Interreligious Dialogue in Bosnia-Herzegovina1

MILAN KOSTRESEVIC

No peace among nations without peace among religions. No peace among religions without dialogue between religions. No dialogue between religions without research into their foundations. Hans Küng, Declaration Toward a Global Ethic, 1990

Introduction This article outlines and discusses the results of interreligious dialogue in Bos- nia-Herzegovina following the 1992-1995 war. To provide appropriate con- textual background, I will first discuss the historical background of the late 20th- century war, then provide an overview of relevant census data and analyse the founding of the Interreligious Council which comprises four representatives of the two Christian churches, together with two from the Muslim and two from the Jewish community. It is the activities and working groups of the Council which carry on the work of post-war reconciliation and allied interreligious dialogue. Accordingly, an analysis of the activities and projects of the Council and provides an overview and insight into challenges and tasks that are presently faced.

Historical Background Prior to the Late 20th-Century War Dialogue between different religions, which has recently faced major challenges and questions, has in recent years found an oasis of peace and a potential for progress in Bosnia-Herzegovina. Bosnia-Herzegovina is a country that is a model and good example of ecumenism and interreligious dialogue. The three monotheistic religions (Christianity, Islam, and Judaism) have been living there side by side for centuries (Wettach-Zeitz 2008: 110). Freedom of religion is formally confirmed and guaranteed under the Constitution (Art. 2, § 3G).

A pluralist society, it is not only in the last 25 years that Bosnia-Herzegovina has seen conflict between different religious and ethnic groups. Such conflicts actually extend far back into the past and sometimes had a tendency to escalate. Ever since the conquest of Bosnia-Herzegovina by the Ottomans in the 15th century,2 and the ensuing powerful process of Islamisation, the population adhering

1 Translated from the German by Hector Davie, Bern. 2 Despite numerous protests, the Ottomans finally conquered the territory in the year 1463. Thus began the forceful Islamisation of the population. See Koller 2012.

203 STUDIES IN INTERRELIGIOUS DIALOGUE 26 (2016) 2 to Islam has been growing steadily. At the beginning of the 19th century, it was observed that the government leaned more towards the Roman Catholic than the Serbian Orthodox Church (Samic 1960: 112). The reason for this was probably the recognition of the revolt against Ottoman imperialism as a clearly Serbian and Orthodox movement.3 By contrast, the state authorities did not see any threat from the Roman Catholic Church or could not conceive of an alliance of the Church with the ‘atheist’ First Empire of Napoleon I (Malcolm 1994: 98). How- ever, there was not only a cleft between two religions, Christianity and Islam. Relations between two great Christian churches, the Orthodox and the Roman Catholic, were also very tense, for Orthodox and Catholic clergy often agitated on behalf of competing national interests (Andric 1994: 53-54). In the event, relations between Muslims and Christians greatly deteriorated in the second half of the 19th century with the interests of Christians in the country represented by the diplomatic delegates of Russia and Austria-Hungary.

During the period of Austro-Hungarian rule, the emperor received from the Or- thodox Patriarch in Constantinople and the Pope the right to elect new Orthodox bishops. In 1882, the Muslims founded an independent hierarchy. The emperor had elected the head of the community, the Reis-ul-ulema, who was also the President of the Islamic Council. The Roman Catholic Church experienced more positive developments than the other two communities. In the capital Sarajevo, for instance, the new Catholic cathedral was expanded and all four Catholic dioceses gained considerable benefits. Even if relations between the leaders of the different religions and confessions were not always close, this is not necessarily true of the laity. An American journalist who visited Bosnia in 1902 testifies: “The members of the various creeds live together on a friendly basis, showing mutual respect and tolerance; the courts are wise and honest, justice is guaranteed to every citizen, without regard to confession or social standing” (Curtis 1903: 257).

However, ecumenical and interreligious relations deteriorated so much during the Second World War that one can clearly talk of a collapse in communications between the churches and the religious communities. The main reason can be found in long-standing struggles and battles between Croatian Ustaše, Serbian Četniks, and the partisan movement under the leadership of Tito. For this reason, contact between the Orthodox and the Roman Catholic Churches seemed almost

3 Particularly important here is the Serbian revolution against the Ottomans (1804- 1835), which ended in the adoption of the Candlemas Constitution (Sretenjski Ustav), so-called because of its signing at Candlemas, the Feast of the Presentation of Christ in the Temple, in 1835.

204 INTERRELIGIOUS DIALOGUE IN BOSNIA-HERZEGOVINA impossible after the end of WW II for political and historical reasons.4 The posi- tion of the religious communities during the atheistic communist regime of Tito and, in particular, the relationship between Croats and Serbs in the Second World War have created great difficulties for establishing contacts and for possible dialogue.5

Nevertheless, a turning point in ecumenical and interreligious relations came with the implementation of the theological content of the Second Vatican Coun- cil, in particular the conciliar documents Orientalium Ecclesiarum and Nostra Aetate (Wettach-Zeitz 2008: 111). The response of the Roman Catholic Church at the Second Vatican Council (1962-1965) to global modernisation processes as well as to the spread of communism was of central importance for the insti- gation of ecumenical discussion between Rome and Constantinople at the global level as well as at the local level between the Serbian Orthodox Church and Roman Catholic Church in Croatia (cf. also Byrnes 2001). The goal in the im- provement of relations between the two Christian churches was the “strengthen- ing of the universal Catholic Church through the unity of the Christian churches” (Wettach-Zeitz 2008: 111).

After the decision of the Yugoslav Bishops’ Conference to establish a new com- mission for ecumenical dialogue, which was simply a positive reaction to the already established path of the two churches. In the event, many projects, study days, visits, and to some extent ecumenical prayers, got under way (Bremer 2003: 66). In the period between the Second Vatican Council and the 1991-1995 war in Yugoslavia, relations between three religions and two Christian denomin-

4 Conflicts at that time between the two Christian churches are still a serious problem in communication and, above all, in the understanding of the role of Cardinal Alojzije Stepinac (1898-1960), who was beatified as a martyr in 1998. The movement of the Croatian clergy to canonise Cardinal Stepinac as a saint in the Roman Catholic Church (which has still not been successful) has met with strong opposition in the Serbian Orthodox Church. 5 In the Serbian Orthodox Church, the Roman Catholic Church was seen as a ‘stir- rup-holder’ for the Croatian-Ustaša regime because it had been silent on the persecution, expulsion, and murder of Orthodox Serbs or had even profited from forced conversions. The fact that before the Second Vatican Council the Roman Catholic Church had regarded Orthodoxy as a mission field gave weight to the reproaches of the Serbian Orthodox Church. The Croatian Fascists had murdered 217 of the 577 Serbian Orthodox priests in Croatia and Bosnia and expelled 344 to Serbia. About 400 Serbian Orthodox churches were destroyed.

205 STUDIES IN INTERRELIGIOUS DIALOGUE 26 (2016) 2 ations in Bosnia-Herzegovina had improved, as they did in the whole of Yu- goslavia.6 Various initiatives arose, for example at the ‘grassroots’ local level of individual clergy as well as at a high academic level where there were joint conferences and discussions. In numerous documents the Yugoslav government as- serted that relations among the two Christian churches and three religions were flourishing and constantly improving from the 1960s onwards (Perica 2001: 42). Through mutual visits of heads of churches and religious communities, and open participation in each other’s feast and festivals, a better relationship developed, and not just among the representatives of the religious communities.7 The Yugo- slav government reports documenting the mutual support of churches and religious communities in construction projects, various renovations, and cultural projects, sometimes even organising themselves together, are well known (Bremer 2003: 69). Even at the academic level, some ecumenical and interreligious initiatives have developed since the beginning of the 1960s. Between 1964 and 1990, there were many ecumenical symposia held every two years, especially in Belgrade, Zagreb, Ljubljana, and Sarajevo (Perica 2001: 44). Aca- demic contributions to these symposia were generally published and testify to the exchange of theological knowledge. These documents, however, also illus- trate the fact that “people often talked at each other, not to each other” (Bremer 2003: 69), and there was a lack of serious mutual acceptance of theological con- clusions and research. After the end of the Bosnian war (1992-1995), ecumenical conversations were only revived through the mediation of international agen- cies. In consequence, the Interreligious Council of Bosnia-Herzegovina was founded in 1997.

Census Statistics At the first census in Bosnia-Herzegovina in 1879, the country had 1,158,164 inhabitants. Of these, 496,485 (42.88%) were Orthodox Christians, 448,613 (38.73%) Muslims, 209.391 (18.08%) Roman Catholic Christians, 3,426

6 On this, T. Wettach-Zeitz asserts (2008: 111): “The first ecumenical prayers in Split in 1966 were a driving force in the initially purely ecumenical movement in Yugo- slavia. Although ecumenical prayer in Split was not continued, it was the beginning of a series of different forms of interreligious co-operation in the six republics.” 7 The best known example of the very good relations between the representatives of the Serbian Orthodox and Roman Catholic Churches were the two bishops of Banja Luka in northern Bosnia, nowadays the capital of the Serbian Republic. The Serbian Orthodox Bishop Dr. Andrej Frusic (1916-1986) and the Roman Catholic Bishop Dr. Alfred Pichler (1913-1992) were a model of good relations. The seats of the two dioceses are practically in one garden. During the time of the two bishops it was quite normal and usual that not only the clergy but also all the faithful to visit each other and pray together. The powerful earthquake in Banja Luka on 27 October 1969 completely destroyed the Roman Catholic cathedral. With the permission of Bishop Andrej, Catholics were always able to celebrate their services in the Orthodox Cathedral.

206 INTERRELIGIOUS DIALOGUE IN BOSNIA-HERZEGOVINA

(0.29%) Jews, and 249 (0.02%) others.8 The changes shown by the censuses in Bosnia-Herzegovina during the 20th century and the beginning of the 21st have been quite large. The Serbs (who traditionally belong to the Serbian Orthodox Church) were a relative majority, with 42.89% of the entire population until 1961. The proportion of Muslims (who were referred to as Bosniaks for the first time in the census of October 2013) was 25.69%, and that of Croats 21.71%. The third monotheistic religion, Judaism, was always a small minority in Bos- nia-Herzegovina, with a relatively good infrastructure within society. In 1961 it numbered 381 or 0.01% of the population. In the last census before the Bosnian War in 1991, 43.47% Muslims, 31.21% Serbs and 17.38% Croatians lived in the country. Jews again accounted for 0.01% of the population.

The most recent census was carried out in Bosnia-Herzegovina in October 2013. According to the Bosnia-Herzegovinan Statistics Agency, 3,718,785 people live in the country. Because of various political obstructions, there are still (two years later) no other results issued from this census. The Agency estimates that the country’s inhabitants are made of 49.1% Bosniaks, 34.1% Serbs, 13.9% Croats, and 2.9% others.9 Ethnically homogenous regions are another product of the war. Until 1992, the whole population was heavily mixed, or there was no rule as to which city the adherents of which religion or nation mostly lived in.

The Founding of the Interreligious Council The international representatives of the World Conference of Religions for Peace tried to establish the Interreligious Council of Bosnia-Herzegovina from 1993 onwards after the outbreak of the war in Bosnia-Herzegovina. “However, these first attempts at mediation failed because of a lack of willingness to co-operate with the religious leaders” (Wettach-Zeitz 2008: 137). As early as 1994, the heads of the churches and religious communities comprising the Metropolitan of Zagreb, Cardinal Franjo Kuharic, the Serbian Patriarch Pavle, and Grand Mufti Mustafa Ceric, under the mediation of the Russian Patriarch Aleksey, met in an attempt to inform the public that the war must cease and that all representatives of the religions stood for this (Powers 1996: 22). After the war, the churches and religious communities in Bosnia-Herzegovina decided to engage themselves in civil organisations, for example, through the establishment of the Interreligious Council (IRC) in 1997 and the establishment of the Interreligious Institute (IRI) in 2007 (Brajovic 2007: 198-99). Both organisations were sup- ported by the four traditional churches and religious communities in Bosnia- Herzegovina: the Catholic and the Orthodox Church and the Jewish and the Is- lamic communities. The initiative for the founding of both organisations came

8 Demografija, Tematski bilten 02/2007, Agencija za statistiku Bosne i Herce- govine, Sarajevo, 2007. 9 http://www.statistika.ba/?show=7&id=62 (accessed on 20 August 2015).

207 STUDIES IN INTERRELIGIOUS DIALOGUE 26 (2016) 2 from outside, however. The Council was inaugurated and for a long time sup- ported by the World Conference of Religions for Peace (WCRP) (Brajovic 2007: 201). The institute was founded on the initiative of the late Bishop Homeyer. By way of a joint statement, issued immediately after the foundation of the Council straight after the war, the representatives of the churches and religious com- munities10 sent a strong signal and a message of reconciliation.11 The aim of the statement was make clear to all in society that the people of Bosnia-Herzegovina had suffered greatly in the war, but that the war was over and that it was now time to establish a lasting peace based on truth, justice, and cohabitation. This declaration also condemned all forms of violence against innocent persons and the violation of human rights. In particular, the following were condemned:  hate campaigns directed against representatives of other ethnicities and religions  preventing or hindering the return of people to their country  acts of revenge  and the misuse of media with the aim of spreading hate.12 At this time, and also today, it was important that the religious leaders met regu- larly and acted together in public, which sends a clear signal, and the council is also known for such. However, the heads of state also interceded with poli- ticians, ministries, and international conferences, on behalf of the Council and thus ensured funding for the Council. The Council has made a major contri- bution to the creation of the Law of Religious Freedom and to the legal status of churches and religious communities. It also draws up an annual report on the state of the right to freedom of belief.13

In addition to such activities, for many years, an exchange has been organised between theological students of the four theological faculties,14 and the youth

10 This statement was signed in the name of their churches and religious communities by the following representatives: Grand Mufti Mustafa Ceric, Serbian Orthodox Metropolitan of Dabar and Bosnia Nikolaj Mrdja, President of the Roman Catholic Bish- ops’ Conference in Bosnia and Herzegovina and the Metropolitan of Sarajevo Cardinal Vinko Puljic, and the President of the Jewish Community Jacob Finci. 11 The authenticity of the statement was confirmed by three political representatives of the three peoples, three members of the Presidium of Bosnia-Herzegovina, Alija Izetbegovic, Momcilo Krajisnik, and Kresimir Zubak. 12 “Statement of Shared Moral Commitment,” www.mrv.ba 13 In the original: “Izvještaj o stanju prava na slobodu vjere”; also found at: www.mrv.ba 14 The Orthodox Theological Faculty of the University of East Sarajevo in Foca, the Faculty of Islamic Sciences in Sarajevo, the Catholic Theological Faculty in Sarajevo,

208 INTERRELIGIOUS DIALOGUE IN BOSNIA-HERZEGOVINA group of the Council organises humanitarian actions, distributes parcels to children’s homes, and, more recently, it has organised interreligious seminars for pupils at middle schools. The Council is also an important contact point for re- searchers from all over the world and for study visits. However, the question arises whether, given its assured finances, the Council could not have achieved more in its 14 years. The few projects that have been carried out have rarely been publicised in the media, so the public perception of the Council is strongly linked to that of the profiles of the religious leaders; the Council’s projects themselves are largely unknown.

Overall, the work of the IRC is laborious—everything has to be endorsed or blessed ‘from above,’ which slows down the decision-making processes and keeps efficiency low. As Annedore Wilmes15 reports, a series of respondents in various interviews clearly stated that they regard the IRC as an instrument that allows them to remain at a distance from each other without being openly crit- icised, and that in this ‘religious policy’ similar dynamics can be observed to those operative in daily national politics. The Council itself does not seem to have a clear strategy even though it works at the highest level, i.e., of the religious leaders, as well as at the grassroots level, such as at the seminars for middle school students. In addition, it carries out humanitarian actions like, for example, distributing support packages to children’s homes. But what it is not doing is launching any truly critical debate.

Organisation and Working Groups of the Interreligious Council The Interreligious Council of Bosnia-Herzegovina has four members, the four representatives of the four religious communities. In 2015, the members are: Mufti Husejin ef. Smajic of the Islamic community, the Serbian Orthodox Bishop of Zahumlje and Herzegovina Grigory Duric, the Roman Catholic Bish- op of Sarajevo Cardinal Vinko Puljic, and Jakob Finci, the President of the Jew- ish Community. Each year, a new President of the Council is elected from among the four members.

An Executive Committee with four members was also established for the co- ordination and implementation of the various projects. The Interreligious Council also has four working groups:  Working Group of Legal Experts (founded in May 1999) and the Theological Faculty of the Franciscans in Sarajevo. The Jews do not have their own educational institute. 15 Annedore Wilmes is a researcher at the University of Edinburgh who has dealt particularly with the question of the establishment of peace and dialogue in Bosnia-Her- zegovina.

209 STUDIES IN INTERRELIGIOUS DIALOGUE 26 (2016) 2

 Working Group for Religious Education (founded in March 2002)  Working Group for Youth (established in September 2003)  Working Group for Women (established in April 2003) Working Group for Religious Education One of the first impressions from the statements and official documents of the IRC is that the traditional religious communities in Bosnia-Herzegovina share the opinion that the right to religious freedom in the area of religious education in Bosnia-Herzegovina is in fact not, or is only partially, guaranteed. However, the right to religious education in primary and secondary schools is indeed guaranteed by the central government in Article 9 of the Education Act. The law emphasises that students who choose this subject are not to suffer from any discrimination. But despite this legal guarantee and despite many efforts not only by the Interreligious Council as well as the competent ministries of education,16 there is no uniform religious instruction. Although it is quite often discussed in Bosnia-Herzegovina, there is the impression that there are no teaching staff available for such a project. In spite of a general school reform in 2003, the OSCE has not excluded the possibility of discrimination against pupils from minority religious communities (Perica 2001: 185). Within the framework of the school reform co-ordinated and implemented by the OSCE, the members of the Interreligious Council, with considerable help from the WCRP office, pressed for a guarantee of confessionally-bound religious instruction. In November 2000, the Council clearly rejected the OSCE’s proposed program for a cross- confessional teaching subject.17 The Interreligious Council was only willing to accept the newly proposed subject with the guarantee that confessional religious instruction would remain the same as before. At the same time, the WCRP also co-operated with the German Friedrich Naumann Foundation in Potsdam, organising several talks, conferences, and presentations in Sarajevo, Banja Lu- ka, Tuzla, and Mostar. The clerics of the various churches and religious communities, as well as the experts who attended these conferences and seminars,

16 There have been several ministries of education in Bosnia-Herzegovina and there is no common ministry that could solve the problems in general. The Serbian Re- public has the right to a Ministry of Education as well as all the cantons in the Federation of Bosnia-Herzegovina. The Federation of Bosnia-Herzegovina also has a Ministry of Education that coordinates the work of the cantonal ministries of education. 17 According to the OSCE proposal, the subject would be called ‘Religious Cul- ture.’

210 INTERRELIGIOUS DIALOGUE IN BOSNIA-HERZEGOVINA were unanimously in favour of an alignment of the education system at a national level.18 They voted for denominational religious education19 and advocated the idea of religious instruction as an integral part of the right to freedom of religion.20

Religious education, which would be denominationally based, should ultimately be introduced across all parts of Bosnia-Herzegovina in primary and secondary schools. The conference participants also discussed the question of whether the non-confessional subject ‘Religious Culture,’ based on religious science, should be introduced compulsorily for all pupils, or which of the two subjects should be declared compulsory or optional.21 In addition, questions also arose as to the educational content of the proposed ‘Religious Culture’ curriculum. The pro- posals presented at the conferences have ranged from co-operation with major social and political institutions, NGOs and religious communities22 to the au- tonomy of the religious communities in determining the curriculum.23 Questions of teacher training and the design of the textbooks, a major technical challenge, were also raised and discussed.24

For the foregoing reasons, the religious education group was established and set up in March 2002. The most important task with which the group was to deal was to draft a joint program for common and non-denominational religious education in state schools. One of the first tasks of this group was the drafting of a common textbook for the two Christian confessions and the two other religions (Roman Catholic, Orthodox, Muslim and Jewish). The group is still actively seeking a way to present the individual religious communities. Working Group of Legal Experts In addition to the religious education group, the ‘Legal Experts’ group is also part of the Interreligious Council of Bosnia-Herzegovina. This working group was founded in 1999 because members of the Council felt discriminated against.

18 Statement of the Round Table on the Subject of Religious Education in the Edu- cational System of B-H, Mostar, 2000, p.1. 19 “Religious Communities and Democracy at the Beginning of the 21st Century,” Conference on Religious Instruction in the Educational System in Bosnia-Herzegovina, Concluding document, Mostar, 2001, p.2. 20 “Religious Communities and Democracy,” p. 3. 21 Conference on Religious Communities and Democracy in B-H at the Beginning of the 21st Century, Banja Luka, 2000, p. 3. 22 Statement of the Round Table, 2000, p. 1. 23 “Religious Communities and Democracy,” p. 1. 24 “Religious Communities and Democracy,” p. 3.

211 STUDIES IN INTERRELIGIOUS DIALOGUE 26 (2016) 2

Members of churches and religious communities in areas where they were a minority all had a similar feeling. At the time of the founding of the working group, the law on religious communities was still valid. This constitution of the So- cialist Republic of Bosnia-Herzegovina guaranteed, in accordance with the Yu- goslav constitution,25 a fundamental freedom of religion as a private matter for every citizen, under the condition of a secular state. The same law strictly pro- hibited any misuse of religion for political purposes. However, any political activity of the churches and religious communities was described as unconsti- tutional. The clergy of all religious communities were forbidden to engage in individual political activity.26 Although the constitution of Yugoslavia and the law on religious communities guaranteed freedom of religion, state policy under Tito aimed at the social marginalisation of the religious communities (Wettach- Zeitz 2008: 245).

The problem which the churches and religious communities encountered was not just the prohibition of denominational religious education. All religious communities were equally strongly affected by the agricultural reforms adopted by the communist regime in 1945. Almost all landholdings of the churches and religious communities were nationalised for the purpose of the agrarian reform. The expropriation did not stop there. Soon afterwards, the other real estate of the religious communities was nationalised as well.27 In 1976, the Law on Religious Communities authorised the publication of religious material in accordance with federal law and the practice in other Yugoslav countries. It allowed religious education within the religious communities, but not in schools, and permitted theological colleges for the training of priests and imams. This was a great step forward for all representatives of the churches and religious communities. In its sixth article, however, the law forbade public processions and services unless inside sacred buildings. The law allowed the founding of a new religious community if there were at least thirty citizens who expressed a sense of commun- ality with such a body. De facto, however, this system frustrated the registration of many religious communities, since no responsible department was set up by the municipalities (Wettach-Zeitz 2008: 245). Only the Catholic Church and the Jewish community in Bosnia-Herzegovina were registered and recognised as legal entities under these regulations. Although the Constitution established by the Dayton Agreement in 1995 guaranteed the equality of all churches and

25 The Constitution of Socialist Yugoslavia, which was valid at the time, was pro- claimed on 21 February 1974 by the Assembly of Peoples of the Parliament of Yugo- slavia, which decentralised the whole state, giving much greater powers to each republic. 26 However this only applied to those clergy who wanted to get involved with the opposition. Examples of the political commitment of the clergy to the Communist Party are numerous. No one was punished. 27 The state has not yet returned part of this property, which is one of the main reasons for the tax exemption of all churches and religious communities in Bosnia-Her- zegovina. 212 INTERRELIGIOUS DIALOGUE IN BOSNIA-HERZEGOVINA religions, this situation remained until 2004, when both Christian churches and the other two religious communities were registered in Bosnia-Herzegovina and have enjoyed more or less the same status. The Legal Experts Working Group was founded to help the relevant institutions in writing new religious laws, and this group continues to work successfully today, also in the area of protecting the property of the religious communities. Working Group for Young People The working group for young people was founded in 2003 by the Interreligious Council. The main tasks of this group are:  To bring together young people from Bosnia-Herzegovina who are members of different confessions and religions  To organise joint congresses and excursions  To engage in youth dialogue as a step towards a pluralistic society  To avoid religious and ethnic conflicts With these goals in mind, the Council organised the conference “Hope for a Better Future: Transforming Attitudes and Building Community.”28 In addition, a sub-group, ‘All Together’ (Svi Zajedno) was established in November 2007 by the Interreligious Council. This sub-group has 14 members belonging to different ethnic groups and religious communities. Their main task is the care of children without parents. The ‘All Together’ sub-group is active in Bosnia-Her- zegovina with the project “Open our Hearts,” which focuses on all the problems of children without parents and the principles of solidarity. Through their seminars and conferences, they present various means that all citizens can use to help children without parents and also organise days of solidarity when they collect material assistance from individuals and corporate bodies to improve the living conditions in children’s homes.

The work group for young people has organised an international summer camp for children annually since 2007. In the course of seven days, forty participating children try to get a better knowledge of the other traditions and cultures and to present their own. Working Group for Women In April 2003 the Council established a working group for women. The leadership of the Interreligious Council felt that the situation of single mothers wid- owed by the war would be improved if they could be more open to other cultures and be in dialogue with other religious traditions. With this in mind, the members have established a relatively powerful group, which is particularly com- mitted to the support of widows as well as other victims of the war. In 2005, the

28 More on this at www.mrv.ba.

213 STUDIES IN INTERRELIGIOUS DIALOGUE 26 (2016) 2 working group published a book on the religious practices of the Bosnian Orthodox and Catholic Christians, and Muslims, and Jews.

Conclusion As Hans Küng has often declared, peace among and within the nations requires peace among the religions of the nations which in turn requires interreligious dialogue and allied research. The results of interreligious dialogue in Bosnia- Herzegovina after the 1992-1995 war reveals a process of reconciliation of the three different ethnic and religious groups that continues to this day. A major role in this process is played by the Interreligious Council of Bosnia-Herzego- vina in which four representatives from the two Christian churches, together with two from the Muslim and two from the Jewish community, participate. An overview and discussion of key activities and projects of the Council provides insight into the challenges and tasks of interreligious dialogue faced in the context of contemporary Bosnia-Herzegovina.

LITERATURE Andric, I. (1994). Razvoj duhovnog zivota u Bosni pod uticajem turske vladavine. Belgrade: Prosveta. Brajovic, Z. (2007). “The Potential of Inter-Religious Dialogue.” In: M. Fischer, Peace- building and Civil Society in Bosnia and Herzegovina: Ten Years after Dayton. New Brunswick/London: Transaction Publishers. Pp. 185-214. Bremer, T. (2003). Kleine Geschichte der Religionen in Jugoslawien: Königreich – Kom- munismus – Krieg. Freiburg: Herder. Byrnes, T.A. (2001). Transnational Catholicism in Postcommunist Europe. New York/ Oxford: Rowman & Amp. Curtis, W.E. (1903). The Turk and his Lost Provinces. Chicago, etc.: Fleming H. Revell Company. Koller, M. (2012). “Die osmanische Geschichte Südeuropas.” In: Europäische Geschich- te Online (EGO). Mainz: Institut für Europäische Geschichte (IEG) (3 March). Malcolm, N. (1994). Bosnia. New York: NYU Press. Perica, V. (2001). “Interfaith Dialogue versus Recent Hatred. Serbian Orthodoxy and Croatian Catholicism from the Second Vatican Council to Yugoslav War 1965– 1992.” In: Religion, State & Society: The Keston Journal 29: 39-66. Powers, G.F. (1996). “Religion, Conflict and Prospects for Peace in Bosnia, Croatia and Yugoslavia.” Occasional Papers on Religion in Eastern Europe 16: 2-24. Samic, M. (1960). Voyageurs Français en Bosnie à la fin du XVIIIe siècle… Paris: Klincksieck. Wettach-Zeitz, T. (2008). Ethnopolitische Konflikte und interreligiöser Dialog. Stuttgart: W. Kohlhammer Verlag.

214