As our communities become more diverse, and our influence more global, conflict will naturally occur between cultures and spiritual belief systems.

Ms. Ronnie Howell is uniquely qualified to help communities, corporations, organizations and individuals navigate through these differences. Ms. Howell holds a bachelor of arts degree in Spiritual and Emotional Development with a minor in Religious Studies, has studied comparative religion for several years, and is currently enrolled in an interfaith ordination seminary program.

We are more similar than we are different. Most belief systems hold similar values for conflict prevention and resolution. If we draw upon those we can rise above our differences, find common ground and a way to live in harmony.

If you would like Ms. Howell to mediate your interfaith dispute, please email info@opendialogue.net or call 763.234.5554.

Ms. Howell is also available for keynote addresses, panel participation, and organization experiential workshops. To reserve a date or for more information, please e-mail or call 763.234.5554.

Below you will find The Golden Rule of mutual respect as it is expressed in the following faith traditions:

• Baha'I Faith: Lay not on any soul a load that you would not wish to be laid upon you, and desire not for anyone the things you would not desire for yourself.
       Baha'u'llah, Gleanings
• Buddhism: Treat not others in ways that you yourself would find hurtful.
       The Buddha, Udana-Varga 5.18
• Christianity: In everything, do to others as you would have them do to you; for this is the law and the prophets.
       Jesus, Matthew 7:12
• Confucianism: One word which sums up the basis of all good conduct…loving kindness. Do not do to others what you do not want done to yourself.
       Confucius, Analects 15.23
• Hinduism: This is the sum of duty: do not do to others what would cause pain if done to you.
       Mahabharata 5:1517
• Islam: Not one of you truly believes until you wish for others what you wish for yourself.
       The Prophet Muhammad, Hadith
• Judaism: What is hateful to you, do not do to your neighbour. This is the whole Torah; all the rest is commentary.
       Hillel, Talmud, Shabbat 31a
• Jainism: One should treat all creatures in the world as one would like to be treated.
       Mahavira, Sutrakritanga
• Native Spirituality: We are as much alive as we keep the earth alive.
       Chief Dan George
• Sikhism: I am a stranger to no one; and no one is a stranger to me. Indeed, I am a friend to all.
       Guru Granth Sahib, pg. 1299
• Unitarianism: We affirm and promote respect for the interdependent web of all existence of which we are a part.
       Unitarian principle
• Zoroastrianism: Do not do unto others whatever is injurious to yourself.
       Shayast-na-Shayast 13.29

Father Thomas Keating, O.S.C.O.
Convenor of the Snowmass Conference and member of Monastic Interfaith Dialog

A report on an experience of ongoing interreligious dialogue might be helpful at this point. In 1984 I invited a group of spiritual teachers from a variety of the world religions - Buddhist, Tibetan Buddhist, Hindu, Jewish, Islamic, Native American, Russian Orthodox, Protestant, and Roman Catholic - to gather at St. Benedict's Monastery, Snowmass, Colorado, to meditate together in silence and to share our personal spiritual journeys, especially those elements in our respective traditions that have proved most helpful along the way.

We kept no record and published no papers. As our trust and friendship grew, we felt moved to investigate various points that we seemed t agree on. The original points of agreement were worked over during the course of subsequent meetings as we continued to meet, for a week or so each year. Our most recent list consists of the following eight points:

At the annual Conference in May 1986, we came up with additional points of agreement of a practical nature:

We were surprised and delighted to find so many points of similarity and convergence in our respective paths. Like most people of our time, we originally expected that we would find practically nothing in common. In the years that followed we spontaneously and somewhat hesitantly began to take a closer look at certain points of disagreement until these became our main focus of attention. We found that discussing our points of disagreement increased the bonding of the group even more than discovering our points of agreement. We became more honest in stating frankly what we believed and why, without at the same time making any effort to convince others of our own position. We simply presented our understanding as a gift to the group.