Regional Youth Interfaith Forum: Embracing Diversity: Delivering messages of understanding. – Reflections on Proceedings

Introduction

The first Regional Youth interfaith forum co-organised by the Australian Government and the European Union was held in Perth from the 4th to 6th December 2007. Over 50 young people from Europe, Australia as well as Southeast Asia representing different faiths participated in this 3 day event which saw a mixture of fellowship, fun and serious discussion on the role of religion in the world today. What follows is a series of reflections on the proceedings. I will not give a chronological account but rather, would group my thoughts into categories which would be illustrated by memorable incidences at the forum.


Inter-Faith Dialogue and Evangelization: A Contradiction or Two sides of the Same Coin?

For some Catholics, inter-faith dialogue smacks of heresy and religious indifferentism. After all, if Jesus Christ is the unique mediator of God and the Savior of all mankind, it would seem to follow that dialogue, which seems to imply a process of learning from the other, uncertainty and perhaps even a rethink of currently held beliefs is anathema to the deposit of faith entrust by Christ to his Church. What Christians should do, is to proclaim Jesus as the Savior and to save souls. I did not encounter any Catholic who held these views at the conference for obvious reasons.

For other Catholics, influenced by the so called “spirit of Vatican II”, they are keen to embrace inter-religious dialogue as the new way of being Church (and Catholic). When asked by other Catholics what they think of evangelization, they would reply “O we don’t do this anymore after the Second Vatican Council”, we must respect all religions and not think that our religion is superior to theirs.

Indeed, a Catholic delegate from Mindanao actually shared this with me on the last day while we were having the swan river cruise. She sees her very important work in building a peacemaking culture in that troubled part of the Philippines as an intrinsic part of her Catholic identity. While I fully support that and would definitely pray for the success of her work, I was slightly perturbed when she shared that her Jesuit education has led her to see that conversion to Catholicism is not a priority. Indeed, she seemed proud to say that her peace building program resulted in no conversions to Catholicism from Muslims and members of the Mindanao indigenous community. While I fully understand that conversion is a sticky business in that part of the world unlike in Singapore, I could not help being somehow saddened by this. While it is true that being involved in peacemaking is definitely part of the Church’s social mission, and we should offer this to every person of good will, I could not help but wonder if in our eagerness to do good, we obscure the person of Christ and play down his unique salvific role. Inter-faith dialogue becomes an important means to build a peace-making culture. The need for Conversion and evangelization is downplayed or perhaps even not on the agenda at all.

Indeed, in such inter-faith gatherings, Catholics who are not well formed in their own faith may actually, in their enthusiasm for peace and good relations with members of other faiths and also to highlight how much similarities there are among different faiths, end up in a form of religious indifferentism which says either that all religions are the same or that all religious are equal paths to truth.

That seems to be only natural. In the three day conference, participants were enthusiastic about meeting other participants from different religions and different countries and during the three days together, relationships were cordial and friendly. Everybody were eager to portray themselves as open-minded, respectful and sincere which I believe were real qualities emanating from the participants. We came out with common statements and objectives. My discussion group declared “we as young people of diverse religious faiths, beliefs and cultures are committed to the values of peace, compassion and love (understood uniquely contextually and culturally) and respect for human rights.”

Who can possibly object to creating such an environment? Yet sometimes in our enthusiasm to discover similarities, or to celebrate our differences as merely culturally interesting rather than making actual truth claims, we as Christians would have failed to proclaim Christ and his often demanding truths. After all, who would want to be labeled (as Cardinal Ratzinger was labeled so often) as someone who rocks the boat of harmonious inter-faith dialogue, asking tough questions and challenging the followers of other religions to respond in an equally intellectually vigorous way?

Inspite of these so called dangers or concerns highlighted, I do think that Catholics should continue to engage in inter-religious dialogue and also see it as an avenue for evangelization. For one thing, the atmosphere of friendship cultivated in an inter-faith setting is crucial. Meeting people as friends is important. There are no secrets between friends and friends can share with each other, their most intimate concerns without fear. The time will come where deep questions and differences will naturally emerge in any discussion of religion. It is in these situations where the Catholic must testify to the person of Jesus Christ and give an account for the hope that is in him. The wish that you do hope that the other person comes to know Jesus one day should also be extended. Conversion can be done only in total freedom but one should not be afraid to extend the invitation.

Indeed, it was in a spirit of friendship that I was able to have fascinating discussions with both my Buddhist and Muslim friends from Singapore. For instance, my Buddhist friend Siew Wee and I spoke about the existence of the self, the purpose of the body the significance of the Resurrection of Jesus, the teaching of Buddha. If, as Hans von Balthasar writes, the story of salvation should be seen as both a “theo-aesthetic” and a “theo-drama” than the presentation of the truths of the Christian religion, its inner coherence and logic and its answers to the perennial questions of humanity will constitute in an organic manner, an apologetic of beauty. Logical syllogisms and examination of the evidence would remain a necessary part of evangelization. Yet there is another way, a way perhaps less intimidating, the evidential power of beauty. If Christ is the truth and if all human hearts long for total truth and joy, then such a presentation would be enough to stir a thirst in the other person to know more about the Christian religion.

Government and Religion: Respect, Cooperation, Cooption, Conflict, Tolerance, Indifference.

“What can governments do?” was the theme of the 2nd plenary session on the first day of the conference. As a Catholic, I do not oppose the government for the sake of doing so. Governments can and have done a lot of good and a Catholic should support such initiatives in any way they can. Yet governments too may have agendas which run counter to the convictions of religious believers. A “religious cover” would nevertheless serve a government well and provide endorsement for what may well be an immoral an unjust policy. One have only to think of Robert Mugabe’s boasting that he is a good Catholic who attends Mass frequently or the posturing of Hilary and Bill Clinton that faith is an important part of their lives while simultaneously promoting the destruction of innocent human life through abortion to see how religion can easily be co-opted into the service of some bigger agenda.

Indeed, on the first day, we actually received an exhortation by a certain professor Amir that one should not be reading the scriptures literally but always in a contextual manner for to do so is a sure way of lapsing into fundamentalism, absurdity and even violence. Yet such an assertion while sincerely made still leaves many questions unanswered. Who decides whether something is to be read literally or in a contextual manner? How about “love your neighbour as you love yourself”? Governments would surely hope that believers read that piece of scripture literally. How about the account of the Resurrection? Liberal demythologizes are eager to read this in a “spiritual” and “contextual” fashion which betrays immediately a philosophical bias against miracles. How about the absolute claims of Christ and Christianity?

Also, I felt a hint of co-option during the hypothetical forum held on the 2nd day where the theme was climate change. Participants in that hypothetical forum were supposed to agree that climate change and global warming are serious problems and that they would have to plan strategies to “sell” this message back to their communities. A sensible question to ask in this instance is who is setting the agenda? Are religious communities mere appendages of government and state apparatus’ designed to soften or sell messages and agendas already pre-determined or do religious communities possess autonomously their own agendas which will come into creative tension with that of the state?

In her keynote address author Randa Abdel-Fattah said that religion ought not simply to be tolerated but respected. Indeed, there is a world of difference between tolerance and respect. We tolerate something undesirable where eliminating it would do more harm than good. We respect on the other hand, positive goods. Indeed, French President Nicolas Sarkozy once commented that he found it strange that in his own country, when a school, a stadium or a community centre is built, there is enthusiasm from the state. But when a mosque or a Church is built, the state quickly distances itself from the project wanting no part of it seeing it purely as a private business. While not endorsing any form of religion, the state may well consider if the endorsing of religiosity, a certain civic religion if you will, within of course certain sensible limits might not be a public good in itself. Running for the Republican nomination for the US Presidency, Mitt Romney said it quite well in his recent campaign speech that he is inspired when he sees mosques, temples and churches whose spires reach out to the heavens as that was a recognition from all religions of the common source of our origins.

Avoiding Sloganeering and Motherhood Statements: The importance of Language and the Parameters of Discussion.

Flannery O Connor once said that “compassion leads to the gas chambers”. This shocking statement should cause us to pause and reflect on the importance of clarifying positive concepts, discovering what they really do mean. Nobody would say that they do not want peace, justice and harmony. But what this constitutes remains vague. As such, the declarations made by the various groups, while important first steps, need to be clarified and examined thoroughly. The caveat in our declaration (about understanding the statement contextually, uniquely and culturally etc) was at least to my mind a problematic statement. In some cultures, widow burning is considered an act of compassion. Do we have a response to that or are we to be silenced by the paralyzing force of cultural relativism? Reason, as the Pope’s Regensburg Address makes it clear, must be the common language across cultures so that pathologies both of religion as well as science can be healed. As such, it was a pleasant surprise to discover from the Polish delegate Magdalena that the organization she belongs to, “World Youth Alliance” www.wya.net does exactly that, organizing such activities around the great and important themes which humankind can ill afford to get wrong.

Against, hypocrisy, self-interest and deceit: Cultivating habits of the heart for fruitful Inter-Faith Dialogue.

As one of the delegates from Germany, Friedrich mentioned, he detected a certain angelism in the discussions as if good intentions and the elimination of ignorance through education were all that is needed to create a better world. As Catholics, we know that sin lies in the depths of the human heart, perennially tempting human beings to hypocrisy, self-interest and deceit. In such instances, mere good intentions are not enough. Habits of the heart, virtues, need to be cultivated. Persons who are insincere cannot be trusted to engage in any form of fruitful dialogue. In such instances, niceties will not do. Denunciations are sometimes in order.

Inter Mirifica and New Media; Challenge and Opportunities

On the second day of the conference, both Mr. Peter Dunn and Dr Martin Mhando were given time to exhort delegates to understand and make full use of new media, i.e. internet discussion groups, online forums, youtube etc to spread the message of inter-faith harmony. Indeed, the impact of New Media ought not to be underestimated and may well be a vibrant and fruitful avenue for publicity. One has only to think of how the use of new media enabled persons in Myanmar to broadcast images otherwise not seen in the Junta’s bloody crackdown of Buddhist monks and other anti-government demonstrators. Or how, as a Filipino delegate puts it, new media was able to spread the world out via sms to many people to come for a people’s power rally which resulted in the overthrow of former President Joseph Estrada.

Yet the use of New Media is essentially a disembodied medium, useful for spreading information but perhaps less so in developing genuinely human relationships. One has only to think of countless hours spent in online chat groups and computer games to see the numbing effects of such a disembodied way of interaction. Indeed, one of the speakers Mr. Kuranda Seyit was talking about finding answers through the body. If Christians are to use New Media, they should see it as a field for evangelization. New Media tools, besides spreading information can be used to encourage a more embodied form of existence.

Nation and Religion: On the possibility of Trans-national allegiances

“Universal, religious and Australian values” declared Mr. Jeremy Jones when addressing what kind of qualities a religious Australian should possess. Indeed, it was a truly trans-national experience for me, meeting members of different faiths from different religions. What mattered to me a lot was meeting Catholics from different countries. It was exciting to talk about the faith with Frs. Venancio and Joseph Thieu from East Timor and Vietnam respectively and to share experiences. When I told Magda that we had the Jeweller’s Shop in Singapore, she was very excited. I was also able to talk excitedly with Friedrich about the latest encyclical of Pope Benedict XVI and with Aubrey of Brunei about the Theology of the Body. I discovered national solidarity with my Singaporean delegates as we were justifiably proud of the achievements of our country in terms of inter-religious harmony.

Conclusion

I do hope that the time spent during the three days in Perth will lead to better things to come. The critiques contained in this reflection paper should not be seen as a lack of gratitude to the Australian Government and the EU for organizing this symposium. Rather, they are given in the hope that subsequent forums can be even more successful and may grapple with the serious and often complex issues faced by the religions of the world today as they encounter modernity and face questions of identity.