The variety of temples and mosques illustrate the tolerance and diversity of Singapore

The Yueh Hai Ching Temple, one of the oldest Chinese temples in Singapore (Photograph: Patrick Comerford, 2024; click on images for full-screen viewing)

Patrick Comerford

One of the enduring impressions of Singapore is its diversity and pluralism, with a variety of religious, ethnic and cultural communities and traditions. According to reports by the Pew Research Centre, Singapore’s religious diversity is remarkable on a global scale, and especially in comparison with its neighbours in South and South-East Asia.

During our recent 36-hour visit to Singapore last month, I took time to visit a variety of cathedrals, churches, synagogues mosques, shrines, pagodas and temples, making it almost like a fieldtrip in interfaith dialogue, visiting places of worship associated with Christians, Jews, Muslims, Buddhists, Hindus and Chinese traditional religion.

No more than around a third of the population in Singapore follows any one religion, according to census figures. Yet a Pew Research Centre report ranks Singapore as the most religiously diverse country in the world, with high levels of interreligious tolerance and acceptance on multiple measures.

Among adults in Singapore, 26% identify as Buddhist, 18% as Muslim, 17% as Christian, 8% as Hindu, 6% as a follower of Chinese traditional religions like Taoism or Confucianism, and 4% as some other religion, including Indigenous religions. Another 22% do not identify with any religion.

The churches I visited included Anglican, Roman Catholic and Armenian cathedrals and churches, I have been writing over the past few weeks about the synagogues and Jewish community of Singapore, and I was writing yesterday about my visit to the Buddha Tooth Relic Temple on South Bridge Road, the largest and most impressive Buddhist temples in Chinatown, and the newest too.

Inside one of the two prayer halls in the Yueh Hai Ching Temple in the heart of the central business district in Singapore (Photograph: Patrick Comerford, 2024)

One of the oldest Chinese temples in Singapore is the Yueh Hai Ching Temple, also known in Teochew as the Wak Hai Cheng Bio, on Philip Street, near Raffles Place in the heart of the central business district of Singapore.

The name means ‘Temple of the Calm Sea of the Guangdong (Yue) People’. Today the temple is dwarfed by modern skyscrapers, but it dates from the early 19th century, when it was also the first stop for many Chinese immigrants arriving in Singapore.

The Teochew immigrants were from the Chaoshan region in Guangdong Province in South China, bordering Fujian Province. When they first arrived in Singapore, they set up a small wood-and-attap shrine on what is now Philip Street, and offered their thanks to Mazu, goddess of the seas, for protection them during treacherous sea voyages from China.

Lin Pan is named as the man said to have built the first purpose-built temple where the makeshift shrine once stood in 1826.

Like many other places of worship in Singapore, the temple became a social centre for immigrants. Ngee Ann Kongsi was established in 1845 to look after the religious and welfare needs of the Teochew community in Singapore, and took over the management of the temple that year. During its early years, the Kongsi was led by Seah Eu Chin, a wealthy Teochew pepper and gambier merchant.

Yueh Hai Ching Temple was rebuilt in 1852-1855 with funds from the growing Teochew community. Some building materials were specially imported from China.

Yueh Hai Ching Temple has received many awards for its heritage and conservation work (Photograph: Patrick Comerford, 2024)

The temple has two prayer halls: the left wing of the temple, Tian Hou Gong (‘Palace of the Heavenly Empress’), is reserved for the worship of Mazu; Shang Di Gong (‘Palace of the Heavenly Emperor’) on the right is for Xuan Tian Shang Di or Heavenly Emperor, the patron deity of the Teochews. As both prayer halls look identical, Cantonese devotees nicknamed the temple Mah Miu, which means ‘Twin Temples’.

The temple was built with the standard three-hall layout of Chinese temples, with covered courtyards between the entrance and main halls. Its Teochew-style roof has a relatively straight ridge. An outstanding feature is the set of three-dimensional sculptures on the roof, depicting scenes of towns in China, as well as mythical flora and fauna representing longevity, posterity, and strength.

The images of dragons and other ornamentation on the roofs of the temple are crafted using a method known as jian nian or ‘cut and paste’. Colourful ceramics were carefully cut and trimmed into smaller pieces, and then pasted to create beautiful mosaic figures. Inside, the temple has intricate carvings depicting scenes from popular Chinese legends and folklore.

In 1899, the Emperor Guangxu of Qing China gave the Yueh Hai Ching Temple the gift of a calligraphy scroll with four characters elegantly written in his own hand. The phrase, translated as ‘moving seas with peaceful clouds above’, conveyed the Emperor’s blessings to the local Chinese community, in return for the temple’s contribution towards flood relief efforts in Shandong, China.

The four characters were carved on a large wooden plaque, now prominently displayed in the Mazu temple. The only other Chinese temple in Singapore to have received a similar imperial favour is Thian Hock Keng.

Yueh Hai Ching Temple was gazetted as a national monument of Singapore in 1996. It was restored extensively in 2011-2014 and has received many awards for its heritage and conservation work. The temple remains popular with the Chinese community and some festivals include puppet shows to honour the deities.

The Jamae Mosque and its front entrance gate flanked by two minarets (Photograph: Patrick Comerford, 2024)

In Chinatown itself, close to the Buddha Tooth Relic Temple on South Bridge Road, the Jamae Mosque is one of the oldest mosques in Singapore, while its neighbour, the Sri Mariamman Temple, is the oldest and perhaps the best-known Hindu temples in Singapore. Both the mosque and the temple stand out in the predominantly Chinese location.

Masjid Jamae was founded in 1826, the first of three mosques in Chinatown built by the Chulias, who were Tamil Muslims from the Coromandel coast of south India. The mosque has a shrine to an early local Muslim religious leader, Muhammad Salih Valinvah, whose grave was there before the mosque was built in the 1830s.

The mosque was completed in 1835, and its architectural styles blend eclectic traditions, from Indian and Islamic styles to western and Greek influences.

The neoclassical features of the mosque were influenced by the work of George Drumgoole Coleman from Drogheda (Photograph: Patrick Comerford, 2024)

The most significant feature is the front entrance gate with a South Indian Indo-Islamic influence, with two minarets flanking a miniature palace façade.

The neoclassical features of the two prayer halls and the shrine are in a Neo-Classical style that is typical of George Drumgoole Coleman (1795-1844) from Drogheda, the first trained architect in Singapore. These features include Doric columns and large windows with Chinese green-glazed tiles.

The mosque, which has given Mosque Street its name, was gazetted as a National Monument in 1974.

Sri Mariamman Temple dates from 1827 and is Singapore’s oldest Hindu temple (Photograph: Patrick Comerford, 2024)

Sri Mariamman Temple on South Bridge Road dates from 1827 and is Singapore’s oldest Hindu temple. Mariamman is a rural south Indian mother goddess who is invoked for protection against diseases.

The temple was founded in 1827 by Naraina Pillai, eight years after the East India Company established a trading settlement in Singapore. Pillai was a government clerk from Penang who arrived in Singapore with Sir Stamford Raffles on his second visit to the island in May 1819. Pillai went on to set up Singapore’s first construction company, was involved in the textile business, and was a leading figure in the Indian community.

The central tower or Goputram at the entrance resembles a pagoda, and this explains how the temple gives both Temple Street and Pagoda Street their names. The grand tower has five tiers of sculptures and carvings of Hindu deities and mythological figures.

The central tower at the entrance to Sri Mariamman Temple has tiers of sculptures and carvings of Hindu deities and mythological figures (Photograph: Patrick Comerford, 2024)

Inside the temple, there are exquisite ceiling paintings in the main hall. A major part of the present structure is believed to have been built in 1862–1863.

The walkway connecting the main entrance to the principal shrine was originally covered in attap, but this was destroyed in a fire in 1910. The architectural firm of Swan and Maclaren then designed a more permanent walkway in 1915.

Sri Mariamman Temple is known for the annual firewalking festival, Theemithi, about a week before Deepavali, the Festival of Lights. The temple was designated a National Monument in 1973.

The Sri Layan Sithi Vinayagar Temple was built almost 100 years ago in 1925 (Photograph: Patrick Comerford, 2024)

The other Hindu temple I visited in Chinatown is the Sri Layan Sithi Vinayagar Temple, beside the hotel where we were staying on Keong Saik Road. This temple was built almost 100 years ago in 1925 by Nattukkottai Chettiars, a money-changing community originally from Tamil Nadu.

The temple is dedicated to Ganesha, the elephant-headed god. Its humble beginnings were near the mortuary of Singapore General Hospital, where a Hindu temple with an atthapu roof of metal sheets was frequented by hospital and prison staff. The temple had statues of Vinayagar, also known as the elephant-headed god Ganesha, and Naagar, the snake god.

The government acquired the site from the temple in 1920 and used the land to expand the hospital. The compensation was used to build a new and more elegant temple at the junction of Keong Saik Road and Kreta Ayer Road in 1925.

Inside the Sri Layan Sithi Vinayagar Temple on Keong Saik Road (Photograph: Patrick Comerford, 2024)

The statue of Vinayagar from the first temple and was installed in the new temple in front of the main black-stoned Vinayagar statue. A third statue of Vinayagar was installed was donated by Pichappa Chettiar, a trustee of the Sri Thandayuthapani Temple.

The temple on Keong Saik Road also has statues of the Holy Spear and the Rama Naamam. Every year on Thaipusam, the Holy Spear is brought to Thandayuthapani Temple in a silver chariot, where it is bathed in milk as an offering to Vinayagar’s brother, Murugan.

Recent census figures show 74.3 per cent of the population of Singapore is ethnic Chinese, 13.5 per cent ethnic Malay, 9 per cent ethnic Indian, and 3.2 per cent other, including Eurasian. It was easy during my visits to these cathedrals, churches, synagogues mosques, shrines, pagodas and temples to understand why Singapore has become known as a religious ‘melting pot’ and ‘cultural mosaic’.

Religious diversity and tolerance have made Singapore a religious ‘melting pot’ and ‘cultural mosaic’ (Photograph: Patrick Comerford, 2024)

Denis Santry from Cork and the architectural legacy of Swan and Maclaren in Singapore

Raffles Hotel, Singapore … one of the many prestigious designs by Swan and Maclaren, where Denis Santry was a partner (Photograph: Patrick Comerford, 2024)

Patrick Comerford

In recent years, I have been exploring how three prominent Irish figures shaped the streets and vistas of Singapore in the 19th century: Sir Orfeur Cavenagh (1820-1891), the Governor with family roots in Co Wexford; George Drumgoole Coleman (1795-1844), the architect who was born in Drogheda; and William Cuppage (1807-1871), with family roots in Coleraine and Coolock, who first began to develop Emerald Hill, an architectural heritage area off Orchard Road, almost 200 years ago.

Denis Santry (1879-1960) was both an architect and cartoonist. As a cartoonist, he was a pioneer of animated cartoons in South Africa; as an architect, he designed several prominent structures in Singapore and Kuching, including the Sultan Mosque and the Cenotaph in Singapore and the General Post Office and the Brooke Obelisk in Kuching.

Santry was born in Cork on 14 May 1879, the son of Denis Santry, a carpenter and joiner, and Mary Ellen (Foley). After an apprenticeship as a cabinetmaker, he studied at the Cork Municipal School of Art from (1894-1896) and the Crawford School of Art (1895). He was articled to the architect James Finbarre McMullen in 1897, and with a Lane scholarship studied at the Royal College of Art, London (1897-1898). There he won the Queen’s Prize for freehand drawing before returning to work with McMullen.

Santry moved to South Africa in 1901 and worked in Cape Town with the architects Tully and Waters and William Patrick Henry Black. He married Madeline Marian Hegarty, also from Cork, in 1904.

Santry also became a cartoonist with the South African Review, the Sunday Times and the Rand Daily Mail, and was a pioneer of animated cartoons in South Africa. His cartoons were reproduced in several countries during World War I.

The Cenotaph on Connaught Drive, Singapore … designed by Denis Santry of Swan and Maclaren in 1922 (Photograph: Patrick Comerford, 2024)

After World War I, Santry moved to Singapore in 1918, and became a partner in the architectural firm Swan and Maclaren. There he designed several prominent buildings and monuments, including the Sultan Mosque, the Cenotaph, the Maritime Building, built as the Union Building, the Hongkong and Shanghai Bank Building and the Telok Ayer Chinese Methodist Church.

Santry’s principal work in Kuching is the General Post Office (1931), with its neoclassical façade and the Brooke coat-of-arms crowning the pediment. The GPO was commissioned by Charles Vyner Brooke (1874-1963), the third and last Rajah of Sarawak.

In Kuching, Santry also designed the Brooke Obelisk in front of the Old Court House. It was unveiled 100 years ago on 13 October 1924 by Charles Vyner Brooke in memory of his father, Charles Brooke, who ruled as the second Rajah from 1868 to 1917.

The General Post Office, Kuching, designed by Denis Santry in 1931 (Photograph: Patrick Comerford, 2024)

Denis Santry was the first president of the Saint Patrick’s Society Singapore, which held its first meeting in the Victoria Memorial Hall in 1925.

He was a member of the board of the Victoria Theatre and Concert Hall, a frequent contributor to the Straits Produce, a satirical magazine, and helped to found the Singapore Society of Architects and the Institute of Architects of Malaya.

Santry retired to England in 1934 and lived in Kent. But he returned to South Africa in 1940 and died in Durban on 14 April 1960.

The Victoria Theatre and Concert Hall designed by Swan and Maclaren … Denis Santry was a board member (Photograph: Patrick Comerford, 2024)

The Swan and Maclaren Group, where Santry was a partner, is one of the oldest architectural firms in Singapore. It was one of the most prominent architectural firms in Singapore when it was a crown colony in the early 20th century, and the practice has designed numerous heritage buildings in Singapore and Malaysia.

The company began in Singapore as Swan and Lermit in 1887, when it was formed by two surveyor engineers, Archibald Alexander Swan (1857-1911) and Alfred Lermit (1850-1921). Lermit left the partnership in 1890, and it became Swan and Maclaren after James Waddell Boyd Maclaren (1863-1910) joined as a partner in 1892.

Regent Alfred John Bidwell (1869-1918) joined the firm in 1897, when he arrived in Singapore after working for a few years in Kuala Lumpur. He was the first professionally trained architect in Singapore since George Drumgoole Coleman practised there in the 1820s and 1830s.

Bidwell dominated the work of Swan and Maclaren from 1897 to 1911, and his talent and reputation made it the dominant architectural practice in colonial Singapore, with the most prestigious commissions. Many of those buildings are still standing and some have been gazetted as national monuments, including Raffles Hotel (1899), the Teutonia Club (1900, now Goodwood Park Hotel) and the Victoria Memorial Hall (1905), now the Victoria Theatre and Concert Hall.

The Raffles Hotel was one of the first of numerous projects by Bidwell with Swan and Maclaren. The practice rebuilt the Teutonia Club in 1900 in a new location on Scotts Road after it moved from its location near Raffles Hotel on North Bridge Road. Bidwell applied the south German architectural style in his design of the clubhouse.

In his design of the Victoria Memorial Hall, Bidwell duplicated the adjacent original Town Hall that later became the Victoria Theatre, and he also designed the clock tower joining the two buildings.

Bidwell also designed the three-storey Stamford House, formerly the Oranje Building, completed in 1904. By then, Swan and Maclaren was the largest architectural practice in Singapore. The firm worked on the extensions and rebuilding of the Victoria Memorial Hall in 1905, and the Chesed-El Synagogue on Oxley Rise was built that same year.

Singapore Cricket Club on Connaught Drive was designed by Swan and Maclaren (Photograph: Patrick Comerford, 2024)

The Singapore Cricket Club was extended and refurbished in 1907, and the Eastern Extension, later Telegraph House and today Sofitel So Singapore, was built at 35 Robinson Road.

The firm designed and built one of the largest shops in early Singapore, John Little on Raffles Place, across the square from Robinson and Co, in 1907. Swan and Maclaren rebuilt Saint Joseph’s Church on Victoria Street in the Gothic style in 1906-1912.

Eu Yan Sang at 267 to 271 South Bridge Road, built in 1910, was the first Eu Yan Sang outlet in Singapore set up by the Chinese businessman and philanthropist Eu Tong Sen. The building was designed by Bidwell, and Swan and Maclaren also designed the Eu Villa, a large villa for Eu Tong Sen on Mount Sophia in 1913, built at a cost of $1 million.

Swan and Maclaren also designed the Jinrikisha Station on Neil Road in 1913 and rebuilt part of the Sri Mariamman Temple on South Bridge Road in 1916.

The Sri Mariamman Temple on South Bridge Road was partly rebuilt by Swan and Maclaren in 1927 (Photograph: Patrick Comerford, 2024)

Meanwhile, Bidwell left Swan and Maclaren in 1915 to establish his own practice. By then, he was the most important architect in Singapore. He died on 6 April 1918, Denis Santry moved to Singapore that same year and became a partner in Swan and Maclaren.

After World War II Denis Santry designed the Cenotaph for Swan and Maclaren in 1922. The granite memorial at the Esplanade Park commemorates the soldiers who died in World War I. Its reverse side was inscribed with the names of soldiers who died in World War II.

Between World War I and World War II, the firm’s projects included the Sultan Mosque (1924-1928), Ocean Building (1923), Hongkong Bank Chambers (now HSBC Building) (1925), Prinsep Street Presbyterian Church (1930) and the Singapore Turf Club (1934). Denis Santry was the principal architect on many of these projects.

The former Great Southern Hotel at 70 Eu Tong Sen Street was designed by Swan and Maclaren and was known as the Raffles Hotel of Chinatown. It was popular with celebrities from Hong Kong and China, was the first Chinese hotel in Singapore to boast a lift service.

The Majestic Theatre at 80 Eu Tong Sen Street was originally a Cantonese opera house designed by Swan and Maclaren by Eu Tong Sen in 1927 for his wife after she was reportedly refused admittance to an opera performance elsewhere. A highlight of this art deco building is its decorated façade of hand-painted tiles depicting opera characters and flying dragons.

Swan and Maclaren completed the construction of the ‘Eastern Extension’ at 35 Robinson Road, later known as Telegraph House, in 1927. Today, it is the Sofitel So Singapore. Swan and Maclaren also rebuilt part of the Sri Mariamman Temple on South Bridge Road in 1916.

Swan and Maclaren remained an important practice after World War II, continuing with projects such as Singapore Polytechnic’s original campus at Prince Edward Road, and Saint Thomas’s Anglican Cathedral in Kuching. However, it lost some of its dominance with increased competition from both local and foreign companies.

Swan and Maclaren is among the oldest extant architectural practices in the world. The founders of the practice, Swan and Maclaren, are both buried in their native Scotland. Today, the Swan and Maclaren Group has its headquarters in UE Square, Singapore, and the firm continues to design numerous projects in Singapore.

Saint Joseph’s Church on Victoria Street was rebuilt by Swan and Maclaren in 1906-1912 (Photograph: Patrick Comerford, 2024)

Three Hindu temples illustrate the religious and ethnic diversity found in Leicester

The former Midland Bank on Granby Street is now a ‘Hare Kishna’ temple … Leicester has about 20 Hindu temples (Photograph: Patrick Comerford, 2024)

Patrick Comerford

Leicester is known as a multi-faith city with a rich ethnic, cultural and religious diversity. In recent weeks. I have written about churches, the cathedral, synagogues, meeting houses, the Jain and Sikh communities, and the Secular Hall, as examples of the variety of faith communities and belief systems found in Leicester.

About 15 per cent of Leicester’s population are Hindus. When I was in Leicester back in 2011 for a course on interfaith dialogue in Saint Philip’s Centre, our group received a warm welcome at the Shree Sanatan Mandir, a large Hindu temple in Weymouth Street. During my visits to Leicester last month, I learned that the city has about 20 Hindu temples, and I was interested to see some of them as I walked around the city.

Iskcon, the International Society for Krishna Consciousness – known to many as the Hare Krishna movement – has its temple in an elegant building on Granby Street in the centre of Leicester. The former Midland Bank is a Grade II* listed building dating from the early 1870s. The building was designed for the Leicestershire Banking Company in 1872-1873 by the Leicester architect Joseph Goddard (1840-1900).

Goddard was a member of a prominent family of architects and played a major role in introducing Victorian gothic architecture to Leicester with his clock tower. He designed the bank building in the French Gothic Revival style, in striking contrast to the Italianate design of the National Provincial Bank built nearby a few years earlier.

Notable details include the corner porch, French pavilion roofs, and a two-storey-tall stained-glass façade. The spectacular interior featured enormous hammer beams that formed a lantern roof giving the building a lofty and imposing atmosphere.

The elaborate design of the Leicestershire Bank, both inside and outside, was intended to inspire confidence among depositors, while fire-proof corridors and rooms with safes in the basement ensured the physical safety of valuables entrusted to the banks.

The hand-carved pillars incorporated friezes and coat of arms representing cities where the company did business. These carved details on the exterior are the work of the local stonemason Samuel Barfield, who was also responsible for the figures on the Clock Tower in Leicester.

The bank was completed in 1874 at the cost of £7,439. Its immediate success earned Goddard multiple commissions for new banks throughout the East Midland. Many of his buildings are still in use and listed as historic structures by English Heritage.

By the turn of the 19th and 20th centuries, the Leicestershire Bank merged with the London City and Midland Bank, and the building later became a branch of the Midland Bank and then of HSBC.

Joseph Goddard’s details on the bank building include the corner porch and French pavilion roofs (Photograph: Patrick Comerford, 2024)

The former bank was vacant for some years when it was bought by a local family and donated to Iskcon, the International Society for Krishna Consciousness, as a temple. Six years earlier, An explosion destroyed their former temple at 21 Thoresby Street in North Evington, in Leicester, on 3 September 2010, when 30 people escaped.

The temple is one of 16 religious and cultural centres Iskcon runs in the UK, and follows the Krishna-centric practices of the Gaudiya Vaishnava tradition in Hinduism. The tradition based on Sanskrit scriptures including the Bhagavad Gita and the Bhagavat Purana. It is a monotheistic form of Hinduism in which Krishna is worshipped as the highest form of God and the source of all the avatars of God.

The former HSBC bank on Granby Street had been on the market for five years and the bank accepted an original offer of £750,000 in May 2011. But, during the purchase process, the became clear the Grade II listed building needed major renovations to the roof, heating, and lighting systems. English Heritage added the building to a national ‘at risk’ list, saying it needed urgent repairs to save it from falling into ruin.

With an estimated renovation cost of £2 million, the community renegotiated the purchase price to £350,000 with the promise of restoring the building.

The Hare Krishna monks moved into the building in 2016, and the temple was inaugurated in August 2016. The main temple room can host up to 250 guests, and there are offices, two classrooms for the College of Vedic Studies, and a kitchen producing vegetarian food. Further renovations are planned to include a restaurant, library, and exhibition.

The Shree Geeta Bhavan Temple and Hindu Community Centre on Clarendon Park Road (Photograph: Patrick Comerford, 2024)

The second Hindu temple I noticed during my visits to Leicester last month is the Shree Geeta Bhavan Temple and Hindu Community Centre at 70 Clarendon Park Road, run by the Hindu Religious and Cultural Society of Leicester.

This is a more modern building than the other two temples I saw in Leicester in recent weeks. It is said locally to have been used once as part of the buildings of Saint John the Baptist school, which I visited back in 2011. It has been used as a Hindu temple and community centre since the 1980s. A £500,000 extension to the temple was officially opened in July 2010.

The temple says it seeks to meet the spiritual, ritual, ceremonial and social needs of Hindus, respecting and reflecting the diversity that is part of Hindu heritage. It tries to promote mutual respect and tolerance within the Hindu community, with its diverse beliefs and unique traditions.

The aims and objectives of Geeta Bhavan Leicester include providing an umbrella organisation for Hindu temples, faith organisations and groups across the UK, working with other faith groups for mutual appreciation through interfaith dialogue and community cohesion.

The Shirdi Sai Baba Temple Association of London had a temple in the former Guild Hall on Colton Street (Photograph: Patrick Comerford, 2024)

Until recently, the Shirdi Sai Baba Temple Association of London had its own Hindu temple in the former Guild Hall on Colton Street. The name of this building should not cause confusion with the mediaeval Guildhall near Leicester Cathedral, which was built by the Guild of Corpus Christi and later became the town hall.

The Leicester Guild of the Crippled opened the Guild Hall on Colton Street in 1909 by to provide a social centre for people with physical disabilities. As well as being ‘beautiful and commodious’, this Arts and Crafts and Art Nouveau style building was very practical and was designed to be fully accessible. The architects A & TE Sawday designed it on one level, with wide exterior and interior doors for spinal carriages and wheelchairs.

The Leicester Guild of the Crippled was formed in 1898 by Arthur Isaac Groves, a hosiery manufacturer, and his business partner Thomas E Meakin, at the suggestion of Sister Carroll Hogbin. Through her work with the poor of Leicester, she realised that many disabled people were isolated and needed social contact. The Guild Hall provided a centre where the Guild of the Crippled could expand its work and provide activities such as concerts, ‘magic lantern’ evenings, craft classes, excursions and a library.

An industrial training hall was added in 1914 to address the problems disabled people faced in finding employment. Medical services were provided free of charge, including surgery, prosthetic limbs and wheelchairs.

Until recently, the former Guild Hall was used as a temple by the Shirdi Sai Baba Temple Association of London, a Hindu organisation or religious movement of the followers and devotees of the 19th and early 20th century Indian saint Sai Baba of Shirdi or Shirdi Sai Baba.

Sai Baba (1838-1918) is revered by people from a variety of religious backgrounds. He is called ‘Baba’, meaning father or grandfather, by his devotees who see him as a spiritual guru or saint with divine and miraculous powers. He was a spiritual master and fakir, considered to be a saint, and he was revered by both Hindus and Muslims.

According to the Shri Sai Satcharita, a biography written after his death, his Hindu devotees believed Sai Baba to be an incarnation of the Hindu deity Dattatreya. In his teachings, Sai Baba combined elements of Hinduism and Islam. He emphasised love, forgiveness, helping others, charity, contentment, inner peace, and devotion to God and Guru. He condemned discrimination based on religion or caste, and refused to identify himself with one religion to the exclusion of the other.

The former temple and former Guild Hall on Colton Street is in an area that has seen much regeneration in recent years, with new residential and office space bringing new life into the area. Now the sale of the former temple and former Guild Hall is being negotiated, after being on the market in recent months with an asking price of £500,000.

As for the organisation that built the Guild Hall, it moved premises but continues to support disability services. In a reflection of changing attitudes to disability, it was first renamed the Leicester Guild of the Physically Handicapped and since 2000 it has been known as ‘Mosaic 1898.’

The Shree Geeta Bhavan Temple on Clarendon Park Road is part of the religious diversity in Leicester (Photograph: Patrick Comerford, 2024)

‘I was born to love people … I see in the face of each person the image of God’

Flowers in Hall Court, Sidney Sussex College, Cambridge (Photograph: Patrick Comerford, 2016)

Patrick Comerford

‘The more a person loves God, the more he loves other people. He loves them with holiness, respect and refinement, as images of God.’ So said Elder Amphilochios of Patmos.

Metropolitan Kallistos of Diokleia told the story of Father Amphilochios this morning at the summer conference in Sidney Sussex College, Cambridge, organised by the Institute for Orthodox Christian Studies.

Metropolitan Kallistos, who is the President of the IOCS and a monk of Patmos, was speaking on: ‘Elder Amphilochios of Patmos.’ They first met on Patmos in 1961, when there was only a boat once a week from Athens to the island, three taxis and a car belonging to the doctor.

Father Amphilochios said: ‘We must have Love, even if they do us the greatest harm, we must love them. We will be able to enter Paradise only with love.’

Metropolitan Kallistos said elders have a variety of gifts and charisms from the Holy Spirit. But they were often harsh and remote, and he gave the example of Saint Arsenios, a fifth century tutor to imperial children who withdrew to the Egyptian Desert. When he was asked by his former friends why he avoided him, he replied: ‘I cannot leave God to be with men.’

But Father Amphilochios was not like that, he said. He was an icon of the love of Christ, and did not force people’s free will.

The true elder appeals to people’s free will. He is not a substitute figure for the presence of the Holy Spirit in our hearts, but frees us to listen to the voice of God in our hearts and consciences. The spiritual father does not replace God, but acts as God’s usher, ushering us into the presence of God, so that we can listen to God in our own conscience.

Father Amphilochios (1889-1970) was a priest and monk who was born on Patmos when it was part of the Ottoman Empire. This was the island where Saint John the Divine received the Revelation in the Cave of the Apocalypse. The Monastery of the Apocalypse, founded by Saint Christodoulos in 1088, sits like a citadel on the top of the mountain, and Metropolitan Kallistos has many memories of celebrating the Liturgy in the cave in the monastery.

Father Amphilochios lived on Patmos, and after basic schooling he became a monk in the Monastery of the Apocalypse. He had a hearty sense of humour and lived a life of prayer. He taught the value of frequent Communion, regular Confession, and the practice of the Jesus Prayer, which he learned from a hermit who lived in a cave on the island and which he taught to all, giving prayer ropes to children.

Father Amphilochios wrote: ‘Cultivate the Jesus Prayer and a time will come when your heart will leap with joy, just as it does when you are about to see a person who you love very much.’

After a short time on Mount Athos, he was sent to be ordained deacon on the neighbouring island of Kos in 1913. But instead he travelled to Alexandria and on to Jerusalem to visit the holy sites and in search of a cenobitic monastery.

He was sent back to Patmos, where he was sent to a remote hermitage. There he learned inner prayer, based on the Jesus prayer in the Hesachyst tradition. He was ordained deacon and priest in 1919.

He was the Abbot of the Monastery of the Apocalypse (1935-1937) until the occupying Italians forced him into internal exile in Greece. He received hospitality from the Zoe brotherhood in Athens, and then travelled throughout Greece; first in Athens and later on Crete, where he became the spiritual father of many people on the island.

He returned to Patmos in 1939, but did not become abbot again. Instead, he was the spiritual father to the women’s community in the Monastery of the Annunciation. He died on 16 April 1970.

The Master’s Garden in Sidney Sussex College, Cambridge (Photograph: Patrick Comerford, 2016)

Earlier this morning, Elder Amphilochios was also referred to by Dr Christine Mangala Frost, who quoted him saying: ‘I was born to love people. It doesn’t concern me if he is a Turk, black, or white. I see in the face of each person the image of God. And for this image of God I am willing to sacrifice everything.’

Dr Frost is a research associate at the IOCS, a published novelist and a leading voice in the area of interfaith dialogue, particularly in Hinduism and Orthodoxy. She was speaking on ‘Signs and Wonders: a Comparative Study of Spiritual Elders in Orthodox Christian and Hindu Traditions.’

We live in an apparently enlightened age, free of superstition and informed by scientific insights. Yet, she pointed out, people seek after holy men and holy women, who are often associated with signs and wonders.

In her paper, she asked what are the hallmarks of the Orthodox elders, what do the Hindu gurus offer, what have they in common, and where do they differ.

She began by looking at signs and wonders in the Bible.

Christ accepts that signs and wonders are expected of the Messiah. He often performs these out of compassion to make people whole so that they may turn towards God. But, as in the case of the feeding of the multitude and the miracle at Cana, these signs and wonders also prefigure the Eucharist, showing that Christ is the true bread and the true wine. His signs and wonders related to the whole message of the Gospel, and the core message of salvation.

He often refuses to be a mere wonder worker, and instead points people to his central messages of repentance, God’s forgiving love, and resurrection, and he warns of false signs and wonders.

In looking at the criteria for holiness in the Orthodox tradition, and asked whether these are shared by Hindu ‘holy men and women.’

She pointed out that all Christians are called to be saints, but some live lives that show how the Holy Spirit can transform sinful human life in the here and now.

Many are monastics, and not all are priests. They share a common spiritual bond and share the same goal of acquisition of the Holy Spirit. They talk in parables, paradox and poetic language, and their lives show deification by grace and the promise of spiritual transformation.

Elder Amphilochios Makris of Patmos once said: ‘I was born to love people. It doesn’t concern me if he is a Turk, black, or white. I see in the face of each person the image of God. And for this image of God I am willing to sacrifice everything.’

She looked at the place of self-abasement or self-effacement, playing the holy fool, holy idiosyncrasies and humility in the lives of the Orthodox elders, and then compared this with the lives of holy men and women in the Hindu tradition. She suggested the mystery of repentance and the mystery of love come together in their lives.

Discernment is seen by Orthodox writers as the ability to perceive the secrets of another’s heart, often concealed even from that person’s own heart. It is not like telepathy, clairvoyance, or psychic gifts, but is a gift of the Holy Spirit for healing the wounded and scarred.

They live in the atmosphere of heaven, in the here and now. Spiritual practices are not ways of earning merit but of keeping Christ’s commandment of love.

Turning to Hindu holy men and women, she distinguished traditional gurus, who tend to be monastics, who have ascetic lives, traditional teachings, and are low-profile are self-effacing from the cultic gurus she described as ‘export gurus’ and ‘a curious tourist phenomenon.’

She compared the traditional gurus to the righteous figures in the Bible who may not know God, but God knows them, such as Cornelius. They are full of compassion and love, they deflect attention from themselves, they have a strong yearning for the love of God, and they want people to know of this love of God.

On the other hand, the cultic gurus emphasise self-realisation and often are not ascetic. She referred to Jaggi Vasudev or Sadhguru, who founded the Isha Foundation, and Swami Prabhavananda, who introduced Christopher Isherwood to Hinduism.

They emphasise positive thinking and self-help, while belief in God is marginal or dispensed with, so that belief in self is important, with the promise of continuous bliss in the here and now. The motto of the Isha Foundation is: ‘Be, breathe, blossom.’

These gurus offer ‘technologies of inner well-being’ and a message of total self-reliance and cosmic consciousness. They do not demand any explicit faith commitment, but instead offer an ‘easy, download-free message.’

They engage in a psychic feat to be obtained through yogic meditation, with Christ as an accessory who is recast as an avatar. All the old heresies are well and truly alive in the language of these gurus. Many of them deny the reality of evil, and the demonic is not a category they recognise.

This afternoon, Dr Razvan Porumb, Vice-Principal of the IOCS and a postdoctoral fellow and lecturer, speaks on ‘Father Nicolae Steinhardt,’ and the Romanian theologian and priest, the Revd Dr Liviu Barbu, presents a paper on: ‘What it takes to be a saint today? A tentative sketch of a profile.’

Metropolitan Kallistos Ware (right) and Dr Christoph Schneider at the IOCS summer conference in Sidney Sussex College, Cambridge (Photograph: Patrick Comerford, 2016)

Are there meeting points with Muslims and Hindus in dialogue with Orthodoxy?

Sunshine and flowers in Chapel Court in Sidney Sussex College, Cambridge, today (Photograph: Patrick Comerford, 2015)

Patrick Comerford

The summer conference in Sidney Sussex College moved from ecumenism to inter-religious dialogue this afternoon when Dr Dominic Rubin spoke about “Orthodox-Muslim interaction in Russia today: between ideology and theology,” and Dr Mangala Frost spoke on “Karma and the Cross: a dialogic study of suffering.”

Dr Rubin teaches at the Higher School of Economics in Moscow and his expertise is in inter-religious relations in Russia and the former Soviet republics.

He asked whether Russia is the bridge between Europe and Asia, and whether Islam is the new communism, the new enemy, in the west.

He shared his experience of talking to large numbers Russian Muslims about their belief and their identity. Although he said this is not dialogue, it involves taking the first step towards dialogue.

Deep dialogue is not happening in Russia, but then he wondered whether it is taking place anywhere else.

He pointed out that power structures influence dialogue, and recalled that the preamble to the Russian religious law recognises four traditional religions in Russia, with Russian Orthodox Church first among equals, alongside Jews, Muslims and Buddhists. But Baptists and Roman Catholics, for example, are not mentioned.

The law makes it easier to get permission to build an Orthodox Church than to build a mosque.

The four religions were chosen to reflect philosophy of Eurasianism. This theory was developed in 1913-1931, and the founding figures included the Russian Orthodox theologian Georges Florovsky.

A significant influence on the doctrine of the Eurasianists is found in an essay by the Russian Orthodox theologian, Nikolai Berdyaev, “The Sources and Meaning of Russian Communism.” However, Florovsky later withdrew his support, accusing it of raising the right questions but posing the wrong answers.”

Eurasianism idealises Genghis Khan, the Mongols and the Tartars. The Orthodox and Muslims in Russia. Muslims and Orthodox have inherited this situation and have to talk to and negotiate with one another.

He described a recent visit to Kazan, the capital of Tatarstan. With a population of over 1.1 million, this is the eighth most populous city in Russia. The population consists mostly of ethnic Russians (48.6%) and ethnic Tatars (47.6%), and the Kazan Kremlin is a World Heritage Site.

The multi-ethnic city is famous for Muslims and Christians living side-by-side in peace, and an artists who is a Sufi Muslims brought him on an intimate tour of a Russian Orthodox monastery.

Yet people can say outrageous things about who is the rightful owner of the land and the city’s heritage.

Is this dialogue? Is it even diapraxis?

Surviving mediaeval glass in a window on the stairs to the Old Library in Sidney Sussex College, Cambridge (Photograph: Patrick Comerford, 2015)

Dr Frost (IOCS) spoke later this afternoon on “Karma and the Cross: a dialogic study of attitudes to suffering.”

She juxtaposed two different approaches to suffering, with a dual perspective as a former Hindu who understands karma, and as an Orthodox Christian who feels she has something to offer Hindus a fresh understanding of Christianity.

She hopes to improve mutual understanding, without necessarily finding agreement.

She identified three intertwining but distinct Hindu traditions.

For the Monist strand, suffering is unreal or an illusion (maya), and so too is evil. The suffering body has no part in one’s real identity.

The second, more popular strand, Karma, suffering is real and a punishment for past actions or actions in past lives.

The third perspective, Bhakti, sees suffering as real but synonymous with birth. In this tradition, devotional love is met by God’s grace which can cancel out karma. This tradition subverts the Karma theory.

The appeal of karma provides a description of human nature. Its appeal lies in its offer of consolation, in offering an instant palliative and an answer to the problems of evil, it offers a justice in which sin is punished and virtue is rewarded, a type of “poetic justice,” and leads to hope rather than fatalism.

In Orthodox theology, the Fall is the rupture of communion with God, sin is “missing the mark,” death is not a “punishment from an angry God,” but the inevitable consequence of ruptured communion, and the Resurrection is the conquest of death and is the key to coping with suffering.

In Orthodox theology, answers to all problems, especially those of evil and suffering, come from an unswerving focus on the joy of Christ’s Resurrection. The Incarnation, Crucifixion and Resurrection of Christ are treated as an integral story of human salvation. In and through his Resurrection, Christ is seen as restoring once again what was lost – a full communion with and participation in the life of God.

Christians are called to be human icons of the divine image we bear.

Where Christianity, especially Orthodox Christianity, differs from Hindu traditions is to take the discussion about suffering beyond virtue-oriented, conventional moralism to the volatile, metaphysical dimension where the human-divine encounter seems to fail utterly for the believer.

She quoted Saint Mark the Ascetic in the Philokalia:

“Every suffering tests our will, showing whether it is inclined to good or evil. That is why an unforeseen affliction is called a test, because it enables a man to test his hidden desires.”

She said Christian belief in “a suffering God” who entered history to redeem it poses the most serious challenge to believers in Karma. Such a belief has rippling effects on the identity of those who chose to follow him.

Christians believe that in suffering for us, with us, and overcoming the ultimate evil of death, Christ, the God-Man, has changed forever the meaning of suffering.

Matthew the Poor, a Coptic monk, reflecting on suffering as participation in God’s work of redemption, said: “Now, if we can undergo suffering on the level of his suffering, not just as a consequence of sin, but as participation in the suffering of love, self-sacrifice, and redemption.”

In conclusion, she offered a reappraisal: “Paul spoke of the Cross as ‘foolishness’ to the Greeks and a ‘stumbling block’ to the Jews. On the whole, Hindus view the Cross with respect due to a holy man, but do they fully understand or appreciate the challenge the Cross poses to a Karmic view of life? I hope they are persuaded to reconsider.”

But she added: “Equally, I hope that the Orthodox become aware of the temptation to shrink, or distort, the awe-inspiring cosmic mystery of the Cross into simplistic strategies of comfort that come dangerously close to Karma.”

Once again, the day concludes with Vespers in the Chapel and dinner.

Moving beyond tolerance and dialogue

A modern sculpture at the entrance to Saint John the Baptist Church of England School in Clarendon Park Road, Leicester (Photograph: Patrick Comerford, 2011

Patrick Comerford

Tuesday was another busy day for the half dozen of more people from the Church of Ireland taking part in an interfaith training programme at Saint Philip’s Centre in Leicester.

In the morning, we visited nearby Saint John the Baptist Church of England School in Clarendon Park Road, accompanied by Janet Ingram, the Leicester Diocesan Religious Education Adviser and Leicester Cathedral Education Officer, and the Revd Jenny Appleby, Rector of Saint John the Baptist Church and a school governor

The headmaster of Saint John, Andrew McDonald, introduced us to the challenge and mission of a large Church of England primary school, working with the local church in a multifaith society, building relationships.

About 50 per cent of the children are Christian, up to 30 per cent Muslim, up to a 20 per cent Hindu, with some Jewish children and children of other backgrounds. As a church-aided school, the collective acts of worship at Saint John’s are Christian based, and while the school acknowledges it does not celebrate other faiths.

This is a high-achieving school, but he says values are as important as attainment at the school, which seeks to equip children for future generations, with a Christian ethos.

He spoke of “a belief that this school has been established by God to serve its community and to share his love and grace with every individual; a belief that a church school is a mission school that is established by God to work in partnership with the wider church to share the Gospel; a belief that we value more than we can measure; a belief in the individual value and potential of every person;” and “a belief that community is a group of valued individuals and that it is in this that the community finds strength.”

Inside the is the Masjid Umar, one of the most prominent mosques in Leicester, which is close to Saint Philip’s Centre (Photograph: Patrick Comerford, 2011)

After lunch at the school we returned to Saint Philip’s for two panel-led seminars.

John Florence, of BBC Radio Leicester, and Nick Carter, former editor of the Leicester Mercury, spoke on “The Media: engaging with faith groups.” Both spoke warmly of the role of the Church of England as the driving force behind interfaith dialogue in Leicester.

Later in the afternoon, four local priests – the Revd Bonnie Evans-Hill, the Revd Terri Skinner, the Revd Suresh Kumar and the Revd Canon Stephen Foster – spoke about pastoral issues in the multifaith context.

Each spoke from different contexts about the way in which the local church is recognised by people of other faiths as “a place where God is.”

Bonnie shared her experience of a monastery in Syria that was rebuilt with the help of Muslim neighbours, who live alongside and are part of the community. There, one of the monks made a distinction between tolerance, which he described as putting up with something you regard as negative, and dialogue, which may lead to compromise. Instead, he told her, the monks beyond these, and they were “living with our neighbour.”

Stephen said many of the problems in interfaith dialogue were often ones of ignorance or caricature. “But it’s story that brings truth,” he said. “The Church often asks the wrong questions. Sacraments are not the be-all and end-all,” he said.

To which someone added: “Eschatology is the be-all and end-all.”

A warm welcome at the Shree Sanatan Mandir, a large Hindu temple in Weymouth Street, Leicester (Photograph: Patrick Comerford, 2011)

In the evening, we received a warm welcome at the Shree Sanatan Mandir, a large Hindu temple in a former Baptist Church in Weymouth Street.

We ended the evening with a vegetarian dinner in Amritsar, a Sikh-run restaurant, with further discussions over the table about Sikh faith and practices.

It was a day we had learned a lot about how Christians, Muslims, Hindus and Sikhs seek to move beyond tolerance and dialogue to living with one another as neighbours.

Using the Bible in Interfaith Dialogue

Turkish Muslims at prayer in a mosque in Izmir (Smyrna). Photograph: Patrick Comerford

Patrick Comerford

Introduction

Most of us, at this stage, I am sure, are sensitive to ways we can and should use in the Bible in inter-Church dialogue and at inter-Church events.

We are all aware of the insensitive occasions when someone has asked rhetorically: “We all share the same Bible, don’t we?”

Even among Anglicans, there can be differences of opinion about how we use those books that the 39 Articles say the Church reads for “example of life and instruction of manners,” without “apply[ing] them to establish any doctrine. But when the Lectionary provides for readings from those books described as part of the Apocrypha or Deutrocanonical books, how do you call for a response at the end? Do you say: “This is the word of the Lord?” [see Article 6.]

And what about those Deutrocanonical books or parts of the Apocrypha that are included in some bound versions of the NRSV or RSV, such as the Common Bible, which are not listed in Article 6, but which are regarded as canonical by other traditions, such as the Orthodox Church?

Can you use Apocryphal readings at inter-Church events, or inter-Church family events, such as baptisms, weddings and funerals?

Can you say “This is the Word of the Lord” at the end of a reading?

When the New Testament writers quote not from the Hebrew Bible but from the Greek Septuagint, how this change our understanding of what is being said in Article 6?

In your ministry, many occasions will arise when you will need to be more than aware there is more than one idea of what is canonical and what is apocryphal.

If we have to be sensitive about how we use the Bible in ecumenical or inter-Church encounters, how much more sensitive we must be when it comes to inter-faith events and dialogue and inter-faith events.

In the process of inter-faith dialogue, there is a difference in degree between our dialogue with the other great monotheistic Abrahamic traditions especially Jews and Muslims, and I would say Sikhs also, and our dialogue with other faith traditions, such as Hindus and Buddhists, even when those other traditions have their sacred scriptures.

Today, we commonly refer to Jews, Christians and Muslims as the Children of Abraham to refer to many of our shared and common understandings of faith and tradition, and this is emphasised even further by Muslims when they refer to members of these three traditions as “People of the Book.”

But how do we use the “Book” when we are in dialogue with these traditions, and more especially, how do we use the Bible?

Jewish-Christian dialogue

1, It is important to develop and to retain an understanding the Bible as Jewish Scripture in its own right and on its own terms.

The Bible is sacred Hebrew Scriptures and remains so to this day. It is not merely a preface or preamble to the New Testament: it is an account of God’s living covenant with the Jewish people. That is how Jesus and the early Church saw it, and it remains so for Jews to this day.

The Apostle Paul says “All scripture is inspired by God and is useful for teaching, for reproof, for correction, and training in righteousness” [II Timothy 3: 16]. When he wrote this, he could hardly have been aware of the later Petrine or Johannine epistles or the Book of Revelation. Could he even have imagined at the time that his own letters to Timothy and Titus, for example were going to be regarded by the Church at a later date as canonical?

So what was Saint Paul referring to? What did he include within the parameters of “all scripture”? As a writer in Greek, did he include the Apocryphal books in the Septuagint?

Saint Paul was referring to what we now call the Old Testament, but which is never partial or incomplete for Jews, because for them it is the Bible, whole and complete. For them, it can never be the Old Testament. It is not out of date for them; it is still living Scripture for every believing Jew.

If we call it the Old Testament, do we imply that it has been superseded by the New Testament?

The term “supersessionism” describes the belief that the Church has replaced the Jews as God’s chosen people. Many argue that supersessionism was responsible for the persecution of Jews throughout history, culminating in the Holocaust.

But the term “supersessionism” has also been applied to the belief that Christianity is superior to Judaism, as well as the view that the New Testament fulfils or supersedes the Old Testament. Paul rejects the idea of supersessionism and the implication that God has broken his everlasting covenant with the Jews (see Romans 9-11).

As Christians, do we believe that Christianity is superior to other ways of explaining the world? Is there another reason for being a Christian if you do not think that Christianity is the better way? In considering this, we should be mindful that, on the other hand, there are some people who will have obvious difficulties with the idea that the Jews are God’s chosen people, feeling that this implies that God loves the Jews more than he loves other people. How do you respond to this? Does supersessionism offer the possibility of arguing that Jews and Gentiles are equal in God’s sight (see Galatians 3: 28)?

The Bible is authentic Scripture for Jews today. Their reading of it without our understanding of Messianic promise, and certainly without an understanding of Christ as that Messiah, is a valid reading of the Bible for Jews. It was so for believing Jews at the time of Christ, including Jews he worshipped with in the Temple and in the Synagogue.

How do we respond when Jews interpret the Messianic passages in the writings of the prophets as referring to the whole Jewish people, and when some Jews read the passages about the suffering servant in the hindsight that comes from the experiences of the Holocaust?

2, In Jewish-Christian dialogue, we need to be aware of how Jews will respond to those parts of the New Testament that appear to be anti-Jewish. In Jewish-Christian dialogue, Christians often face embarrassing difficulties because historically the Jews were often persecuted under Christian rule, and the Bible was used often and regularly to justify discrimination, ghettoisation and persecution.

Some will say that there were times when Jewish authorities persecuted the Christians. But the Jewish persecution of Christians was never as bad as the Christian persecution of Jews, it was never systematic, and it was never at the hands of a government that used religious belief, faith and scripture to justify it.

During the controversy over the Passion of the Christ, critics of Mel Gibson argued that his interpretation of the Gospels is not historically accurate when it comes the death of Jesus, pointing out that the Romans played a bigger role in it than the Jews.

But what about the use of the term “Jews” throughout the Johannine writings? Can we distinguish between “Judeans” and Jews? How many of the references translated as Jews should really be translated Judeans? For example, we don’t translate the title of the Epistle to the Hebrews as the Epistle to the Jews. Can we tell the difference between those who were Judeans by provincial origin (as opposed to Galileans) and those who are Jewish by religion?

There are references in the New Testament to Jews who eject Christians from the synagogue, because they see Christians as abandoning monotheism. But is that a conflict within a community that should influence how we use the Bible in dialogue with Jews today, or in our understanding of how Christians should relate to Jews?

And then there are references to Jews, Judaising parties and synagogues in the Pauline and Johannine writings that are references not to all people of the Hebrew faith, but to people who were Christians and wanted to retain or introduce Jewish practices into the Christian communities.

3, Are there insights and contributions that Messianic Jews can offer that may be helpful in understanding scripture as part of the process of Jewish-Christian dialogue?

Messianic Jews often face difficult problems within the Jewish community, and their presence can be a difficult area when it comes to dialogue with Jews. But Messianic Jews and Jews who become Christians do not see themselves as abandoning their Judaism, as has been pointed out beautifully by Michele Guinness in many of her books.

Within the Christian community, these offer us important insights. For example, Michele Guinness and others help us to understand both the Friday night rituals in Jewish families and homes that help n understanding the many meals Jesus had with his disciples and with people such as Zaccheus and Simon the Pharisee, or in understanding the Seder or Passover meal within its Jewish context. Both give us fresh insights into our celebrations of the Eucharist.

A writer like David Stern has made an interesting translation, the Jewish New Testament, that expresses the Jewishness of the New Testament.

We need to be sensitive about the ways in which we use the Bible in Jewish-Christian dialogue, but we need to be aware of how we can gain fresh insights into the roots of our faith and our liturgy from Jews too, but those who remain faithful Jews and who interpret the Hebrew Scriptures in a very different tradition of understanding, and those Jews who have become Christians but do not wish to lose their Jewish identity.

Christian-Muslim dialogue

1, It is more difficult when it comes to the question of how can we use the Bible in dialogue with Muslims, despite the fact that Muslims see Jews, Christians and Muslims as People of the Book.”

Muslims give a very high degree of reverence to the Quran, even in how they handle it, and where they place it in a bookshelf. They are shocked if they see us placing the Bible on the floor, or marking it with a highlight pen, as so many of us probably do during Bible studies or lectures. They would even be shocked to see us place it on a bookshelf and then to see us place other books on top of the Bible.

So what do Muslims think the Bible is? For Muslims, their prophet Muhammad did not start a new religion, and the Quran was revealed to him within a tradition of scriptural revelation and prophecy.

For Muslims, the Torah, the Psalms and the Gospels are revealed Scripture. They believe that God has never left people without revealed scripture or without prophetic messengers. And while they are often taught that Jews and Christians have misinterpreted or rewritten Scripture, they are still interested in what we have to say about the Torah (tawrat), the Psalms (zabur) and the Gospels (injil). There is a whole chapter or sura in the Quran about Mary and the birth of Christ, and another sura devoted to the Last Supper.

Many Muslims are interested in the parables in the Gospels, the parallels between Bible stories and the stories in the Quran about the prophets and Christ, and I have had interesting conversations with a senior Iranian cleric about both Saint John’s Gospel and the hermeneutical approach to the Pauline epistles when it came to debates about the ordination of women.

The Quran is seen by Muslims as the confirmation of the truth revealed in early scriptures, and the people of the book, the followers of the revealed scriptures, have a special place in the Quran, particularly those who carry the Abrahamic legacy. Significant portions of the Quran focus on the story of the Biblical prophets and their followers, the Jews and Christians. It presents their stories as the story of the journey of faith, reminding the followers of the last revelation of the ups and downs in the struggle of the early communities of faith.

Some commentators have focused on the Quranic critique of the People of the Book, pointing out that the Quran says there were several excesses and mistakes by the followers of the Biblical prophets, and warning Muslims against committing similar excesses. Yet the Quran is full of stories of great struggles and shining examples of the followers of early prophets whose commitment and devotion were crucial for establishing the monotheistic traditions and translating divine guidance into social practices. For example, the strong faith of Saul (Talout) and those who stood firmly with him (2: 249); the devotion of the people of the Trench who remained true to their faith in the face of a horrifying aggression committed by ruthless enemies (85: 1-11); and the unwavering commitment of the followers of Christ to the ethical code and compassionate spirit he brought to humanity (61: 14).

2, Christians need to read and to be familiar with the Quran, and will be surprised at the many parallels with Biblical stories in the Quran.

But can we use the Quran in a Christian setting or in dialogue with Muslims?

I remember my reaction to hearing the Fatiha or the opening sura of the Quran being used as a reading at a funeral.

The sura al-Fatiha (Arabic: الفاتحة‎), “The Opening,” is the first chapter of the Quran. Its seven verses are a prayer for God’s guidance and the stress the lordship and mercy of God. This chapter has a special role in traditional daily prayers of Muslims, who recite it at the start of each unit of prayer, or rak’ah.

Muslims believe that the Quran is a direct divine revelation from God in the Arabic language. Translations into other languages are considered by many to be merely superficial “interpretations” of the meanings and so they are not reliable versions of the Quran. Although some liberal Muslims may use translations as part of their daily prayers, translations are used mainly for personal spiritual use by non-Arabic speakers.

The text of the Fatiha with transliteration and translation in English is as follows:

1 بِسْمِ اللّهِ الرَّحْمـَنِ الرَّحِيم
Bismillāhir rahmānir rahīm
In the name of God, the Most Beneficent, the Most Merciful:
2 الْحَمْدُ للّهِ رَبِّ الْعَالَمِين
Al hamdu lillāhi rabbi l-'ālamīn
Praise be to God, the Lord of the Universe. 3 الرَّحْمـنِ الرَّحِيم Ar raḥmānir-rahīm The Most Merciful, the Ever-Merciful.
4 مَـالِكِ يَوْمِ الدِّين
Māliki yawmid-dīn
King of the Day of Judgment.
5 إِيَّاك نَعْبُدُ وإِيَّاكَ نَسْتَعِين
Iyyāka na'budu wa iyyāka nasta'īn
You alone we worship, and you alone we ask for help
6 اهدِنَــــا الصِّرَاطَ المُستَقِيمَ
Ihdināṣ-ṣirāt al mustaqīm Guide us to the straight path;
7 صِرَاطَ الَّذِينَ أَنعَمتَ عَلَيهِمْ غَيرِ المَغضُوبِ عَلَيهِمْ وَلاَ الضَّالِّين
Ṣirāt al-ladīna an'amta 'alayhim ġayril maġdūbi 'alayhim walād dāllīn
The path of those whom you have blessed, not of those who have deserved anger, nor of those who stray.

This sura has often been compared with the Lord’s Prayer, both because of its sentiments and because of the way it is used in traditional Muslim prayers. The Islamic mandatory prayers require every practicing Muslim in the world to recite the Fatiha at least 17 times a day. This surah is sometimes described as “the mother of the Book” (Umm al-Kitab) and “the mother of the Quran” (Umm al-Qur'an), and “the cure of diseases” (Sura-tul-shifa). When recited during daily prayers, many Muslims end their recital of the Fatiha with the word Amen (Amin).

The first verse, transliterated as bismillāhir rahmānir rahīm, is heard so often and so regularly in Arabic and Muslim societies that it is familiar even among those who are not Muslims and who do not speak Arabic. This verse appears at the start of every sura in the Quran (except for at-Tawbah). The verse is said before reciting a sura or part of a sura during daily prayer, and also before public proclamations and before many personal and everyday activities as a way of invoking God’s blessing and proclaiming one’s motives before an undertaking.

But what about the concluding verses? Can they be said within a Christian context? It is always important to respect the fact that people of other faiths interpret their own Holy Scriptures in the light of their own traditions and hermeneutical approaches. For Muslims, the “straight path” in verse 6, is the way of Islam, while verse 7 is understood always to refer to (without naming them explicitly) Jews and Christians.

A Muslim would be shocked to gear the Fatiha being recited in a church. And so, no matter how we might want to appropriate some of its words with different meanings, it should never be used as a reading in a church under any circumstances – out of respect to Jews, Christians and Muslims.

3, What does the Quran says about interfaith dialogue?

There are voices within the three monotheist Abrahamic faiths – Judaism, Christianity, and Islam – who, in the light of current tensions, argue that it is difficult if not impossible to find understanding and to build trust among the followers of these three traditions.

Those who quote selectively from Islamic sources often paint Islam as an intolerant religion. This is often misleading when it comes to both the historical record of Muslims in dealing with people of other faiths, and, most importantly, what the Quran has to say itself. There are plenty of examples in history of Muslims encouraging multi-religious societies where people with diverse religious backgrounds lived in considerable harmony. Two prime examples are provided by the tolerance of mediaeval Muslim Spain and the invitation to Jews expelled from Jerusalem to return to the city upon the defeat of the Crusaders.

The Quran teaches that true and honest living is the assured way for spiritual and social harmony, and for protecting the long-term self interests of every human being. The Quran asserts that humans are fallible and can never be free of error in understanding and judgment. Human knowledge is imperfect, and subject to bias and error. Knowledge of intentions and inner thoughts are beyond human capacity, and so is the knowledge of the final destiny of individuals. People of faith must show humility and put their trust in divine wisdom and the absolute justice of God, and must focus on doing what is right and just, instead of sitting in judgment on the eternal salvation of others.

The Quran is clear that only God knows who is true and sincere in worship and service, and who has gone astray.“Your lord knows best who strays from his way: He knows best who they are that receive His guidance” (6: 117).

“And we granted them clear signs in matters (of religion): it was only after knowledge had been granted to them that they fell into schisms, through insolent envy among themselves. Verily, your lord will judge between them on the Day of Judgment as to those matters in which they set up differences” (45: 17).

The duty of believing Muslims, therefore, according to the Quran, is not to judge others or to look down on those with different religious understandings and faith, but to respect their choices and try his or her best to live an upright life and manifest the values of his and her faith through good work and good deeds.

“To you we sent the scripture in truth, confirming the scripture that came before it, and guarding it in safety: so judge between them by what Allah has revealed, and follow not their vain desires, diverging from the truth that has come to you. To each among you have we prescribed a law and an open way. If Allah had so willed, he would have made you a single People, but (his plan is) to test you in what he hath given you; so strive as in a race in all virtues. The goal of you all is to Allah; it is he that will show you the truth of the matters in which you dispute” (5: 48).

The Muslim prophet Muhammad repeatedly emphasised that his mission confirmed those of early prophets. He directed early Muslims to seek refuge in Abyssinia, pointing out that the country was ruled by a just Christian King. This was the beginning of a strong alliance between Muslims and Christians in Abyssinia that lasted for 1,000 years.

Muslim attitudes towards the followers of other religions, particularly the People of the Book, can be one not of self-righteousness and pride, but of compassion, mutual respect, and concern for the well-being and welfare of other communities. The Quran an encourages Muslims to co-operate for the common good and to search from a common ground, based on mutual respect and help.

“Say: O People of the Book! Come to common terms as between us and you: that we worship none but Allah; that we associate no partners with Him; that we erect not, from among ourselves, Lords and patrons other than Allah.” If then they turn back, say: “Bear witness that we (at least) are Muslims (bowing to Allah’s Will)” (3: 94).

Muslims are asked to seek common ground with the followers of other religions in a society in which people are free to worship God. In such an open society, Muslims can display a positive attitude and an unwavering respect for the followers of other faiths. Dealing with respect and positive engagement does not mean that differences in doctrine and interpretation do not matter. Rather, it means that those differences must be addressed through free and open dialogue.

It is this open, free, and dignified dialogue that allows the followers of various religious traditions to affirm their diversity and discuss their similarities and differences, and it is what Islam requires from its followers. Muslims have a moral and religious obligation to engage in interfaith dialogue with other communities of faith, and they must do that by maintaining ethical standards required by the Quran, including the directive to “argue with [the follower of the revealed books] in ways that are best and most gracious.”

Dialogue with other faiths

The principal Sikh scripture is the Adi Granth (First Scripture), more commonly called the Sri Guru Granth Sahib. Sikhs do not speak about this as their “holy book” but as their perpetual and current “Guru,” Guide or Master. The Granth is 1,430-page long, divided into 39 chapters, and was written between 1601 and 1604. All copies are exactly alike, and Sikhs are forbidden from making any changes to its text.

Because it talks about the one God shared by the great monotheistic faiths, how can we have discussions with Sikhs about it?

Some time ago, I was buying two ties in a Beijing hotel. The helpful shop assistant pointed out that I should have three ties for the price of two, and tried to press on me a third tie with Chinese characters. I asked her to translate them, and was told they were quotations from Buddhist scripture.

How could I wear a tie like that, out of respect to Chinese Muslims and out of respect to Chinese Christians?

Many years ago, I stayed as a guest of Japanese monks from the Nichiren school of Buddhism. Their life is punctuated with chanting repeatedly: “Namu myoho renge kyo” – “Praise to the Lotus sutra.” This phrase is known as the daimoku, and the practice of chanting the daimoku is called shōdai and is supposed to bring absolute happiness.

Many Buddhists will place passages from scripture in a prayer wheel, and turn this in prayer. When you visit a Buddhist temple or monastery in Japan or China, and you are asked to turn a traditional prayer wheel, how do you respond?

What about Hindu scriptures? Hindu literary tradition is dominated by the Sanskrit scriptures, including great religious epics such as the Upanishads, the Vedas and Bhagavad Gita, which are still revered as scripture by Hindus today. How do you feel about them being used in one well-known Dublin school to teach Sanskrit?

I know one Turkish scholar who argues that because the Bhagavad Gita (literally the Song of the God) is devoted to one God Hindus can be respected as People of the Book and that it is evidence of God’s plan to provide all people with revelation.

Some questions for discussion

How do you respond to the concept of God always providing revelation and prophets for people in every age?

How do you respond to the concept of the Hebrew Scriptures being respected in their own right?

Have you a separately bound copy of the New Testament (you will receive one on your ordination as deacon)?

Have you ever read the Quran?

Have you ever read the scriptures of other religious traditions?

Did you ever receive a copy of the Book of Mormon?

How do you respond to people in other traditions bringing their own interpretations to the Bible?

Some further reading

The Quran (various English interpretations are available through most popular books shops).

Colin Chapman, Cross & Crescent: responding to the challenge of Islam (Leicester: Inter-Varsity Press, 1995).
BE Inze, IA Omar (eds), Heirs of Abraham: the future of Muslim, Jewish, and Christian Relations (Maryknoll NY: Orbis, 2005).
Michael Ipgrave (ed), Scriptures in Dialogue (London: Church House Publishing, 2004).
Jacques Jomier, The Bible and the Qur’an (San Francisco: Ignatius Press, 2002).
Joseph Stallings, Rediscovering Passover: a complete guide of Christians (San Jose CA: Resource Publications, 1988.
David H. Stren (trans), Jewish New Testament (Jerusalem: Jewish New Testament Publications1994 ed).

Canon Patrick Comerford is Director of Spiritual Formation, Church of Ireland Theological College. This essay is based on notes during a seminar with Year II students on the NSM course on 4 April 2008.