Interreligious dialog, a force for good

Irawan Abidin, Former Diplomat, Jakarta

Interreligious dialog is an absolutely necessity at a time when people of different faiths must interact with one another in their daily lives, while so much prejudice, intolerance and bigotry is going on.

This is largely because of ignorance of persons of one faith in relation to those of other faiths. Most of the time people do not realize how ignorant they are: They think they are well informed and without prejudice.

At best this strains relationships between and among individuals; at worst, it could be the cause of injustice or violence. Sometimes, it is not a case of ignorance of other people's religions, but that of one's own religion. Religious fanatics in particular think that their respective religions teach them to murder or harm people of other religions in other ways, when in fact this is not so.

Among the most evil results of religious ignorance is the kind of fanaticism and the practice of terrorism that we have seen in the likes of the Taliban and those linked to al-Qaeda. These are by no means the only ones who are so benighted. Most modern day religions have become victims of their own fanatical adherents.

The antidote to ignorance and the prejudice, intolerance and violence that it breeds is knowledge that brings about understanding, mutual appreciation and compassion. That kind of knowledge can best be spread through dialog, which should be aided through various means, including social education programs and the use of mass media. An essential aspect of that effort is always face-to-face dialog between and among adherents of different faiths.

To be fully effective the dialog should be a global one; it should involve all people from all countries, for there is no country today where there is no religion being practiced, and there isn't any single nation, people or ethnic group that does not practice some kind of religion. Even absolute atheism should be considered as a kind of faith and its adherents should be included in the dialog.

The trouble in organizing such a dialog and the expense entailed would be worth it. The reward: A creation of a massive force for peace, human understanding, compassion and cooperation.

The alternative would be the continuation of the sorry state of current affairs, with a war against terrorism being carried out with weapons of massive destruction, and an enormous amount of money used to make the world safe from terrorist acts. This is not to say that religions breed terrorism, but that without religious ignorance, without religious prejudice, and without fanaticism, organized international terrorism cannot possibly flourish. The spirit of cooperation engendered through dialog among religions should be supportive of efforts to conquer the basic problem of poverty. Let us not forget that the most effective social workers are often religious persons.

A most natural venue for such a massive dialog would have to be and could only be the United Nations. It is very important that the venue should be a nonreligious institution that is oriented to neutrality but with massive bureaucratic capability. To build such an institution from scratch would be very costly, troublesome and would take a lot of time. The institution that is the venue for a global interreligious dialog is needed right now. If the UN is willing to serve in this manner, then by all means it should be allowed to serve.

However, there would be many organizational hitches. There will be complaints of ineffectiveness and inefficiency -- but all would be part of the birth pangs of the institutionalization of global interreligious dialog.

The body that would facilitate the global interreligious dialog would have to be a subsidiary of the UN, with a great measure of autonomy. It would draw its staff from all nationalities, religions and cultures. It would be funded in the same way that other UN subsidiaries are funded in addition to philanthropic grants. It must have a very strong research arm.

Among the vital tasks that would have to be given to this body would be the formulation of a world interreligious modus vivendi. It would have to be ratified by all the religions represented in the body and would serve as a code of ethics governing relationships between and among religions.

Difficulties would include the fact that many religions do not have established hierarchies, and so who would sign the modus vivendi for them? With creativity, however, such difficulties can be overcome.

Another vital function of the same body would be to find ways and means by which the various religions could work with each other to conquer poverty and promote social justice. All religions teach compassion and the love of social justice. All that is needed is for them to be helped to find a way of expressing that sentiment and realizing that idea through practical and concrete programs.

Religion, a force that exists for the good of humankind, can be harnessed to solve some of our most pressing problems, which include terrorism, crime, vice, poverty and ignorance. Religion is the natural enemy of these evils. With the help of religion -- all religions -- these problems can be overcome.