Religious peace traditions and pregnant conversation

Just returned from an Omni forum made up of... here goes...

A Unitarian moderator
An Atheist (points out the absence of logic and rational thinking in war rhetoric)
An Episcopalian Priest (Jesus was a pacifist. We say we follow Jesus, so let's be true to that. )
A Nondenominational professor who teaches international students (we can learn a lot from each other)
A Practicing Catholic agnostic (social action within the church is rich, but unappreciated by many members)
A non-practicing Southern Baptist agnostic (Religion is a major source of war. Moved away from his religion when he saw its propensity to support violence and war.)
An Indian Muslim (Holy Koran teachings on peace are powerful. Mohammed and Jesus both taught peace. Believers need to return to their roots)
and
A Tibetan Buddhist Lama (Buddhist tradition is inner peace. This is the lasting way to outer peace. Seeking balance is the key.)

Hope I didn't misrepresent anybody.

The topic of the evening was "why are the churches silent?" We didn't begin to cover the topic adequately, and gave up after 9:00, with many people wishing for more discussion. Each of these leaders feel strongly that this war is a serious mistake, and thought so from the start. A majority of their fellows now agree. For many congregations that was not the case in the beginning. It's a painful process to come to believe that the leaders of ones country are not trustable, and many people are still not at that point, even when they concede that the war was handled very badly.

Some interesting points of view emerge. For one thing, non-religious people are deeply spiritual about their non-religion. And all sides tonight were prepared to hear the others out. That was pleasantly electrifying to me. People with strong beliefs and deeply held opinions can express themselves (as thoroughly as time permits anyway), and also listen to people whose beliefs and opinions differ. That may not be true in all groups. I'm relieved to be part of one where that's possible. The audience was really engaged, with lots of comments and questions.

I believe that if there's hope for the world, the hope will be based on conversation. One attender asked "If you had to abandon hope for peace, what could you replace it with?" Too bad it was at the very end, because such a large question was hard to address briefly. I think hope is precisely what Omni and its friends are trying to nurture. If hope dies in one place, we have to seek it out somewhere else, because without it, there's so little left.

If hope dies in one place, the new place we find it may also be a truer place. A truer place then we hoped from before. Conversations like the one that took place tonight renew my hope. I hope such conversations are proliferating wildly all over the earth, between such very diverse and interesting peoples. From such conversations, hope springs forth quivering with delight.