Our Work on Mitigating Polemic Texts

GINGKO’s Fellowship programme has brought together experts in interfaith dialogue,
academics, and faith leaders to explore different approaches to confronting polemic texts. The
power of religious texts to incite or exacerbate hatred between communities remains an ever-
present danger in our society. Targeted

techniques are required when these texts are
invoked in order to mitigate the harm they can
cause.

A full report of our latest gathering to work toward
a toolkit of techniques is available here.

Drawing from the experience and knowledge of
our unique fellowship network, we have assembled
the resources and wisdom needed to facilitate
dialogue through group workshops.
Our work on polemic mitigation is an ongoing
project, and this currently represents a
repository of knowledge and approaches.
Group discussion of polemic texts will naturally
take different directions depending on the
nature of the group. In single-faith settings,
we encourage critical engagement with the faith’s
own texts, while multifaith groups offer a valuable
opportunity to confront polemic texts in
ways that strengthen interfaith relations.

Selecting Texts

We have found that text selection works best when:

• The texts are difficult in nature, the kind often excluded from interfaith dialogue. We
  have found that sunlight is the best disinfectant. Although this process can be painful,
  trust can only be established when these beliefs are brought into the open.
• Different faiths or denominations are represented in the selection process. In faith-
  specific settings, such as a church, this may involve building relationships with other
  communities.
• The text selection process is as transparent as possible to workshop participants,
  fostering curiosity and openness. This may involve openly discussing how texts are
  chosen.
• A broad definition of ‘polemic texts’ is used, reflecting the realities of a group or
  community’s needs. Academic or scholarly groups may be better suited to complex
  scripture, whereas community settings may be more concerned with polemic
  statements made by religious leaders online.

Presenting Texts
Texts are best presented with a degree of contextualisation. There is often much to say about
why a text was written and for whom, which enables a more informed and thoughtful
response from participants.
We are fortunate to share Benjamin Kamine’s work outlining guidelines for introducing texts,
which we have used in our own practice. The document Text Introduction Guidelines (Kamine)
provides a range of useful considerations, including how to:
1. Share historical context and reception.
2. Elevate intracommunal differences.
3. Acknowledge continued harm.
4. Invite encounter.

Priming groups for compassionate listening
In many situations, building closer connections between participants before confronting
polemic texts can encourage more thoughtful engagement, both with one another and with the
texts themselves.
In our sessions, we have used a ‘Compassionate Listening Exercise’, adapted from the
KAICIID International Dialogue Centre by Benjamin Kamine, to great effect. It helps
participants focus on the content of speech rather than their own internal interpretive lens.
Method: A storyteller shares a difficult personal experience over four minutes with a group
of three listeners. Each listener is assigned a different focus: one listens for ‘facts’, another
for ‘feelings’, and the third for ‘values’. The listeners are not allowed to take written notes.
Afterwards, each listener is given time to reflect back only what they have heard in their
assigned category.
Structured in this way, participants are challenged to engage closely with what is being said,
resisting the urge to insert their own opinions, and instead paying careful attention to
understanding another perspective.
The full guidelines for this exercise can be found here: Compassionate Listening Exercise (Kamine)

Scripture and Violence Method
The Scripture & Violence Project is based at the Cambridge Interfaith Programme, part of the
Faculty of Divinity at the University of Cambridge. They have developed a methodology
specifically for addressing what they term ‘violent-sounding’ passages of scripture in inter- or
intra-faith settings.

Their work provides an excellent example of how to prepare texts for group discussion, using
structured worksheets with guiding questions and exegesis to encourage nuanced thinking.
This approach highlights how texts that appear to promote hatred or violence may, in fact,
hold multiple interpretations.
Pre-prepared texts from the Old Testament/Hebrew Bible, New Testament, and Qur’an are
available at:
https://www.scriptureandviolence.org/scripture-discussion-guides
From our experience working with these guides, we have found them not only valuable in
themselves but also useful as a framework for engaging with other polemic texts that may
arise.

The Rossing Center Method
When engaging in interfaith dialogue in difficult contexts, we are indebted to the Rossing
Center for sharing their methodology. The Rossing Center operates in Jerusalem as ‘an
interreligious organization based in Jerusalem which promotes an inclusive society for all
religious, ethnic and national groups’, and has extensive experience in fostering
interreligious dialogue.
Their method begins with identifying an issue, which may relate to a polemic text, and
introducing it through a ‘spiritual questionnaire’ completed by the presenter. This provides
context on their beliefs and broader life experience beyond the issue itself.
Other participants are then given time to reflect on the questionnaire, considering both the
issue and the additional personal context. The presenter is not permitted to interrupt or correct
these reflections, but instead listens silently as their perspective is interpreted by others.
The full questionnaire, used specifically for discussions on Israel and Palestine, is available
here. More information can be found at rossingcenter.org.

The Liberty Fund Method
In settings with a higher degree of participant commitment and the expectation of preparatory
work, sessions may be structured along the lines of the Liberty Fund’s methodology. The
Liberty Fund is a private educational institute dedicated to advancing libertarian ideals
through Socratic dialogue.
Liberty Fund sessions are invite-only, round-table discussions in which participants read
designated texts in advance and engage collectively with the material. Two key principles
structure these sessions: a chair moderates discussion to enable, rather than restrict, dialogue,
and sessions strictly begin and end on time.

This approach may be adapted for polemic mitigation by structuring sessions around
collective engagement with difficult texts. However, as it involves fewer safeguards, it may
be better suited to academic settings or less reactive environments.
More information, including examples of Liberty Fund conferences, is available at libertyfund.org.

Lessons Learned
Across our network of fellows, we have gathered a significant body of shared wisdom from
practice in faith groups, academic settings, and interfaith contexts, both in London and in the
Holy Land.
A consistent lesson emerges: when engaging with the most challenging polemic texts,
participants should be able to express their views within an atmosphere of curiosity and
compassion. Facilitators, where possible, should avoid imposing judgment or excessive
moderation.
Unlike other forms of interfaith dialogue, which often focus on shared ground, confronting
polemic texts requires directly engaging with the divisive aspects of religious traditions. This
involves difficult, and at times embarrassing, work. However, it is through this process of
honest engagement that trust can be built on a foundation of genuine understanding.