in response to Nelson Mandela’s Francis-like recklessness when he opened negotiations from his prison cell. F W de Klerk responded by a gesture which is best summed up by the Zulu word ubuntu, humanness or humaneness – the quality that makes us human as distinct from the animal.

On 1 February 1990 President de Klerk announced in parliament:

that all political prisoners including Mandela would be released

that all the people’s organisations would be freed from proscription

that all apartheid laws would be repealed

all those in exile would be repatriated

the negotiations would be started without delay.

Throughout this process the church leaders and later the other religious leaders were called upon to play the role of honest broker. At times when the negotiations became seriously deadlocked it was the church leaders who stepped in to advise the two protagonists as to the way forward:

“Go on TV to inform the nation what your problem with the other is. But, most

important, tell the people what you are going to do to resolve it.” Wonderful to tell, within days both men had done as advised, and negotiation took off again. Though neither man ever said so in as many words, it was their spirit of ubuntu that took the quest for peace, justice and reconciliation forward.

The first democratic elections which took place on 27-28 April 1994 have been dubbed ‘the miracle elections’ for a number of reasons.

First, because they took place at all, given the obstacles thrown in their path!

Second, because in spite of all manner of violence and killings that accompanied the election campaign, on the day itself there was no violence worth mentioning and no killing whatsoever.

Third and most significant, because of the spirit of ubuntu that the voters showed. Some people living near polling stations were seen taking trays of tea and eats to elderly voters standing in the queue, while others took chairs or stools out to give respite to those battling with the long wait.

The extraordinary thing is that the donors were white and the recipients black!

Challenge to Australia While it would be extreme arrogance to try to tell Australians how they should go about welcoming the stranger, I would dare to challenge you to see whether you could not take inspiration from the daring recklessness of Francis of Assisi, or the convention-breaking actions of Jesus of Nazareth.

I hope my sharing my testimony with you will encourage you at least to begin to formulate and publicise your vision for a society that will commit itself to the common project of welcoming the stranger by making place for the other in your life. For life is indivisible. As long as one life is under threat, no life is safe.

May God bless you with UBUNTU, which like us you need as individuals and as a country.

This is an edited version of the keynotespeech given at the launch of Gesher 2010 by Cardinal Wilfrid Fox Napier,O.F.M., Archbishop of Durban, SouthAfrica.CardinalNapierwasordainedfortheFranciscanson25July1970.Amongstmany other positions he has held, hehasbeenPresidentDelegateof the2ndSpecialAssemblyforAfricaoftheSynodofBishops,“TheChurchinAfrica,attheService of Reconciliation, Justice andPeace.”

Gesher 2011 11

Cardinal Wilfrid Napier

12 Gesher 2011

A dark and windy nightThe divine relationship between guest and host Ian Goodhardt

It was around midnight on a dark and windy Seder night – the first night of Pesach (Passover) when Jews conduct a home ceremony centred around a meal to mark their birth as a people and their freedom from Egyptian slavery. The night had reached the point when the children are sent to open the front door of the house to welcome the Prophet Elijah. The children called back to the dining room, “There’s a man there.”

“Very funny,” we all called back. “Close the door, come back and sit down.”

“No! There really is a man there!” they shouted.

Trudging to the door, wondering who would be there at this time of night, we did indeed find a somewhat bedraggled man. We invited him in, gave him some food. It turned out that he

was a resident in Jewish sheltered accommodation in another city, and had come to our town for an important football game. After the game, he remembered that it was Pesach, and walked several miles to the Jewish part of town on the hunt for some matza. He had encountered our neighbour returning home from his parents’ Seder, who had helpfully directed him to our door. After some hot soup and a meal he was happy to go on his way with a little package of food.

The quotation with which the Seder begins – “let all who are hungry come and eat” – is taken from the Talmud (Ta’anit 20b)

Rabba asked Rafram bar Papa: “Can you relate to me the good things which R Huna did?” And he replied: “I do not remember anything of his youth; but when he was of mature age …. [several examples follow. Finally] … When sitting down to a meal, he would order a servant to throw open the doors and call out: Whoever desires to eat, let him come in and do so.”

It follows in the tradition of Abraham, whose hospitality to wayfarers is legendary. His treatment of three travellers in Gen 8:1-8 is a primary source. Over the centuries, the rabbis subjected each word and nuance of this account to interpretation and exegesis so that every last skerrick of learning can be pulled from it. It pays, therefore, to read the text in full.

1 And the LORD appeared unto him [Abraham] in the Plains of Mamre, as he sat in the tent door in the heat of the day; 2 and he lifted up his eyes and looked [into the distance], and, lo, three men stood right over him; and when he saw them, he ran to meet them from the tent door, and bowed down to the earth, 3 and said: “My lord, if now I have found favour in your sight, please do not pass, I pray you, from your servant. 4 Let now a little water be fetched, and wash your feet; rest under the tree. 5 I will fetch a morsel of bread so that you can refresh yourselves; then you can continue on; after all, you have come to your servant.” And they said: “Yes; do as you have said.” 6 And Abraham hurried into the tent to Sarah, and said: “Quick! Three measures of fine flour! Knead it! Make cakes!” 7 Abraham ran to the cattle, and fetched a tender and choice calf, and gave it unto the young man who rushed to prepare it. 8 And he took butter (or curd/ cottage cheese), and milk, and the calf which he had prepared, and set it before them; and he stood by them under the tree as they ate.

Moses Leib Ben Wolf of Trebitsch. Seder in an 18th-Century Bohemian Home. 1716-1717Opposite: Seder night

Theology and Hospitality

Gesher 2011 13

One of the things the commentators want to know is whether Abraham knew the identity of the guests. On this hinges a number of questions. For example, in TB Kiddushin 32b, Rabbis Eliezer, Joshua and Zadok were at the wedding of the son of Rabban Gamiliel, who was the Nasi. (The position of Nasi was the highest in the Jewish community, roughly equalling President and being translated as ‘prince’.) They discuss whether it was right for Rabban Gamiliel personally to serve them drinks. All agree that Abraham – who was far greater than all of them – personally served his guests. But if he knew his guests to be angels, this would suggest that mere humans might not merit such treatment. There is evidence both ways in the text. On the one hand, verse 2 suggests that he saw the men in the distance, and a mere moment later they were up close to him without enough time having elapsed for them to walk as humans do. On the other hand, in verse 4, he asks them to wash their feet. Traditional sources explain that he thought they were idolaters who worshipped the dust on their feet. He could not countenance such a thing in his home, so he asked them to wash the dust off before entering.

This last detail has surprising contemporary relevance. One of the questions about the way Australia treats its immigrants is about whether we should, or even have the right to say, “You are welcome to be here, but we do things in a particular way here. There may be activities and attitudes you are accustomed to in the place you come from, but we don’t do things that way here.” Or should we say, “Make yourself at home and do whatever you like.” Abraham’s example suggests he felt quite comfortable in making clear to his guests what was and was not acceptable in his home.

At a recent inter-faith conference one participant suggested this was a limitation on Abraham’s hospitality. I disagreed. I suggested that as a guest I might be on edge not wanting to do anything that might offend my host. Once I know that my host will tell me – openly and respectfully – if I get close to the point of offence, I can relax, relying on him not to let me do anything wrong.

Another controversy in the text concerns verse 3, and whom Abraham was addressing. The difficulty is that the word Abraham used – Ado-nai, in Hebrew – has two quite different meanings. It usually refers to G-D, but also has a non-holy usage, roughly equivalent to ‘sir’. (A closely related word – Adoni – is used exactly that way in modern-day Israel.) On the secular reading, he was

addressing the visitors, and asking them not to depart without first receiving something from him. But understanding the word in the first way reveals an altogether more profound lesson.

Don’t forget that Abraham was in the middle of a Divine revelation, as we read in the first verse. On this reading, he literally asks G-D to wait for him while he attends to his visitors. This led the Talmud to the following startling conclusion (TB Shabbat 127a):

R. Yehudah said in the name of Rav: hospitality is even a greater merit than receiving the Divine Presence (Shekhina), as it is written [Genesis xviii. 3]: “And he said, My Lord, if now I have found favour in thy eyes, pass not away,” etc. (showing that Abraham let the Lord wait while he went to receive his guests).

So powerful a statement on the importance of receiving guests was this, that it became normative Jewish law, codified by Maimonides (Mishne Torah, Hil. Avel 14:2), and quoted in numerous other locations.

Every detail of Abraham’s behaviour held lessons for the rabbis. He said initially that he would fetch a small amount of bread, but then produced a banquet fit for a king. This led the first century sage Shammai to instruct (Mishnah Avot 1:15) “Say little and do much, and greet every person cheerfully.”

Even the opening of the passage is instructive as to the attitude we should adopt. The rabbis explain that the incident occurred on the third day after Abraham’s circumcision (at the age of 99!) when the pain is said to be at its most intense. G-D caused the sun to shine extra hotly, so that any potential traveller would stay indoors and not trouble Abraham. But Abraham, whose tent famously had four doors opening in every direction to welcome guests, was even more distressed by the absence of visitors. So G-D sent the three itinerants for him to entertain.

A contemporary rabbi once offered a beautiful analogy. Some of you may have had the experience of sending a child to another town or another country for study or work. The moment you leave your child at the airport, you worry about them. Will they have enough food? Will they be comfortable where they are living? Will they be lonely? Will they be alright? So if you hear of a person in that place who took your child into their home, was kind to them, gave them a meal, offered them reassurance, how thankful and well-disposed towards that person would you be?

Every human being on earth is one of G-D’s children, so when we look after them, are kind to them, encourage and sustain them, how well-disposed towards us would our Father in Heaven be? In the end it comes down to the fundamental lesson that the Bible teaches on its first page and every page thereafter. Every human being is made in the image of G-D and must be respected and treated with dignity in that fact alone. The test of our humanity comes when we look in the face of the stranger. Even though in that face I may not see my image, I must keep looking until I see G-D’s image, and then I will know what to do.

Ian Goodhardt is the Rabbi of Blake Street HebrewCongregation.

14 Gesher 2011

Understanding the story of Abraham and Sarah Meg Warner

When Abraham sees wanderers approaching his dwelling at the oaks of Mamre in the heat of the day, he is quick to welcome them as honoured guests and to urge them to accept his hospitality. From this point the striking aspect of the story is Abraham’s urgency about the assembly and service of a meal, probably quite extravagant in its scope, to his guests. Following the meal, one of the guests, who is gradually revealed to be YHWH, promises to return the following year when Sarah will give birth to a son, and confides to Abraham the matter of Sodom and Gomorrah.

There can be little doubt that if the visit of YHWH and the messengers to Abraham and Sarah is a test of hospitality, then Abraham passes it with flying colours. Of course, as Naomi Graetz wryly points out, it is easy to be a generous host when you have a sous-chef indoors!1 But is this the full extent of what Genesis 18, and the Abraham narratives more generally, have to say about the role of hospitality in the story of Abraham and Sarah?

The hospitality of LotIn the opening verses of Genesis 19, Abraham’s nephew Lot also offers hospit-ality to passing strangers. In fact, Lot’s guests are two of those who had, earlier in the day, been the recipients of Abraham’s hospitality. Here the two are on a mission to investigate reports of wickedness in Sodom and Gomorrah. Lot, like Abraham before him, invites them to turn aside to rest and to enjoy a meal. After repeated urging, they agree and become guests under Lot’s roof.

Much of the scholarly discussion of Lot’s hospitality focuses on a comparison between the meals offered by Lot and Abraham. Some commentators have concluded that Lot’s offering can be considered meagre, even inadequate, in comparison with that of Abraham. On this reading the purpose of the narrative of Lot’s hospitality is to underline the generosity of Abraham’s hospitality. Other commentators have concluded that Lot’s hospitality is at least on a par with that of Abraham. Possibly, too, the meals offered by the two reflect the time of day at which they were offered, so that Lot’s repast was simply what was appropriate for an evening meal. If this were so it would suggest that the meaning of the story is not to be found in a simple comparison between the hospitality of Abraham and that of Lot.

Things go dramatically wrong for Lot and his guests when the men of the city of Sodom come and surround Lot’s house. The scene has a violent edge to it, with the men demanding that Lot deliver the strangers to them. Lot does all he can to protect his guests from the baying crowd, even going to the extraordinary length of offering his own daughters in their stead. It is possible to regard Lot’s shocking offer of his daughters as an unorthodox, and admittedly extreme, expression of hospitality. What’s more, Lot’s offer, in its very extremity, resonates with the extreme inhospitality shown to the strangers, and to Lot himself (also a stranger in the city – Gen 19:9) by the men of Sodom.

In the beautiful Genesis story of Abraham and Sarah’s hospitality to three passing strangers, one of the strangers proves to be none other than YHWH. The generosity of the aged couple is rewarded by the promise of a son. The story has inspired many works of art and a great deal of Christian iconography in which the passing strangers are sometimes depicted, anomalously, as the three persons of the Trinity.

St Jeanne Jugan founded the Little Sisters of the Poor in Saint-Servan, France, in 1842 at the age of 50. She began taking into her two-room apartment elderly women who needed care. Today there are Little Sisters in 31 countries serving the elderly poor and modelling hospitality to us all. Opposite: Andrei RublevIcon of the Trinity c 1410Tretiakov Gallery, Moscow

Gesher 2011 15

Chapters 18 and 19 of Genesis are closely bound together, not only by a common interest in the fate of the city of Sodom, but also by a shared focus on the exercise of hospitality.

The origins of Moab and AmmonThe closing verses of chapter 19, vv 30-38, at first sight appear to have nothing to do with the topic of hospitality. The daughters of Lot, finding themselves living in a cave in the hills outside Zoar, apparently without men to father their children, make their father drunk so that they may be impregnated by him. Traditionally, this passage is understood as concerning the role of incest in the origins of the nations of Moab and Ammon, adding that offence to the list of Israel’s complaints against those nations.

If we look a little closer, however, we discover something intriguing. Deut 23:4-5 sets out the traditional reasons for the exclusion of the Ammonites and the Moabites from the assembly:

No Ammonite or Moabite shall be admitted to the assembly of YHWH. Even to the tenth generation, none of their descendants shall be admitted to the assembly of YHWH, because they did not meet you with bread and water on the journey out of Egypt…

The first reason offered here for the exclusion of the Ammonites and Moabites is that they failed to offerhospitality to Israel on the journey out of Egypt. If the principal charge against the Ammonites and Moabites is a failure

of hospitality, then why does the author or the editor of Genesis locate the story of the origins of the nations of Moab and Ammon immediately following a narrative which has hospitality as one of its primary themes, and in which the common ancestor of Moab and Ammon, Lot, offers two journeying strangers hospitality?

One possibility is that the author or editor wants to subvert the Deuteronomic tradition, and does so by constructing a story in which the ancestor of the two nations is connected with the offeringofhospitality, rather than the withholdingofit. In fact, there is evidence in Genesis 19 to support this idea. The meal offered by Lot to the two visitors corresponds to the meal that Deut 23:4-5 says was not offered to the Israelites by Ammon and Moab.

Deut 23:4-5 says that Ammon and Moab did not meet the Israelites with bread (לחם) and water (מים). Gen 19:3 says that Lot offered the two messengers unleavened bread (מצות) and drink (משתה). There is a parallel here, in that both meals consist of bread and drink. To be sure, the language used is quite different. If the author of Gen 19:3 had wanted to allude to Deut 23:4-5, wouldn’t he have used the same language? Well, yes and no. If the author of Gen 19:3 had said that Lot offered his guests bread (לחם) and water (מים), that might suggest an intention to allude to Deut 23:3-4, but it would be impossible to be certain. These two nouns are relatively common in the Hebrew Bible, where they appear together forty-nine times. How could a reader know that the author of Gen 19:3 meant to allude to Deut 23:4-5 rather than to one of the other forty-eight places in which bread and water are mentioned together?

Do not neglect hospitality, for through it some have unknowingly entertained angels.Hebrews 13:2

16 Gesher 2011

Understanding the story of Abraham and Sarah

Paradoxically, the language used in Gen 19:3 of Lot’s hospitality, although different from the language of Deut 23:4-5, suggests that Deut 23:4-5 is being alluded to. In Deut 23:4-5 the charge against Ammon and Moab is that they failed to offer hospitality to Israel during her journey out of Egypt. The language used in Gen 19:3, although different from that appearing in Deut 23:4-5, is inherently related to Israel’s exodus from Egypt. The word מצות (unleavened bread) is used in Exod 12:39 of the bread that the Israelites cooked hurriedly prior to their departure. Similarly, the word -is used in Exod 15:23-24, 17:1 משתה6 and Num 20:5-13 of the waters that Israel drank from the rock at Meribah and Marah.

Putting all of this together, it appears that the combination of three elements – (1) language in Gen 19:3 that is both parallel to Deut 23:4-5 and Exodus-related; (2) a story of the origins of Ammon and Moab in Gen 19:30-38 in which the ancestor of those nations offers hospitality to passing strangers; and (3) the prevailing theme of hospitality in Genesis 18 and 19 – indicates that the author or editor meant to revisit the Deuteronomic tradition of a failure of hospitality on the part of Ammon and Moab as a basis for their exclusion from the assembly of YHWH.

An ecumenical dimension to the role of hospitality in the Abraham story

What does all this mean for our discussion of the role of hospitality in Abraham and Sarah’s story? Staying for a moment with Lot, Moab and Ammon, one result is that instead of functioning as a story about the shamefulness of the origins of Moab and Ammon, Gen 19:30-38 becomes a story about the common heritage of Moab, Ammon and Israel. Instead of being presented as ‘others’ to be vilified and excluded, as in Deuteronomy 23, Moab and Ammon are

here shown to be connected to Israel by common descent from Terah, Abraham’s father. Just as the Ishmaelites share a common heritage with the descendants of Abraham through Ishmael, and the Edomites through Esau, so Genesis 19 shows that Moab and Ammon share a common heritage with the descendants of Abraham through Lot.

Further underlining this common heritage, the rescue of Lot and his daughters from the destruction of Sodom is expressly attributed to Lot’s relationship with Abraham (Gen 19:29).

In these ways, the book of Genesis says some subtle but significant things about the connectedness of Abraham with the surrounding nations. To be sure, membership of the Abrahamic covenant is dependant upon descent from Sarah, through Isaac (Gen 17:21), but that gloss does not eclipse the sometimes uncomfortable fact that the book of Genesis often tends to focus more on the connections between Abraham and the nations than on the distinctions between them.

The consequence of the common heritage of Israel, Ammon and Moab, exposed in Genesis 19, is that Abraham’s hospitality is depicted as having a distinctly ecumenical dimension that extends far beyond the mere provision of food and drink to wandering strangers. Taken together, the two chapters, Genesis 18 and 19, illustrate an Abrahamic hospitality tothenations that is expressed in a range of ways. Not only is Abraham an ‘ancestor’ to Moab and Ammon (19:30-38), he is also presented as ‘advocate’ or ‘intercessor’ on behalf of the nations (as represented here by the population of Sodom and Gomorrah) in Gen 18:22-33, and is declared by YHWH to be a ‘mediator’ of divine blessing to “all the nations of the earth” (Gen 18:18).

In Genesis 17 YHWH tells Abram that he is to become ‘Abraham’, “father of many

nations” (vv 4-5) and Sarai, that she is to become ‘Sarah’ and that she shall “give rise to nations” (vv 15-16). In the chapters immediately following chapter 17, we as readers begin to see the first workings-out of these promises. In Genesis 18 and 19, ‘hospitality’ is presented as more diverse and subversive than a simple model of the provision of food and drink might suggest, and through the giving and receiving of hospitality, Abraham and Sarah begin to live into, and to claim, their divinely-appointed identities in the land and among its people.

Meg Warner is the inaugural MornaSturrockDoctoralFellowatTrinityCollegeTheological School. She is currentlycompleting a D. Theol. through theMelbourne College of Divinity, focusingon the patriarchal narratives ofGenesis,and teachesHebrewBible at theUnitedFacultyofTheologyinParkville.

1Personal communication, 9 May 2011. Naomi Graetz is Emeritus of Ben Gurion University of the Negev and the author of several books, most recently The Rabbi’sWifePlaysatMurder (Beersheba: Shiluv Press, 2004).

Gesher 2011 17

We in our western society look forward to a warm and friendly greeting when invited to visit someone after a recent introduction. We may be a little apprehensive, wondering if the invitation were a mere formality, or if it confirmed that we were accepted as worthy of an ongoing relationship. We open our homes to others with varying degrees of enthusiasm – sometimes with a sense of expectation at the prospect of an exhilarating evening, sometimes with a degree of reluctance. Do we really have to welcome so’n’so? But we put on a bold front, knowing that our other guests will provide a buffer, and because generally we pride ourselves that offering hospitality is a norm in our culture.

Hospitality as a universal obligationIan Rex Fry

Then we travel overseas, or find ourselves in a different neighbourhood among people we have regarded as ‘different’, and our perceptions might change. ‘They’ make us more welcome than expected, with a genuine interest in us and a refreshing openness. Perhaps the notion of hospitality is intrinsic to other cultures too. We dig a little deeper and find that it is common to the spiritual and moral values embraced by all of our major religious and ethical traditions.

Hospitality is a central and inaugural event in the world’s great traditions. It marks that moment when the self opens to the stranger and welcomes what is foreign and unfamiliar into its home… Most major wisdom traditions… share a sacred commitment to hosting the stranger… But along with this overwhelming consensus at the confluence of these spiritual rivers, it is important to acknowledge that traditions of hospitality come from very different sources and travel in their own unique directions.1

Those “unique directions” are sometimes very hard for us to understand, and it is difficult to define hospitality – not just a matter of offering shelter, food and drink to a close friend or a passing stranger. It involves a mind set, and impinges on every aspect of individual, family, community and corporate life. The offer of hospitality can be a bridge between faith communities and a mechanism for dialogue, but qualified hospitality can build barriers by implying a lack of sincerity. Guests at a celebration of the Eucharist, for example, cannot fully participate and are in a position of inferiority until they adopt the practices of our home.

James Jacques Joseph Tissot (French, 1836-1902)Abraham and the Three Angels

18 Gesher 2011

Hospitality as a universal obligation

Hospitality is not necessarily a virtue in itself. Like love, it is a complex combination of virtues and its fulfilment requires us to transcend our ephemeral selves. It is a direct manifestation of the mercy God has shown us, and is thus one of the ways in which “the mercy of God is ever nigh unto the virtuous.”

Real hospitality can never be hostile to difference. Hosting a stranger is always a risk. A commitment to hospitality therefore requires spontaneous recog-nition of the other’s humanity. It should be a bridge to dialogue, but may be a challenge to one’s self-understanding and belief because it cannot stop at offering food, drink and shelter.

True hospitality becomes as it was for Abraham and Sarah at their tent at Mamre. When one welcomes a stranger, one welcomes God; when one makes room for the other, one resides in the presence of God, and the notion of election2 carries greater responsibility for another. The notion of the open tent introduces the prospect of an encounter with a stranger in transition, a sojourner between traditions, or even a clash of civilisations which requires us to reflect on the causes and possible resolutions for the clash.

However, if such an encounter is used as an instrument for proselytising or evangelism it may become a hindrance and cause communal division. Hospitality is sometimes offered out of enlightened self-interest. “Do not neglect to show hospitality to strangers, for by doing that some have entertained angels.” (Hebrews 13:2) Or, following Jesus’ parable of the sheep and goats, the motive might be either a yearning for salvation or to avoid damnation, rather than a commitment to Jesus’ injunction to act on the daunting and difficult premise that we should love our enemies – even those who hate us.

Is culture a thing we weave for ourselves as “unfinished animals” responding to education, art and religion? Is it true that “we are racist by birth, xenophobic by nature”? That we only become “cosmopolitan by education, altruistic by imagination (and) hospitable to our

enemies by religious conversion”?3 Such sweeping generalisations are open to challenge, even if those tendencies are present in some situations. It is my assessment that divine influence is apparent in the progressive revelation of the concept of covenant, including hospitality, which has led to the possibility of a partnership of the three Abrahamic faiths to advance their common role: to bring all humanity to a clearer understanding of its relationship with God.

The Jewish harvest festival of Sukkot reminds the community of its dependence on God, their status as guests, and the biblical commandment to “live in booths for seven days,” exposed not only to the needs of family and servants, but also to widows, orphans and neighbours, and to extend the hospitality that they may have received to others, including wanderers and strangers. It might be that Sukkot was the inspiration for the pattern of Harvest Festivals and Covenant Celebration services in Protestant Christianity.

Within each of the Abrahamic faiths there are well-known examples of sects such as the Christian Exclusive Brethren, the Pashto Taliban of Afghanistan, or the orthodox Jewish Adass, that disdain contact with outsiders and may reject those within the mainstream of their faith who are not purified or ‘saved’ by their special understanding. Typically, these communities maintain isolation from outsiders to the greatest extent that the conduct of a business will allow.

Nevertheless, the provision and accept-ance of hospitality is intrinsic to all major religious and ethical traditions, and it is an obligation under divine covenant within the Abrahamic tradition. To gain the widest insights we should explore the holy books of all faiths.

We can piece together those insights through a plain reading of the early Israelite scriptures, their exegesis, interpretation and elucidation; through the same approach to the Christian Gospels, Qur’anic texts, additional or non-canonical texts of those three faiths; reflection on the teachings of the non-Abrahamic faiths, and careful examination of the origins and motives behind developed tradition. Seekers both religious and secular shall benefit, but paradoxical relationships and confusion may arise.

Absolute hospitality will require that the home be opened up to the other, to the point of the giving up, the abandonment of this home. It requires that a host exchange his status as the host for the guest, for the stranger. Indeed Derrida goes so far as to say that unconditional hospitality implies that the guest becomes the host and the host the guest.4

Adherents of the Abrahamic faiths who reject the concept of hospitality, or fail to honour it, may have to accept adverse consequences in one form or another. This realisation is nowhere stronger than in Judaism – the first of the three to become subject to a community-specific divine covenant – which constantly lives with Leviticus as a reminder.

When a stranger resides with you in your land, you shall not wrong him. The stranger who resides with you shall be to you as one of your citizens; you shall love him as yourself, for you were strangers in the land of Egypt … I the Lord am your God who freed you from (that land). You shall faithfully observe all My laws and all My rules: I am the Lord. (Lev. 19:33-37)

Absolute hospitality will require that the home be opened up to the other, to the point of the giving up, the abandonment of this home. It requires that a host exchange his status as the host for the guest, for the stranger.

Theology and Hospitality

Gesher 2011 19

The liberation of Exodus was not an end point. The Israelites struggled with and ignored God’s commandments, and were punished to remind them of their subordination to Divine values. The integrity of the Jewish home has become essential for hospitality, to which there is a spiritual significance. All finite human beings are an image of God, every human being is a messenger from God, we must keep our hearts open as Abraham and Sarah kept their tent open on all four sides, and after the Talmudic discussions, religious law (halakha) has encoded rituals in a general principle of hospitality/hakhnasat orkhim, as a serious legal obligation to welcome the stranger.

One task of religion is to transform exile into pilgrimage, a lonely journey energised by a goal, for God’s hospitality is infinite and always available to both the pilgrim and the stranger.

When we withhold or reject hospitality it may be simply because we are apathetic towards strangers, or it may be the result of a current, an historical or a philosophical confrontation we have had with them, either as individuals or as communities. But whatever the basis, because hospitality is a binding covenant, we can certainly expect adverse consequences.

Buddhist philosophers recognise that unless a stranger’s demeanour or conduct provides a clear justification for personal esteem, they will commonly be met with self-grasping apathy and with no spontaneous hospitality, but they argue that while this attitude might be considered normal, it is out of touch with reality. They say that the fundamental awareness of our minds has the innate power to sense all others as like ourselves in essential ways – in our wish to be well and happy, to be free of distress and to realise our intimate connection to all others. The purpose of Buddhist practice is therefore “to awaken our potential to know and love others beyond constructs of otherness, and from that recognition, to mirror and evoke the same potential in others” as the Buddha did in his teaching.5

The emphasis on sharing – planned giving within the community (as to monks engaged in service and teaching) – is a direct outcome of that philosophy, as is the notion that the chance for spontaneous sharing with strangers is an opportunity to earn merit and plant new roots of virtue. The Indian Government has given formal recognition to that philosophy in its Atithi Devo Bhavah Program, the website for which states: “The concept [guest as god] is deep-rooted in modern progressive India. Even [the] Government of India believes in the concept.”

The idea of sharing with strangers compares interestingly with the practices announced in the Vatican Manual of Indulgences in 2000: indulgences can now be gained by being pleasant to immigrants, praying at work and giving up alcohol and cigarettes. This contrasts sharply with Australian Government refugee and asylum seeker policies.

In Islam, extending hospitality to family, friend and stranger is considered a moral imperative, especially for the poor during Ramadan, but so too is accepting hospitality from others, regardless of how deprived their circumstances may be. However, while hospitality for strangers is so important, the Qur’an and Hadith discourage excess and call for moderation and humility in all matters, including charity. “Give unto the kinsman his due, and [unto] the indigent and the traveller, but do not squander wastefully. Truly the wasteful are the brethren of satans, and Satan is ungrateful to his Lord.” [Sura 17:26-27]

One of Hinduism’s principal references to hospitality, the Taittiriya Upanishad, dates from the sixth century BCE. For a student who wishes to learn properly, a list of fundamental values includes righteousness, learning and teaching, truth, self-control, the performance of ritual and several social commitments, one of which is the care of guests: “Guests, yes; but also the private and public recitation of the Veda.” In their commentary on the Taittiriya Upanishad, Srinivas and Bajaj offer

poignant reflections of memories of hospitality in the twentieth-century family, where cooking and eating were always accompanied by attention to the needs of others. They add trenchant criticism on the decline of the culture of hospitality, due not only to urbanisation and the waning of intimacies in village life, but also the impact of colonisation and British destruction of older and more holistic social patterns.6

Economic and political issues, set in the context of post-colonial rethinking of tradition, “enable us to look back with a fresh eye to older texts such as the Taittiriya Upanishad.”7

I must agree. The world at large, and not just the white western Christian bloc in its progressive decline, has much to gain by taking account of the moral and ethical values of the world’s great traditions. In particular, hospitality in all its complexity must be distinguished as a vital obligation under each of the divine covenants recognised by the Abrahamic faiths – Judaism, Christianity and Islam.

Ian Fry’s extensive work in interfaithrelations includes being foundingsecretaryoftheJewishChristianMuslimConference of Australia (JCMA), amember of the Commission on LivingFaiths, Dialogue and Community ofthe Victorian Council of Churches,and a member of the Executive ofthe international Initiative on SharedWisdom (ISW) which is currently beingestablished.

1Richard Kearney ahd James Taylor, ed., Hosting theStranger: Between Religions, First ed. (New York and London: Continuum 2011).2Divine choice; predestination of individuals as objects of mercy and salvation.3Mark Hederman, ‘Hospitable by Calling: Inhospitable by Nature’ in Hosting theStranger:BetweenReligions (New York, Continuum, 2011) p. 88.4Jacob Meskin, ‘Misgivings about Misgivings and the Nature of a Home,’ in Hosting the Stranger: BetweenReligions (New York, Continuum, 2011) p. 55.5John Makransky, ‘The Awakening of Hospitality’ in Hostingthe Stranger: Between Religions (New York, Continuum, 2011) p. 112.6Frank Clooney, ‘Food, the Guest and the Taittiriya Upanished: Hospitality in the Hindu Tradition’ in Hostingthe Stranger: Between Religions (New York, Continuum, 2011) p143-144.7Ibid, p. 144

20 Gesher 2011

After a long period when religious homogeneity was touted as the only way to have a cohesive society, we have begun to re-learn our interdependence as humans. It is time for religions and spiritualities to realise the life-giving response of giving hospitality each to the other. There are glorious examples of religiously and culturally diverse societies producing great cultural innovations and many forms of beauty.

Ours is not a society that plays one tune, but a complex polyphony with each group contributing its unique music, adding a distinctive tone and demonstrating that through cooperation the music is more ennobling and enjoyable, and richer. Successful music-making requires that each plays his or her part and makes room for the others. It is a useful metaphor for the giving and receiving of the hospitality that is essential to productive inter-religious relations.

Gary Bouma

Gesher 2011 21

Interfaith and Hospitality

At the Jewish Museum of Australia 2005, for the project and exhibition Young Intersections, maintaining their distinctive identities were Ngala King, Thornbury High; Busra Demirhane, Isik College; Rachel Dank, Beth Rivkah Ladies College; Edwina Thompson, Presentation College Windsor.

22 Gesher 2011

Following crisis events – including September 11, and the Bali and London bombings – religious communities in Australia increasingly initiated multifaith activities to dispel negative stereotypes and to promote understanding between people of diverse faith traditions. In Victoria in particular, culturally, religiously and linguistically diverse (CRALD) communities collaborated with the state, including the police, aiming to build positive community relations informed by the principles of multiculturalism.

Multifaith initiatives in VictoriaAnna Halafoff

These initiatives proved successful in advancing social inclusion and common security. Consequently, while multiculturalism was and continues to be widely criticised in Europe and Australia as fostering processes of radicalisation within immigrant communities, especially after the 2005 London bombings, Victorian experiences counter this claim. Victorian CRALD communities reported that rising narrow nationalism and a return to assimilationist immigration strategies, as promoted by the former Australian federal government under the leadership of John Howard, legitimised prejudices in Australian society and exacerbated feelings of exclusion among minority groups. It follows that a narrow nationalism, which propagates anti-Muslim and anti-multicultural sentiments, is likely to lead to conflict in an ever more globalised world in which societies are becoming increasingly religiously diverse and faith traditions continue to play a central role in the majority of people’s lives.

Australia, like other Western multifaith societies such as the USA and the UK, has a long history of multifaith engagement. The first formal attempts at multifaith dialogue occurred in Melbourne in the 1960s, predating the introduction of multicultural policies. Anglican Archbishop Frank Woods began inviting diverse faith leaders to meet for a meal and discussion at Bishopscourt, facilitating greater understanding between faith traditions, and the beginning of friendships between religious leaders. In the 1980s, the Council of Christians and Jews was established in Australia. There was gradually a wider interest in multifaith engagement, particularly in Victoria where the Office of Multicultural Affairs assisted the establishment of a Multi-faith Resource Centre, an unofficial inter-religious council. However, only a few years later the Centre dissolved as a result of division and conflict. From 1987 onward, the World Conference of Religions for Peace (WCRP) began to play an influential role in Australia, and in 1989, its fifth World Assembly was held at Monash University. The event was a great success, with over 700 delegates, half of whom were international, and the Australian WCRP national office was established in Melbourne where it has remained active to this day.

The 1990s was a time of increased multifaith engagement in Australia at the national, state and local council levels: the Uniting Church set up working groups with both Jewish and Muslim communities; the Council of Christians and Jews expanded throughout Australia; the Australian Council of Churches established a Commission for Dialogue with Living Faith and Community Relations, and also a Working Group on Religious Liberty. Multifaith organisations were also formed in Adelaide, Perth, Brisbane and New South Wales during this period. In Melbourne, Monash University conducted several research and community engagement projects and the Springvale City Council formed a multifaith network (now the Interfaith Network of the Greater City of Dandenong) that organises tours to a variety of places of worship in their area. Faith leaders joined together in 1993 to support Aboriginal land rights and to raise concerns over the decrease of social services in Victoria. Christian and Jewish groups also reached out to assist Muslim communities during and after the Gulf War.

Following September 11, the focus of multifaith engagement, as in other Western societies, largely shifted toward dialogue among the monotheistic faiths of Judaism, Christianity and Islam. Muslim communities, academics and the state began to initiate multifaith activities with agendas of social cohesion and counter-terrorism. Indeed, following September 11, issues of national security were imposed on multicultural and multifaith organisations and Muslim communities, which were well positioned to challenge cultures of violence and promote peace in their stead.

An increase in multifaith activities also occurred at the local council level in Victoria in Dandenong, Moreland, Geelong, Hume and Kingston. The Turkish-based Fethullah Gülen Movement’s Australian Intercultural Society in Melbourne, and Affinity in Sydney began organising multifaith events and initiatives, often in partnership with Jewish and Christian communities and academic institutions. The Australian National Dialogue of Christians, Jews and Muslims, including the Australian Federation of Islamic Councils, the Executive Council

Gesher 2011 23

Theology and Hospitality

of Australian Jewry and the National Council of Churches of Australia, became increasingly active following September 11. At a national level, in April 2003 the Federation of Ethnic Communities’ Councils of Australia established a special multifaith committee, the Australian Partnership of Religious Organisations, including representatives from Jewish, Christian, Muslim, Buddhist, Hindu, Baha’i and Sikh communities.

In particular, a significant rise in educational activities promoting awareness and understanding of Muslim culture and of multifaith engagement occurred in Victoria after September 11, and the Bali and London bombings. Muslim communities became more active in addressing the negative effects of divisive and ill-informed media reporting through positive engagement with the media, and Muslim public intellectuals countered negative stereotypes and sought to promote understanding of their communities through commercial and independent media.

In Victoria, community-led initiatives such as Mosque open days, multifaith educational programs, symposia and festivals, received state government funding. The Victorian Government, Victoria Police and several local councils also initiated a plethora of multifaith activities in partnership with faith communities, including the Victorian Government’s Community Accord; Celebrate our Cultural Diversity Week; the Premier’s Multifaith Leaders Forum (now the Multifaith Advisory Group); the Multifaith Multicultural Youth Network; the Australasian Police Multicultural Advisory Bureau; and Victoria Police’s Multicultural Advisory Unit, and Multifaith. These initiatives have been aimed at fostering an inclusive Victorian community in which religious diversity is welcome, religious traditions and practices are respected as long as they are consistent with the law and human rights, and good relations are developed in diverse communities. New communities are assisted with settlement and in managing tensions, whether old or new, should they occur. These initiatives have contributed to building genuinely secure communities and have also formed a significant part of preventative counter-terrorism strategies. Indeed, CRALD communities have praised the Victorian Government for their commitment to multiculturalism. They also expressed a positive view of Victoria Police for their community engagement and willingness to work with communities to address critical issues. Victoria Police’s community policing approach has been cited as an effective counter-terrorism strategy in Victoria.

Religious vilification does occur here. But the Victorian government’scommitment, against global trends, to promoting multicultural and multifaithcommunity as a peace-building strategy arguably protected the Victoriancommunity from terrorism at a time when home-grown terrorism posed asignificant threat to Western societies.

InterAction Launch, Interfaith Youth Core Training at Monash University, November 2009

24 Gesher 2011

Such peace-building initiatives in Victoria have countered extremism by normalising religious pluralism, lessening the potential for alienation and radicalisation in multifaith societies. They have encouraged dialogue as a non-violent means of influencing policy and effecting social change.

Networks that include religious representatives alongside police, teachers and journalists have been highly effective. Optimistically, since the decisive defeat of John Howard’s federal Liberal Government, the Labor government has adopted similar measures, to promote “greater inclusiveness and opportunity in Australia” (Attorney-General Robert McClelland, 2008) and to address “underlying causes of radical extremism”.

Exclusion is a major contributing factor to global risk. While concerns have been raised that multiculturalism “undermines solidarity and trust” because “people are more likely to afford equal treatment to others with whom they share a common identity and common values”, lessening marginalisation of minority groups through inclusive policies such as multiculturalism can actually encourage their participation in society and therefore increase feelings of solidarity. Moreover, promoting a multicultural and multifaith view of Victorian identity ensures that a common unity can be found beyond the oppositional ‘us and them’ of narrow nationalism and policies of assimilation.

That is not to say that acts of racial or religious vilification do not occur in Victoria, or that multiculturalism in Victoria does not have its critics. However, in the face of such obstacles, the government of Victoria has maintained its commitment to promoting an inclusive multicultural and multifaith community as a peace-building strategy, against global trends and against the divisive policies of the former Howard government. This decision arguably protected the Victorian community from terrorism at a time when terrorism, home-grown terrorism in particular, posed a significant threat to Western societies.

To celebrate Victoria’s success in promoting harmonious multifaith relations, Melbourne was chosen as the site of the 2009 Parliament of the World’s Religions, which brought multifaith activists from all over the world to discuss the PWR’s main themes of healing the earth, reconciliation, overcoming poverty, social cohesion, inner peace, securing food and water, and social justice. More recently, Victorian faith communities and the Victorian Multicultural Commission have prioritised multifaith youth initiatives and also activities focussed on countering the risk of climate change. This is evident in the formation of two new organisations in Victoria, GreenFaith Australia (2009), which has chapters in the USA, and InterAction (2009), a multifaith youth network that is modelled on the Interfaith Youth Core, based in Chicago. Finally, as a legacy of the Melbourne Parliament of World’s Religions, the Faith Community Council of Victoria (FCCV) was established in 2010, as Victoria’s umbrella multifaith body. The FCCV is the successor to the Leaders of Faith Communities Forum, which was founded in 1995.

Multifaith initiatives in Victoria

Exclusion is a major contributing factor to global risk. While concerns have been raised that multiculturalism “undermines solidarity and trust” because “people are more likely to afford equal treatment to others with whom they share a common identity and common values”, lessening marginalisation of minority groups through inclusive policies such as multiculturalism can actually encourage their participation in society and therefore increase feelings of solidarity.

Gesher 2011 25

Theology and Hospitality

These developments indicate that ten years on from the tragic events of September 11, 2001, Victoria’s commitment to promoting positive multicultural and multifaith relations has strengthened, and that while the focus has shifted away somewhat from countering terrorism, it has moved to new threats, such as climate change and economic crises. This change in focus reflects global developments and demonstrates that faith communities, alongside others, continue to play a critical role in peace-building by challenging both direct and structural violence.

DrAnnaHalafoff isa lecturerat theSchoolofPoliticalandSocial Inquiryandaresearcher for theUNESCOChair in Inter-religious and Intercultural Relations –AsiaPacific,atMonashUniversity.ShehasrecentlybeenlistedasaGlobalExpertinmultifaithrelationsfortheUnitedNationsAllianceofCivilisations.

References Baldock, John (1997) ‘Responses to Religious Plurality in Australia’, in Gary D. Bouma (ed.) ManyReligions,AllAustralian:ReligiousSettlement,IdentityandCulturalDiversity.Melbourne: The Christian Research Association. pp. 193-204.

Bouma, Gary D., Pickering, Sharon, Halafoff, Anna, & Dellal, Hass (2007) ManagingtheImpactofGlobalCrisisEventsonCommunityRelationsinMulticulturalAustralia. Brisbane: Multicultural Affairs Queensland.

Cahill, Desmond, Bouma, Gary D., Dellal, Hass, & Leahy, Michael (2004) Religion,CulturalDiversityandSafeguardingAustralia. Canberra: Department of Immigration, Multicultural and Indigenous Affairs.

Das, Sushi (2008) ‘US-style security chief to fight terror’, TheAge, 28 January. p. 5.

Eisenberg, Avigail (2006) ‘Education and the Politics of Difference: Iris Young and the Politics of Education’, EducationPhilosophyandTheory 38(1): 7-23.

GreenFaith Australia (2009) Available at: http://www.greenfaithaustralia.org/aboutus.html [Accessed 29 July 2011]

Faith Community Council of Victoria (2010) available at: http://www.faithvictoria.org.au/about-fccv [Accessed 29 July 2011]

InterAction (2009) Available at: http://www.interaction.org.au/ [Accessed 29 July 2011]

Lentini, Pete (2007) ‘Countering Terrorism as if Muslims Matter: Cultural Citizenship and Civic Pre-Emption in Anti-Terrorism’, in Leslie Holmes (ed.) Terrorism,OrganisedCrimeandCorruption:NetworksandLinkages.Cheltenham: Edward Elgar. pp. 42-59.

Lopez, Mark (2005) ‘Reflections on the State of Australian Multiculturalism and the Emerging Multicultural Debate in Australia’,PeopleandPlace 13(3): 33-41.

Miller, David (1998) ‘The Left, the Nation-State, and European Citizenship’, Dissent 48: 47-51.

Parliament of World’s Religions (2009) Available at: http://www.parliamentofreligions.org/index.cfm?n=8&sn=5 [Accessed 29 July 2011]

Pickering, Sharon, Wright-Neville, David, McCulloch, Jude, & Lentini, Pete (2007) Counter-TerrorismPolicingandCulturallyDiverseCommunities. Melbourne: Monash University.

This change in focus reflects global developments and demonstrates that faith communities, alongside others, continue to play a critical role in peace-building by challenging both direct and structural violence.

26 Gesher 2011

Learning from other faithsJCMA Conference Coralie Ling

I think of hospitality as a human responsibility to be a welcoming host or a good guest, but hospitality began way before humanity existed, with the gift of this planet hosting so many forms of life. We acknowledged the part of the Wurundjeri people who cared for this beautiful part of Victoria at the foot of Donna Buang where the JCMA conference met at Pallotti College, a Catholic conference centre.

Just as the Creator made space for life in the gift of the planet, on a smaller scale, as a human being, to be hospitable I will need to make space for other people and creatures in my life. Making space for the other will help me to be a welcoming host and a good guest. One of the challenges about making space for the JCMA participants lies in listening to someone of a different faith with different practices, religious understanding and traditions. Making space is a challenge to be modest about our faith, recognising that we do not have all knowledge of the Divine. There will always be a gap in our knowledge and we can learn from the work and insight of people from another faith. One of the benefits of being part of the hospitality of JCMA is that from listening to the other we may understand our own faith more deeply.

Although the three faiths share texts that encourage hospitality, there are limits to the practices of hospitality in each tradition. A Muslim teaching is that a guest is welcome for three days but after that it becomes charity, and the onus is on the guest not to impose on the host. Another story is to give the guest beef the first day, lamb the second day, fowl the third day, but after that beans. As hosts and guests there are sensitivities to observe. Some of these sensitivities require learning about each other’s dietary needs, times of prayer, and special festivals. How to refuse a well-meant act of hospitality in a gracious manner was discussed. One practical example was the Iman who asked his guest who had brought wine to leave it at the door as there was no alcohol allowed in his house. The guest could then retrieve the wine on his way out.

Some of the most difficult limits to hospitality occur in intrafaith matters where dialogue has been cut off because of taking a stand on a controversial matter, or there has been refusal to open doors to those of the same faith but different practices. Going to an interfaith gathering such as JCMA offers perspectives on meeting the other within one’s own faith. Links were forged between participants of the same faith but different traditions, as well as between different faiths.

People could participate in each other’s rituals when possible and all could be observers. There were invitations to sing, to reflect on texts, to meditate, to share the new Jewish prayer book, to share a Muslim incense smoking, to join the Pallotti College at Mass every morning. Sharing of rituals was practice in hospitality. A model Iftar dinner where the customs were explained and everyone could join in a festive banquet was a highlight of an hospitable conference.

Hospitality for each of the faiths means going beyond one’s own faith to the stranger of any or no faith. People of faith are engaged in many acts of practical hospitality around Melbourne. At the conference we heard about a homework project for young Somalis in Preston, a neighbourhood house in Springvale, and work with asylum seekers in Albert Park – interfaith projects supported by gifts of food and medical supplies from the conference participants.

The journey of hospitality continues as we make space for each other and live as guests and hosts in this community, this land.

Coralie Ling is a retired Uniting Church minister, enjoyinginterfaith work with the JCMA. She is interested in feministtheologyand liturgy,andwritesand teacheson these topics.CoraliewasChairperson,JCMAEighthWinterConference.

Hospitality was the theme of the Eighth Winter Conference in July 2011 of the Jewish Christian Muslim Association (JCMA). Forty people from the three faiths lived, breathed and learned hospitality.

Participants in the 2010 JCMA Conference

Gesher 2011 27

Time and silence for meaning TheSpiritwithinAustralianContemporaryArt, Melbourne, December 2009Rosemary Crumlin

She was back the next day. Sitting on the floor with her back against the wall – looking, still. I went over and she said ‘Hello, I was here yesterday’.

‘I know, I saw you. How is this for you?’

‘Wonderful. I’m looking at that boat in the middle of the floor. It can’t float, can it? There’s nothing between the ribs. I’m remembering my life. I’d like to climb in and lie down there. There are other boats, too, paintings like that one over there with the two men in the canoe. They aren’t looking at each othe