Trends and Developments in Interreligious Dialogue

GEORG EVERS

TRENDS AND DEVELOPMENTS IN INTERRELIGIOUS DIALOGUE

General Observations It is often asked if the many activities in the field of interreligious dialogue and encounter really yield tangible and concrete results. The most common objection to the whole project of interreligious dialogue is that those who usually attend these meetings are people who are already “converts to the cause of dialogue” and therefore do not need to be taught that members of different religions should attempt to understand one another and live in peace. Even worse is the scathing or cynical remark that interreligious dialogue is the field where those people meet who are not at home in any given religious tradition. On the other hand, there is agreement that engagement in interreligious dialogue should never be connected with an agenda of achieving clearly described objectives and aims. Dialogue should not be burdened by too many concrete expectations that would oblige the participants to come up with resolutions and proposals that cannot be realized most of the time. One essential element of dialogue among members of different religious traditions is that dialogue should be “unintentional” (absichtslos)— expressing the expectation that those who engage in dialogue should not pursue their own hidden agendas. If one agrees to this description of dialogue, then the question may be raised: Is dialogue just l’art pour l’art for those who enjoy engaging in an exchange of rather abstract ideas from different religious traditions while forgetting the real problems of our global world where communal harmony often is threatened by religiously motivated prejudices, hate and violence?

If we look at the many activities in the field of interreligious dialogue in recent months we can see that there is a growing conviction that in the face of a growth of alleged religiously motivated terrorist activities, all religions are challenged to show that their religious traditions and teachings do not support or justify the use of violence in the name of religion. This rejection of violence can be found in many declarations of meetings and conferences between members of different religions during the last year. To be credible, these statements have to be bolstered by the admission of the historical truth that religions have been used in the past again and again to justify violence and religiously motivated wars. Religious leaders have to admit that their religious heritage has been abused and that crimes have been committed in the name of religion. Such an admission of guilt can help one be watchful and vigilant with a view to the future, and at the same time, to be humble when speaking of their own religious traditions and their capacity to pro-

228 TRENDS AND CONFERENCES vide guidance for the peaceful and harmonious co-existence of members of different religions in today’s religiously pluralistic world.

There are quite a few areas for interreligious cooperation if the religious leaders and the simple faithful are ready to engage in working together and not against one another. A very important field is education, because by providing accurate information about one another’s religious tenets and traditions, the emergence of prejudices can be forestalled and a way to a true appreciation of other religious expressions and forms can be fostered. As studies of school textbooks in several countries have shown, there is still much misinformation, historical distortions and misleading information to be found in teaching material about the other religions. It is often said that the most effective dialogue occurs on the level of every- day life among people of different faiths living and working together. This has been true for a long time in many Asian countries where people of mixed religious affiliations live side by side. But the growth of fundamentalist and extremist cur- rents in different religions has shown that the apparent harmony and understanding were rather fragile. Faced with agitation by radical elements that stress the differences between religious traditions, the common people do not have sufficient knowledge of the other traditions to see through the erroneous and hateful arguments of those who advocate separation, segregation and often violence. There- fore, it is most important that efforts be made to spread knowledge about the other religious traditions already during their education to provide sufficient information to resist the propaganda spread by radical elements.

Another area of interreligious cooperation is in the social field in working for the improvement of life in urban and rural settings by pooling the resources and skills of different religious and cultural traditions. The work of the Asian Cultural For- um on Development (ACFOD), founded in 1973, is an early example of such cooperation. The series of seminars, under the name of “Faith Encounters in Social Action” (FEISA), organized by the Federation of Asian Bishops’ Conferences (FABC), were born from the realization that reflection and exchange on religious topics with members of other religions should include common action in the social area as well in order to become a force in bringing about change. There has been spontaneous cooperation on many occasions in the cases of natural calam- ities, e.g. in Myanmar, where the cyclone Nargis devastated vast areas in the Irra- waddy river delta in May 2008, killing more than 70,000 people. In a similar way, there were several examples of interreligious cooperation after the tsunami disas- ter in 2004 in Sri Lanka, India and Thailand. Again in Thailand, Buddhists and Christians are cooperating in caring for AIDS/HIV patients. At a conference in Sapporo which was held shortly before the G8 summit in Japan in July 2008, religious leaders representing Buddhism, Christianity, Islam, and Shintoism, directed an appeal to political leaders to cut down the expenses for the military and give

229 STUDIES IN INTERRELIGIOUS DIALOGUE 18 (2008) 2 the surplus money into an “Earth Fund” for protection of the environment and for the struggle against poverty.

Crisis in Jewish Christian Dialogue? The open controversy between the Vatican and the Jewish community regarding the reformulation of a prayer in the Good Friday liturgy, which was published in February 2008 and used for the first time during the Good Friday services, has raised the question if the Catholic Church has truly changed its attitude towards the Jewish community. The Vatican—and for that matter Pope Benedict XVI— wanted to accommodate the small minority of traditionalists in the Catholic Church who demanded a new edition of the 1962 version of the Roman Missal in the Tridentine Order of the Mass for use in their liturgical celebrations, so that they could avoid using the new, post-conciliar, liturgy that they reject. The offensive part in the new prayer for the Jews on Good Friday is the passage where the hope is expressed “that God will illuminate [the Jews’] hearts so that they may recognise Jesus Christ as the Saviour of all people.” Several Jewish leaders and organizations reacted strongly to this new prayer formula which, in their inter- pretation, looks like a “return to the old anti-Semitic mindset” (so the Chief Rabbi of Milan), or as “a most regrettable step and potentially dangerous step back- wards” (so the new chairman of the General Rabbinical Conference, Henry G. Brandt). The Austrian Jewish community suspended all official dialogue with the Catholic Church in the aftermath of the publication of the prayer. Chief Rabbi Paul Chaim Eisenberg said that in the revised version of the prayer Judaism was regarded as a second-class faith and that the aim of the prayer was that the Jews might come to acknowledge Jesus as the Redeemer. Jewish representatives cancelled their participation in the national Catholic conference (Katholikentag), held May 22-25, 2008, in Osnabrück.

It did not help much when Cardinal Walter Kasper, responsible for Jewish-Chris- tian relations in the Vatican, tried to defend the formulation of the prayer by stating that it was basically a quotation from the New Testament, namely from St. Paul’s letter to the Romans, chapter 11, in which he speaks of God’s unbroken covenant with the Jews and not about missionary activity towards the Jews. Therefore, according to Kasper, the use of this text in the new prayer should not seen as an offence towards the Jews. Kasper’s declaration, however, did not resolve the issue, because the simple fact was that many Jews felt offended. The Vatican then felt obliged to provide a clarification published by the Vatican press office on April 4, 2008, in which it responded to the disappointment expressed by Jews who complained that the formulation of the Good Friday prayer was not in accordance with the official declarations and statements made by the Catholic Church in the aftermath of Vatican II. The Holy See tried to reassure the Jews that the new formulation of the prayer was in no way intended to change the position of the Catholic Church regarding the Jews. Again the expectation that this state-

230 TRENDS AND CONFERENCES ment would help clarify the “misunderstanding” proved to be wrong, because most Jewish critics did not accept it. Criticism also came from Catholic bishops and institutions involved in Jewish-Christian dialogue. The deputy head of the German Bishops’ Conference, Heinrich Mussinghoff of Aachen, for instance, declared publicly that the German bishops would have preferred that the wording of the 1970 edition of the Roman Missal had been retained, because it emphasized the Jews’ faithfulness to God’s covenant and the dignity of Israel. Beyond the debate sparked by the new prayer, in their Good Friday services the vast majority of Catholics continue to use the prayer as formulated in the missal published in 1970 during the pontificate of Paul VI. That prayer says: “Let us pray for God’s ancient people, the Jews, the first to hear his word … that God will grant us the grace to be faithful to his covenant to grow in the love of his name.” During his visit to the USA in April 2008, which coincided with the central Jewish feast of Pesah, Pope Benedict XVI used the occasion to meet with Jewish representatives and to state that the Catholic Church is committed to continuing the dialogue with the Jewish community on the basis of the Vatican II document Nostra Aetate, which in the past forty years has fundamentally changed the relationship between the Catholic Church and the Jewish community.

The—in itself—small incident, however, points to a deeper problem in interreligious dialogue, i.e. that in all religions those in leadership and the common believers have not yet realized that religions are no longer living in isolation from one another and that their religious practices—however ancient and venerable they may be— are no longer restricted to the inner chamber but are somehow visible, audible and, therefore, potentially offensive, in the agora of a world community.

Open Letter and Call from 138 Muslim Religious Leaders On October 13, 2007, the first anniversary of the letter of 38 Muslim scholars to Benedict XVI in October 2006 (cf. Studies in Interreligious Dialogue 17 (2007): 244f.), 138 Muslim religious leaders sent an open letter to Pope Benedict XVI and several other Christian religious leaders, i.e. the Archbishop of Canterbury, the heads of the Lutheran, Methodist and Baptist Churches, and fourteen patriarchs of the Orthodox Church called: A Common Word between Us and You. In the letter, published at Eid al-Fitr, the feast celebrating the end of Ramadam, Muslim scholars from all over the world and from all Muslim groups, Sunnis, Shi’ites, Ibadis and even Ismailian and Jaafari schools, urged a greater understanding between the two faiths. The letter was signed by prominent Muslims leaders, poli- ticians and academics, including the Grand Muftis of Bosnia and Hercegovina, Russia, Croatia, Kosovo and Syria, the General Secretary of the Organization of the Islamic Conference, the former Grand Mufti of Egypt and the founder of the Ulema Organization in Iraq. The Muslim scholars insist that world peace depends on improved relations between Muslims and Christians who, after all, constitute

231 STUDIES IN INTERRELIGIOUS DIALOGUE 18 (2008) 2 well over half of the world’s population. The two principles, love of God and love of neighbour, are identified as common ground and the basis for peace and understanding between the two religions. The letter further states that finding common ground between Muslims and Christians is not simply a matter for polite ecumen- ical dialogue between selected religious leaders but an issue where the common future of both religions and all humankind is at stake. The letter concludes: So let our differences not cause hated and strife between us. Let us vie with each other only in righteousness and good works. Let us respect each other, be fair, just and kind to another and live in sincere peace, harmony and mutual goodwill. Generally, the letter was seen and appreciated as an unprecedented document and hopeful sign that the cause of dialogue and understanding is making progress in spite of the many incidents of violence in the name of religion. While praising the positive tone of the letter and seeing it as a historical document, some critics ask why the dialogue offer by the Muslims is directed only to Christians and why it does not include the Jews as well. After all, reference to Jewish sources is made several times in the letter. But including the Jews would, of course, burden the dialogue with the problems arising from the conflict between Israel and the Arabs of Palestine.

Pope Benedict XVI responded to the open letter on November 29, 2007, by thank- ing the Muslim scholars for their initiative and gesture of goodwill and understanding. The pope acknowledged the positive spirit in which the invitation to cooperation and dialogue was written. Without overlooking the differences between the two religious traditions of Christians and Muslims, the two religions can agree on the belief in the One God and the commandment to love one another. Ad- dressed to Prince Ghazi bin Muhammad bin Talal of Jordan, director of the Aal al Bayt Institute of Islamic Thought in Amman and a principal signer of the letter, the pope invited him, together with a delegation of advocates of the joint letter, to come to Rome for a dialogue on these questions. On December 12, 2007, Prince Ghazi bin Muhammad bin Talal accepted the invitation. As a first step, a preparatory meeting of Catholic and Muslim scholars was held in Rome in March 2008. During this meeting the Vatican announced the founding of a new Catholic- Muslim Forum. In a statement, the heads of the two delegations, Cardinal Jean- Louis Tauran, President of the Pontifical Council for Interreligious Dialogue, and Sheikh Abdal Hakim Murad, President of the U.K.-based Muslim Academic Trust, announced that a first seminar of the forum was scheduled for November 2008 to discuss the theme “Love of God, Love of Neighbour.”

Visit of King Abdullah to the Vatican on November 6, 2007 In the same period, i.e. that which was spanned by the letter from the 138 Muslim scholars, the response by Pope Benedict XVI and his invitation for a meeting, King Abdullah of Saudi Arabia made a historic visit to the Vatican on November

232 TRENDS AND CONFERENCES

6, 2007. The initiative for the meeting came from King Abdullah, the Custodian of the holy sites of Mecca and Medina, who used the occasion of a state visit to Italy to meet with the Pope. After the encounter, which lasted 70 minutes—much longer than originally scheduled—there was no official joint statement, but Fr Lombardi, the spokesman for the Vatican, told the press that King Abdullah had asked to be received by the Pope, the highest authority in the Catholic Church, “to promote common religious and moral values in a world where . . . violence and war continue to rage.” From the Vatican side it was said that the Pope had expressed his wish that all inhabitants of Saudi Arabia should live a full life, a formulation that was interpreted as a veiled desire that all the inhabitants of Saudi Arabia, including the sizeable minority of more than 500,000 Christians, should enjoy religious freedom. Christians are not allowed to build churches, not even to possess Bibles or other religious items in Saudi Arabia. King Abdullah is said to have responded by calling for cooperation in order to avoid confrontation. The problem of eventually establishing diplomatic relations between the Holy See and Saudi Arabia was left to the respective delegations to work out. In a video aired in December 2007, Ayman al-Zawahiri, the second-in-command of Al Qaida, criticized King Abdullah’s visit to the Vatican, calling it offensive to Islam and Muslims. If not in Saudi Arabia, there are some hopeful signs in the area that the principle of reciprocity might be respected and Christians be allowed to live normal religious lives. In Doha, the capital of the emirate Doha, the first ever Catholic church was consecrated on March 14, 2008 by Cardinal Ivan Dias, the Prefect of the Congregation for the Evangelisation of Peoples.

Catholic-Muslim Conferences and Encounters In the aftermath of the tensions that arose from the Regensburg speech in Sep- tember 2006, and briefly interrupted or disturbed Catholic and Muslim relations, we can observe that there were many new initiatives for entering into dialogue in 2007 and even more in 2008. The annual meeting of the joint committee for dialogue between the Pontifical Council for Interreligious Dialogue and the Per- manent Committee of al-Azhar for Dialogue among the Monotheistic Religions was held in the Vatican February 25-26, 2008. The conference focussed on the theme, “Faith in God - Love of Neighbour,” which was seen to be a central issue for both religions. The committee also discussed the question of freedom of expression, noting that it can never justify harming people’s feelings in religious matters and thus lead to strained relations and destroyed brotherly love. The committee strongly condemned the republishing of offensive cartoons and the various attacks against Islam and its Prophet, as well as attacks against other religions. The final declaration affirmed the resolve to respect the dignity and honour of every human person without consideration of race, colour, religion or conviction and to foster true respect for religious beliefs and symbols, as well as holy books. The participants appealed to those responsible in the mass media to be vigilant that

233 STUDIES IN INTERRELIGIOUS DIALOGUE 18 (2008) 2 freedom of expression not to be taken as a pretext for offending religious convic- tions.

In response to the notorious Regensburg speech on September 12, 2006, in which Pope Benedict XVI had discussed the relation between faith and reason, eight leading Shi’ite theologians from the Centre for Interreligious Dialogue of the Islamic Culture and Relations Organization in Teheran met in the Vatican April 28-30, 2008 with members of the Papal Council for Interreligous Dialogue to discuss the problem of “Faith and Reason in Christianity and in Islam.” There was some speculation in the press as to why Ayatollah Mohammad Ali Taschri, who was originally scheduled to lead the delegation, decided against doing so in the end. Whatever the reason may be, observers agreed that this exchange between Catholic and Shi’ite theologians and scholars was of high importance, especially because it treated one of the central issues currently debated between the two religions. Some observers, among them e.g. Karl-Josef Kuschel, criticized the Vati- can for engaging in dialogue on such an important topic with Shi’ite scholars only and not with Sunni representatives as well. After all, the Shi’ites are a minority faction in Islam.

At the end of this conference a statement containing seven common principles on which the representatives from the Catholic and the Shi’ite side had agreed, was signed and presented at a press conference. The central message of the conference was that there is no contradiction between faith and reason. Concerning the problem of the justification of the use of violence in the name of religion, the participants agreed that any such justification is untenable. The participants also pledged to recognize and value each other’s spiritual traditions. In spite of the remaining differences, both religions, it was said, should go beyond mere tolerance and together develop and defend the values contained in both religions. To understand the tenets of the other religious tradition, one should not rely on isolated passages but keep in mind the total message contained in the revealed scriptures that have to be interpreted using an adequate hermeneutical method. The members of the conference were received by Pope Benedict XVI who thus underlined the importance the Vatican accords to interreligious dialogue. At the same time this gesture helped to bolster the image of the Iranian delegation and indirectly the regime, which had sent them or at least approved of such a meeting. However, a few months later, when the Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad expressed his wish to have an audience with Pope Benedict XVI during the FAO conference June 3-5, 2008, he was politely turned down by the Vatican. A Vatican spokesman made clear that the pope would not receive any foreign dignitary during this international meeting, because there would not be time to do justice to all of them.

The theme of this year’s 14th Islamic-Catholic Liaison Committee Meeting, which took place June 11-13, 2008, in the Vatican was “Christians and Muslims as wit-

234 TRENDS AND CONFERENCES nesses of God’s justice, of peace and compassion in a world which suffers from violence.” The meeting which was steered from the Vatican side by Cardinal Jean-Louis Tauran, President of the Papal Council for Interreligious Dialogue and from the Muslim side by Hamid bin Ahmad Al-Rifaie, President of the Inter- national Islamic Forum for Dialogue. Pope Benedict XVI received the participants for a brief meeting. The meeting concluded with a statement that listed the agreements between the two partners in five points: 1) From the inherent dignity of each human being stem fundamental rights and du- ties. 2) Justice is a priority in our world. It requires … the respect of the fundamental needs of individuals and peoples through an attitude of love, fraternity and solidarity. There can be no true and lasting peace without justice. 3) Peace is a gift of God and also requires the commitment of all human beings, and particularly of believers, who are called to be vigilant witnesses to peace in a world affected by violence in many forms. 4) Christians and Muslims believe that God is compassionate and therefore consider it their duty to show compassion towards every human person, especially the needy and the weak. 5) Religions, if authentically practiced, effectively contribute promoting bro- therhood and harmony in the human family.

Problems in Christian-Muslim Dialogue In Malaysia, Islamist circles are harassing other religious communities by impos- ing their judgement of what is and is not acceptable for non-Muslim groups. They are convinced that Islam is the best of all religions and the fulfilment of the revelation that Allah has given humankind. They feel entitled to prescribe for members of other religious traditions which elements in their traditions have to be changed and abandoned, because they run counter to the understanding and inter- pretation of God’s revelation in Islam. Thus, Christians are forbidden to refer to God as “Allah” in their prayers, because “Allah” is the true name of God, re- served only for Muslim use. The Muslims in Malaysia simply refuse to accept the historical and linguistic facts that Christians and other people in the Arab-speaking world were using the name “Allah” in their prayers long before Islam arose and Muhammad had received any revelation. This holds true especially for Arabic Christians who have been using and are still using “Allah” as the name for God in their prayers. Samir Khalil, an Egyptian Jesuit working in Lebanon, has col- lected a huge library of Arabic Christian texts, preceding the origin of Islam, in which “Allah” is used to refer to God. Malaysian radical Muslims are unwilling to accept these facts and insist that the Christians refrain from using “Allah” in their prayers and publications.

235 STUDIES IN INTERRELIGIOUS DIALOGUE 18 (2008) 2

The prohibition against using terms of Arabic origin extends beyond the use of “Allah” to other religious concepts, such as nabi when speaking of prophets, injil as a reference to the Gospel and other such terms. Some radical diehards recently went further. Malay Christians returning from an overseas trip had religious books confiscated by Malaysian customs officers, because the books contained pictures of prophets venerated by Christians and by Muslims alike. The custom officers argued that Muhammad, after all, is the “seal of all prophets” and Islam the religion that respects all prophets, beginning with Adam through Abraham (Ibrahim), Moses (Musa) right up to Jesus (Isa). Therefore, the prohibition against depicting the image of any of these prophets should be respected by Christians as well. Af- ter the Christians protested to the Malaysian government, the Ministry of the In- terior ordered that the books be returned. But the underlying issue, namely that Christians have to respect Islamic restrictions on reproducing images of people, saints and prophets, points to a danger that threatens the very foundation of interreligious dialogue and the co-existence of people of different faiths. It would mean in the end that Christians would no longer be allowed to possess any picture of Jesus or any other holy persons.

In Denmark, the episode of the caricatures (cartoons) of the Prophet Muhammad is still far from over. One of the cartoonists of these caricatures received several death threats at the beginning of 2008 from Muslim extremists. The Danish police arrested three Muslims living in Denmark who were accused of having plotted to assassinate one of the cartoonists. Out of protest against this attempt several Dan- ish newspapers and journals decided in February 2008 to reprint the caricatures of the Prophet Muhammad in order to demonstrate that freedom of expression is still guaranteed in Denmark and that they were not prepared to give in to Muslim threats. This action provoked some young Muslim immigrants into burning schools and other public buildings. There were also renewed attacks against Dan- ish institutions abroad. A Danish government group cancelled a trip to Iran, because they refused to meet the demand by the Iranian side to condemn publicly the republishing of the caricatures. This episode again shows the sensitivity in Muslim circles to true or alleged insults or slurs against the Prophet Muhammad, against Islam in general or the sharia.

On March 27, 2008, in the Netherlands, the right-wing politician and member of the Dutch Parliament, Geert Wilders, released his film Fitna (Arabic for “disa- greement” or “division among people”) with the aim of showing the violent side of radical Islamist groups. Already before the release of the 15-minute film there was a controversial debate in the Netherlands on the issue if Wilders should be stopped. Many feared that Muslims all over the world would react with strong protests not only against the author but against the Dutch and Dutch products in general. The version finally released showed selected verses from the Qur’an, presented scenes of terrorist attacks in New York, Madrid and London and the

236 TRENDS AND CONFERENCES murder of the Dutch film maker Theo Van Gogh, and reproduced threats against critics of Islam. Radical Muslim clerics were shown who preach hate and propa- gate violence against all infidels, especially Jews and Christians. International re- action to the film was mostly negative. Critics condemned the film for presenting only a one-sided picture of Islam and thus poisoning the relationship between the two religions. The Dutch government distanced itself from the film but did not stop its release. Various Dutch individuals filed official complaints against the film but the Dutch ministry of justice did not see sufficient evidence that any laws had been violated and did not pursue the issue.

In the United Kingdom, the proposal by Archbishop Rowan Williams of Canter- bury to introduce some elements of sharia regulations into British law caused a storm of resistance and objections. The proposal was made in a speech and in several interviews with the BBC in February 2008. Archbishop Williams argued that a partial introduction of sharia regarding e.g. marital law and other civil matters in the United Kingdom, would bolster social peace and harmony and, at the same time, simply recognize and legalize the already existing situation today. The archbishop argued that the principle that “every citizen should be under the rule of uniform law” was no longer tenable and therefore, the recognition of separate sharia law for Muslims living in the UK should be seen as “unavoidable.” Arch- bishop Williams responded to the nearly universal negative criticism of his proposal by clarifying that he did not intend to propose introducing sharia regulations that discriminate against other people nor the application of penal laws that man- date the death penalty for apostasy or that thieves’ hands be cut off. His proposal was simply intended to point out the existing conflicts between civil law in the UK and diverging cultures and religious beliefs in order to “explore the limits of unitary and secular legal system in the presence of an increasingly plural— including religiously plural—society.” In no way was his proposal aimed at introducing a parallel juridical system in the UK or at negating basic human rights.

In an interview with the BBC, the Anglican Archbishop Ben Kwashi of Jos in northern Nigeria stated that he and his people were shocked at the fact that an An- glican archbishop was calling for the introduction of sharia law. Kwashi called the situation of the Christian churches in northern Nigeria, where sharia law is operative, “simply unbearable.” Other commentators pointed out that introducing sharia law, even only partially, would strengthen the already existing trend that a parallel Islamic society was developing in the UK. The fact that nearly half of all the Muslims in the UK are controlled by the hard-line Islamic sect, the so- called Deobandi, should be seen as an indication of what would happen if sharia law was made applicable in the UK. After all, the leading preacher of this group, Riyadh ul Haq, supports armed jihad and preaches contempt for Jews, Christians and Hindus.

237 STUDIES IN INTERRELIGIOUS DIALOGUE 18 (2008) 2

It came as a surprise when Archbishop Rowan Williams found a supporter of his position in July 2008 in none other than the Lord Chief Justice Nicolas Phillips. In an interview with the BBC the most senior judge in England argued that Islamic legal principles of the sharia could be used to deal with family and marital arguments and to regulate financial matters. Even if Lord Phillips excluded the application of sharia regulations such as flogging or the amputations of hands, his advocacy of applying them to arrange cases of mediation and to arrive at resolutions in interpersonal disputes met with strong criticism from many sides. The British Ministry of Justice declared that English law takes precedence over any other legal system and that the government did not intend to change this. Even Muslims spoke against this position, because it would lead to a division in society and would segregate and alienate the Muslim community from the rest of British society.

Controversy concerning the Baptism of a Muslim Convert by Pope Benedict XVI During the liturgical celebration of the Easter Vigil in St. Peter’s on March 23, 2008, Pope Benedict XVI personally administered baptism to five catechumens, among whom was the Egyptian-born Muslim journalist and vice-director of the Italian newspaper Corriere della Sera, Magdi Allam. The baptism of a Muslim during a liturgy presided over by the pope and administered by him in person, was a highly visible event that drew many comments in the media. In an open letter to Paolo Mieli, the director of the Corriere della Sera, Magdi Allam explained that his conversion was the outcome of a long personal development that, through the years, had led him to leave Islam and to accept the Christian faith. Among the many motives that led to this step, Magdi Allam cited the example of Benedict XVI who, in a masterly fashion, had explained the indissoluble link between faith and reason as a basis for an authentic religion and human civilization.

Magdi Allam complained that his conversion prompted radical Muslims to threat- en to kill him as an apostate from Islam. He called for an end of the abuse and the violence perpetrated by Muslims who do not respect the freedom of the individual person to choose his or her religious adherence freely. At the same time he lauded Benedict XVI for his courage in administering the baptism in public and thus de- viating from the otherwise common practice that converts from Islam to Chris- tianity are forced to hide their conversion out of fear of being assassinated by Is- lamic extremists. Before his conversion Magdi Allam had written an article entitled “The New Catacombs of Islamic Converts,” published on September 3, 2003, in which he described the spiritual and human solitude Islamic converts to Christianity experience, because they are not protected by the state institutions and by the Church which keeps silent about the abuses of religious freedom with regard to these converts. Magdi Allam ended with the rhetorical question: “If in Italy, in our home, the cradle of Catholicism, we are not prepared to guarantee

238 TRENDS AND CONFERENCES complete religious freedom to everyone, how can we ever be credible when we denounce the violation of this freedom elsewhere in the world?”

The media later raised the question whether Pope Benedict actually knew he was baptizing a Muslim and thus deliberately made this gesture or did not know the identity of the catechumens presented to him during the liturgy and thus was una- ware that one of them was a convert from Islam. Connected with this question was the speculation that there are forces in the Vatican that are against progress in Christian-Muslim dialogue and therefore try to put obstacles in its course. Be that as it may, the incident of this individual conversion of a Muslim to Christian- ity brings to the fore the general problem of conversion in the context of interreligious dialogue between Christians and Muslims. On the one hand, it must be taken for granted that those engaging in interreligious dialogue never intend to convert any of the partners in dialogue to their own belief. But at the same time interreligious dialogue should not be considered to be “a conservative principle,” ex- cluding all forms of change and development among the partners in dialogue. As Joseph Ratzinger stated, when he was writing about interreligious dialogue several years ago, partners in dialogue should enter into dialogue on the principle of respecting the “otherness of the other,” but even when respecting this principle, the freedom that the other might change his position, even convert to another religion, should not be excluded. It is obvious that for the conversion of Muslims to another religious tradition is always considered to be an act of apostasy and never an exercise of the religious freedom each individual person can claim as unaliena- ble human right. After all, Muslims consider Islam the best of all religions, and therefore, turning away from the fullness of truth found in Islam is seen as equiv- alent to taking up some lesser form of religious tradition. In short, conversion from Islam is always considered to be sinful and condemned as an illicit use of religious freedom. On the other hand, conversion to Islam from Christianity, or from any other religion, is welcomed because Islam is God’s ultimate revelation after all. In France between 150-200 Muslims convert to Christianity and become Ca- tholics every year, mostly as children of mixed marriages. The number of converts to Islam, however, is much higher and lies between 3,500-4,000 annually, according to the French daily La Croix.

Buddhist-Christian Dialogue In the annual message to Buddhists on the occasion of the Feast of Vesak, which was celebrated by the 350 million Buddhists on May 12, 2008, Cardinal Jean- Louis Tauran, President of the Pontifical Council for Interreligious Dialogue, had chosen as his theme “Harbingers of Hope for a Clean and Harmonious World,” calling the concern for the environment a common task and challenge for Bud- dhists and Christians alike. In the beginning of his letter, Cardinal Tauran took a look at the development of Buddhist-Christian dialogue over the years by stating that steady progress in mutual understanding can be observed. With regard to the

239 STUDIES IN INTERRELIGIOUS DIALOGUE 18 (2008) 2 issue of conserving nature and working for a good environment he stated that Buddhism and Christianity have always upheld a great respect for nature and taught that we should be grateful stewards of the earth. On the practical level, he said that Buddhists and Christians can do more to collaborate in projects which confirm the common responsibility to preserve the human habitat. As concrete common projects, the letter proposed collaboration in recycling, energy conserva- tion, the prevention of indiscriminate destruction of plant and animal life, and the protection of waterways.

The same topic was treated during the third Buddhist-Catholic encounter, spon- sored by the organization Monastic Interreligious Dialogue (MID), held at Geth- semane Abbey in Kentucky, May 27-31, 2008. More than forty participants, most of them monks and nuns of both religions living in the USA, gathered to reflect and share with one another the wisdom concerning ecological questions in their respective traditions. Monastic Interreligious Dialogue (MID) is an organization of Benedictine and Trappist monks and nuns committed to fostering interreligious and intermonastic dialogue between women and men from different religious traditions. In the final statement the participants stated that today humankind is living in a time of environmental crisis and calamity, but also in a time when more and more people are coming together to respond to the suffering of the world. In their monastic interreligious dialogue the participants have been brought to a new awareness of the social and spiritual relevance of the ancient monastic traditions that have been sustained for millennia by Buddhist and Christian communities. Together they appreciated anew the common monastic values of reverence for the sacredness of all things, contemplation, humility, simplicity, compassion and gen- erosity. These virtues contribute to a life of non-violence, balance, and content- ment with sufficiency. At the same time they acknowledged their complicity in damaging the environment and promise to make efforts to reduce making a negative impact on the planet. The statement concluded with a renewal of their commitment to the sacredness of the earth, relating to it as a community, not a com- modity.

Local Dialogue Activities in Asian Countries Thirty-four young Buddhists, Catholics and Hindus, aged between 18 and 35 years, from Nepal, Sri Lanka and Pakistan spent a week living together in the Buddhist monastery Amarapura Buddha Vihar in Bungamati, Nepal, from 9 to16 October 2007, to engage in intercultural and interreligious dialogue. This was organized by the International Inter-Religious Federation for World Peace. The young people visited several religious places such as the Jama Masjid mosque, the Assumption Catholic Church, a Hindu religious school Vidyapeeth, and Ananda Kuli Vihar, a Buddhist temple in or in the vicinity of Kathmandu. During their stay together, the participants took part in common activities such as yoga exer-

240 TRENDS AND CONFERENCES cises in the morning and doing manual labour by helping in the construction of a community hall for underprivileged children.

In Indonesia the cooperation of young people of different religious groups in the fields of politics, development and peace has a long history, going back to times of Dutch colonial rule. In October 1928 young people from different religions vowed to work for the national good of Indonesia. The so-called Youth Pledge stated: “We, the youth of Indonesia, declare that we have one nation, Indonesia. We, the youth of Indonesia, have one motherland, Indonesia. We, the youth of Indonesia, have one language, Bahasa Indonesia.” In October 2007 leaders of eight organizations for university students of various religions commemorated this historic youth pledge by committing themselves to a new spirit of unity and social solidarity in the context of today’s Indonesia where the value of unity is threatened. The group of the eight students organizations, known as Cipayung group, was founded in 1973. Under the motto “Together we can!” the group works with various elements in society to improve solidarity. At the commemoration meeting it was noted that unity and dialogue are needed today, because the spirit of na- tionalism has faded due to factionalism and individualism. The young people spoke out against the passing of local bylaws, introducing sharia law in certain communities, thus violating the national constitution and threatening the unity in the country.

Another interreligious activity undertaken by young people from Islam and Chris- tianity took place in Kaliurang in Indonesia, April 12-14, 2008. Organized by the Indonesian Youth Network (JPI) more than thirty young people from various religious organizations took part in the campaign called “tree adoption.” Among the other organizations and communities represented at the workshop were the Fra- ternal Forum of Religious Believers of Yogyakarta, Indonesian Committee on Re- ligions for Peace, Centre for Environment Study of the University of Gadjah Mada in Yogyakarta, and the Natural Environment Board of Muhammadiyah, the country’s second-largest Muslim organization. The aim of the conference was to make the young people aware of the danger that indiscriminate logging in the In- donesian archipelago will seriously and permanently damage the environment. The conference participants were instructed on how to conduct local campaigns in order to protect, for example, big trees on farm land or to engage in tree plant- ing activities. In addition to the environment issue, the workshop also dealt with the problem of poverty. There is a certain connection between the two topics, because the destruction of the environment is affecting the lower strata in society first and is thus a cause of poverty.

There are several interreligious activities on the local level in India, often in response to previous religiously or ethnically motivated quarrels and fights. One of these activities is the Interreligious Forum to Promote Harmony in Raipur, the

241 STUDIES IN INTERRELIGIOUS DIALOGUE 18 (2008) 2 capital of Chhattisgarh. The forum, called “Sadbhavna Manch,” or “Goodwill Forum” was formed in October 2004 after some radicals burned thousands of Bi- bles, in order to restore peace in the community and promote understanding and harmony. Since then the member groups have worked together to respond to chal- lenges and to deal with problems threatening the solidarity and the welfare in the community. Thus, the forum helped people affected by the tsunami that hit south- ern India in December 2004. In February 2008 the members of the Goodwill For- um took up the local issue of pollution of the environment due to the production and use of polythene, a lightweight plastic used in packaging consumer products. The campaign resulted in action by the state government of Chhattisgar banning the production of thin polythene. The local Catholic Church is a member of the forum. The parish priest, Father Francis, declared that the forum has brought together important people of all religions in the town. It has helped that the Catholic Church became active in the community, leaving its ghetto mentality behind and establishing better relations with members of other religions. People of different religions now participate in each others religious festivities. Since the forum was formed incidences of communal strife have diminished. The successful work of Sadbhavna Manch has inspired other neighbouring communities to form similar interreligious organizations.

242