about learning across religious borders in a way that discloses the truth of my faith, in the light of their faith." Comparative theology vs. interreligious dialogue Comparative theology shares with interreligious dialogue a commitment to engage in dialogue and listen carefully to the religious other. It must, however, go further than just listening: "The comparative theologian must do more than listen to others explain their faith; she must be willing to study their traditions deeply alongside her own, taking both to heart." Sources and methodology The unique character of comparative theology derives from its sources and methodology. Comparative theology works with two types of religious sources. While rooted in one tradition, comparative theology has its foundation also in at least one additional religious tradition. Clooney describes comparative theology. . . as truly constructive theology, distinguished by its sources and ways of proceeding, by its foundation in more than one tradition (although the comparativist always remains rooted in one tradition), and by reflection which builds on that foundation, rather than simply on themes or by methods already articulated prior to comparative practice. Comparative theology is dialectical practice. The comparison starts with a critical study of the other religion. This first step involves a persistent and disciplined in-depth study of the other religious tradition where the theologian exposes herself to the sacred texts of the other tradition. The comparative theologian practices "hermeneutical openness" in a manner where comprehension should precede judgment. This implies a "bracketing" of subjective commitments / theological judgments, allowing the other religious tradition to speak as much as possible on its own terms. It is a practice of making oneself "vulnerable to intellectual, imaginative, affective transformation." The comparison, in turn, becomes a conversation with your own tradition. The insights emerging from the encounter with the other religious tradition might influence the conceptual framework for interpreting your own tradition, causing a reconsideration of your Christian identity. Correlations are made between the two traditions, which might imply recognition of similarities or recognition of differences. At this point "the 'normative theological judgments' that were temporarily suspended are brought back into the hermeneutical circle." Grounds are provided for raising more profound theological questions, conversation with other theologians, and potentially leading to new theological construction. This theological procedure resonates with Clooney's claim thatComparative theology is a theology deeply changed by its attention to the details of multiple religious and theological traditions, a theology that