Rabbi Lehmann observes that a distinction needs to be made between images that described the Jewish and Christian relationship in past centuries from those that have emerged in the last third of the twentieth century. For centuries, Christians assumed that the Church had superseded Jews as God's chosen people and this theology of "supersessionism" was reflected in Christian art. Although Jews were censored by the dominant Christian society, how would you imagine Jews pictured supersessionist Christianity, if only in their imaginations?  How might Jews, for example, have depicted the relationship of Synagoga and Ecclesia? 

The purpose of this question is to develop skills in seeing the world through the other community's perspectives. Some Christians will probably be disturbed to see their faith community as oppressive and frightening. Some may voice their dismay that what understands itself as a religion of love and concern for all people should have behaved so contrary to these principles.  Jews hearing such sentiments and Christians working through them may reflect on how religious convictions can be distorted and corrupted.  

This question will draw together many of the elements of the first four videos in Walking God's Paths, including the history, beliefs, and practices of the two communities. See the Information Sheet for an analysis of many of the metaphors that the video mentions.  Keep in mind that there is no single "correct" answer to this question because the relationship may be more complex than any one metaphor can express. 

This role-playing exercise builds upon the previous questions, but seeks to apply them in the reality of a college campus. Given the scenario that has been devised, perhaps too much is being demanded of the prospective artwork. There may be a peril of the two religions being relativized or marginalized by being placed together somewhere on the campus of a self-defined "secular" institution. Students who are aware of the troubled history of the two traditions will be critical of a sculpture that is too optimistic or fails to acknowledge past hostility. On the other hand, the artwork is meant to inspire the commitment to work together. It may well be that total agreement consensus would be impossible to achieve and that instead a compromise that most people could live with would be a more realistic goal. Still, the exercise should move the discussion from the abstract to the lives of real communities.  Depending on the demographics and meeting space, it might be possible for each small group to give their "report to the president" to the entire group of participants at large. 

Continuing the last question's move from the abstract to people's lived experiences, this question invites reflection on the participants' own congregations. Jews and Christians who have been profoundly affected by interfaith dialogue often are frustrating when their co-religionists seem apathetic or uninterested in their experiences. The conversation will help equip participants for this possibility.