As we stand at the threshold of commemorating the sixtieth anniversary of Nostra Aetate’s promulgation on October 28, 1965, we find ourselves witness to one of the most extraordinary metamorphoses in the annals of interfaith relations. This Declaration on the Relation of the Church with Non-Christian Religions emerged not merely as a theological treatise, but as a luminous response to humanity’s darkest hours and an enduring testament to the possibility of religious reconciliation in our fractured world.

Genesis of reconciliation: From the ashes of Shoah to the dawn of understanding

The genesis of Nostra Aetate cannot be divorced from the profound spiritual earthquake that the Shoah inflicted upon the Christian conscience. The unfathomable horrors of the Holocaust led the Catholic Church into a period of deep moral reflection, prompting a difficult reexamination of its long history of anti-Jewish attitudes and how these may have contributed to the tragic destruction of European Jewry.

Amid this moral reckoning, leaders of remarkable vision and courage emerged. Pope Saint John XXIII, blessed with an intuitive pastoral sensibility that transcended doctrinal rigidity, recognized with extraordinary clarity the urgent imperative for the Church to fundamentally reexamine its relationship with the Jewish people. His providential encounter with the French Jewish historian Jules Isaac on June 13, 1960, would prove to be one of those pivotal moments upon which the trajectory of history turns.

Isaac, bearing the unbearable weight of personal tragedy—having lost his beloved wife and daughter to the Nazi machinery of death—presented the Pontiff with a meticulously documented dossier entitled The Teaching of Contempt. This scholarly indictment revealed how centuries of certain Christian teachings and traditions had fostered attitudes that allowed anti-Jewish prejudice to take root and spread. The encounter left an indelible impression upon John XXIII’s compassionate heart, igniting the ecclesiastical processes that would ultimately birth this revolutionary declaration.

Cardinal Augustin Bea, the erudite German Jesuit and biblical scholar whom John XXIII entrusted with leading the Secretariat for Christian Unity, emerged as the principal architect of this transformative document. Despite encountering formidable resistance from various ecclesiastical quarters, Bea’s scholarly acumen, diplomatic virtuosity, and unwavering conviction proved instrumental in crafting a declaration that would fundamentally recalibrate the Church’s approach to the world’s great religious traditions.

The Islamic dimension: Article 3’s prophetic call to fraternity

While scholarly attention has justifiably focused upon Nostra Aetate’s groundbreaking statements regarding Judaism, Article 3’s treatment of Islam represents an equally momentous watershed in the long and often tumultuous history of Catholic-Muslim relations. The declaration proclaims with remarkable clarity: “The Church regards with esteem also the Muslims. They adore the one God, living and subsisting in Himself; merciful and all-powerful, the Maker of heaven and earth, who has spoken to men.”

More significantly for our contemporary global context, the declaration extends a compelling invitation that resonates across the centuries: “Although in the course of the centuries many quarrels and hostilities have arisen between Christians and Muslims, this most sacred synod urges all to forget the past and to work sincerely for mutual understanding and to preserve as well as to promote together for the benefit of all mankind social justice and moral welfare, as well as peace and freedom.”

This clarion call to transcend historical grievances and collaborate in the pursuit of peace, freedom, social justice, and moral renewal found profound resonance among diverse Muslim communities worldwide, most notably within the Hizmet movement inspired by the luminous teachings of Fethullah Gülen.

A historic convergence: Gülen’s visit to Rome

The Catholic Church’s invitation was met with a historic response when Fethullah Gülen traveled to Rome on February 9, 1998, for a private audience with Saint John Paul II. This extraordinary encounter represented far more than a diplomatic courtesy; it embodied the concrete manifestation of Nostra Aetate’s most sublime aspirations, bringing together the successor of Saint Peter with a distinguished Muslim scholar whose life had been dedicated to the noble cause of interfaith understanding.

During this historic colloquy, Gülen emphasized with profound eloquence the enduring relevance of Saint Paul VI’s prophetic call—the very pontiff who had solemnly affixed his signature to Nostra Aetate on that transformative October day in 1965. Gülen reaffirmed his unwavering commitment to interfaith dialogue while articulating practical pathways through which Muslims and Catholics might collaborate: fostering mutual understanding through collaborative academic research, orchestrating shared pilgrimages to sacred sites, and establishing partnerships in education and social service that would bear fruit for generations to come.

This momentous meeting exemplified how Nostra Aetate’s abstract principles could be transmuted into tangible relationships and concrete initiatives. The Hizmet movement’s subsequent engagement with Catholic institutions and communities across the globe—from educational partnerships that span continents to interfaith symposia that bring together the world’s greatest minds—demonstrates the perduring vitality and practical relevance of the declaration’s revolutionary vision.

The foundations of freedom: Dignitatis Humanae’s essential contribution

As we commemorate Nostra Aetate’s sixtieth anniversary, we must also prepare to celebrate the equally momentous sixtieth anniversary of Dignitatis Humanae (December 7, 1965), the Declaration on Religious Freedom, which will be observed this December. This complementary conciliar document provides the indispensable foundation upon which all authentic interfaith dialogue must be constructed.

Dignitatis Humanae proclaimed with unprecedented clarity that religious freedom constitutes an inherent dignity of the human person, rooted not in the subjective disposition of the individual, but in the very nature of human beings as rational creatures called to seek and embrace truth in freedom. The declaration articulated that “all men are to be immune from coercion on the part of individuals or of social groups and of any human power, in such wise that no one is to be forced to act in a manner contrary to his own beliefs, whether privately or publicly, whether alone or in association with others, within due limits.”

This revolutionary affirmation of religious liberty as a fundamental human right creates the essential preconditions for meaningful interfaith dialogue. Without the guarantee of religious freedom at both individual and communal levels, dialogue degenerates into mere tolerance of difference rather than authentic engagement with the other. A sustainable and truly transformative interfaith dialogue demands that every participant possess the inviolable right to practice, profess, and propagate their faith without fear of persecution or coercion.

The symbiotic relationship between Nostra Aetate and Dignitatis Humanae becomes apparent when we consider that genuine respect for other religious traditions—the cornerstone of Nostra Aetate—can only flourish in an environment where religious freedom is not merely tolerated but actively protected and promoted. The two declarations together create a theological and practical framework that enables believers of different faiths to encounter one another not as competitors in a zero-sum game, but as fellow pilgrims on the human journey toward truth and transcendence.

Evolution and expansion: From Nostra Aetate to human fraternity

The visionary legacy of Nostra Aetate has continued to evolve and expand throughout the decades, finding its most recent and perhaps most comprehensive expression in the historic “Document on Human Fraternity for World Peace and Living Together,” signed by Pope Francis and Ahmad al-Tayyeb, the Grand Imam of Al-Azhar, in 2019. This extraordinary document, building upon the theological foundation laid by Nostra Aetate and the freedom guaranteed by Dignitatis Humanae, presents an even more expansive vision of religious cooperation in addressing the manifold challenges confronting our global civilization.

The Document on Human Fraternity represents the maturation of conciliar thinking, demonstrating how the seeds planted sixty years ago have grown into a mighty tree whose branches extend across all continents and whose roots reach deep into the shared soil of human dignity. The Hizmet movement, along with countless other interfaith initiatives worldwide, continues to serve as one of the Catholic Church’s most significant partners in nurturing this expanded vision of religious collaboration.

Through innovative educational initiatives that bridge cultural divides, profound cultural exchanges that foster mutual understanding, and collaborative social projects that address humanity’s most pressing needs, these movements continue to embody the practical implementation of Nostra Aetate’s ideals in our contemporary context, while simultaneously demonstrating the vital importance of the religious freedom guaranteed by Digitatis Humanae.

Unfinished symphony: The challenge of complete reception

Despite these remarkable achievements that would have been unimaginable to previous generations, an honest and unflinching assessment reveals that Nostra Aetate’s transformative goals remain only partially fulfilled after six decades of implementation. The declaration’s reception among both Catholics and non-Catholics has been uneven and incomplete, and its revolutionary potential has yet to be fully realized across all sectors of religious life.

Within Catholic communities worldwide, while official Church teaching has firmly embraced the declaration’s principles and incorporated them into magisterial documents, grassroots understanding and implementation have progressed at varying speeds. In many Catholic institutions, educational curricula are still catching up with official doctrine, pastoral formation programs sometimes provide limited preparation for interfaith engagement, and popular religious understanding can occasionally reflect older pre-conciliar perspectives of exclusivity and caution.

Among non-Christian communities, including the global Muslim community, awareness of Nostra Aetate’s significance and appreciation of its revolutionary character varies dramatically across different regions and cultural contexts.

Political conflicts that instrumentalize religious identity, deep-seated cultural misunderstandings perpetuated by ignorance and prejudice, and unhealed historical grievances continue to impede the full realization of the declaration’s sublime vision of cooperation and mutual respect.

The path forward: Renewed commitment for a new era

As we mark this momentous sixtieth anniversary, both Nostra Aetate and Dignitatis Humanae remain simultaneously profoundly relevant and urgently necessary. The declarations’ core insights—that religious diversity reflects the magnificent richness of divine providence, that dialogue is infinitely preferable to confrontation, that believers of different faiths can collaborate for human flourishing while maintaining their distinct identities, and that religious freedom is the sine qua non of authentic spiritual life—speak with prophetic clarity to our contemporary challenges.

The path forward demands renewed commitment from all parties involved in the great work of interfaith understanding. Catholic institutions must continue deepening their comprehension and implementation of both declarations’ principles, ensuring that the vision of religious freedom and interfaith respect permeates every level of ecclesiastical life. Muslim communities and other religious groups must engage more actively and creatively with the unprecedented opportunities for dialogue and cooperation that Nostra Aetate creates, while simultaneously advocating for the religious freedom that Dignitatis Humanae champions.

Most importantly, we must transcend symbolic gestures and ceremonial encounters to achieve substantive collaboration that addresses the urgent needs of our common humanity. The existential challenges of our historical moment—climate change that threatens our planetary home, grinding poverty that degrades human dignity, systemic social injustice that perpetuates inequality, and the erosion of moral values that undermines social cohesion—require the coordinated response of all people of faith working together. Nostra Aetate provides not merely permission for such collaboration, but an imperative mandate, while Dignitatis Humanae guarantees the freedom necessary to pursue this collaboration authentically.

Conclusion: A vision for future generations

Sixty years after their respective promulgations, Nostra Aetate and Dignitatis Humanae stand as both monumental achievement and soaring aspiration. These declarations fundamentally transformed the landscape of interfaith relations and established principles that continue to guide religious dialogue in our interconnected world. Yet their complete potential remains tantalizingly unrealized, awaiting more profound reception and more comprehensive implementation by future generations of believers.

The extraordinary journey from the ashes of the Shoah to the hope of human fraternity, from Jules Isaac’s painful testimony to the collaborative vision of Pope Francis and Ahmad al-Tayyeb, from centuries of religious persecution to the affirmation of religious freedom as a fundamental human right, demonstrates both the remarkable distance we have traveled and the challenging road that still lies ahead. The luminous legacy of John XXIII, Cardinal Bea, and all the visionary figures who contributed to these revolutionary documents calls us not merely to commemorate their historic achievement, but to complete their unfinished work.

In our fractured world, torn asunder by religious misunderstanding and sectarian conflict, threatened by the rise of religious extremism and the erosion of religious freedom, Nostra Aetate and Dignitatis Humanae remain twin light of hope illuminating the path toward a more harmonious future. Their combined vision of religious communities working together for peace, justice, and human dignity within a framework of guaranteed religious freedom is not merely an aspiration—it is an urgent necessity for the survival and flourishing of our global civilization.

The fundamental question that confronts us on these momentous sixtieth anniversaries is not whether this vision possesses continued relevance, but whether we, the inheritors of this extraordinary legacy, possess the courage, wisdom, and unwavering commitment necessary to transform aspiration into reality, hope into achievement, and vision into lived experience.

The seeds planted six decades ago in the fertile soil of the Second Vatican Council await their full harvest. May these anniversary celebrations inspire renewed dedication to the unfinished work of building a world where religious diversity enriches rather than divides, where ancient wisdom traditions collaborate rather than compete, where the children of Abraham, Isaac, and Ishmael walk together toward a more just and peaceful future, and where every human being enjoys the fundamental freedom to seek, embrace, and live according to their understanding of divine truth. In this noble endeavor lies not merely the fulfillment of conciliar vision, but the hope of our common humanity.

I had the opportunity to visit some of the many schools established by the Hizmet movement. These schools serve as places for girls and boys to learn universal values, academics and much needed everyday life skills. When I visited these schools, I felt a sense of home. The schools reminded me of the Sister Clara Muhammad Schools, formerly called University of Islam. One Hizmet school in Africa has particularly stayed in my mind, as it bears the name As Shamsiyyah. This name is also shared by the Domestic Violence program I established in the late ’90s and continue to run today, providing support to families in need.

The Quranic recitation we had the privilege of hearing that day continues to feed my soul whenever I recall it. As I listened to the young African men recite, I was reminded of Bilal Al-Habashi (RA – may Allah be pleased with him). Countless Muslims love and respect Bilal (RA), and I do as well, but through the teachings of my father, Imam Warith Deen Mohammed (RA)—the successor to the NOI leader and leader of the Islamic transition in America, now known as the IWDM community—his significance holds an even deeper meaning for African Americans. Imam W.D. Mohammed emphasized Bilal’s importance, and as a result, many of us now call ourselves Bilalian. It was a profoundly moving experience that I will never forget.

Over the years I’ve witnessed not just the diversity of Muslims impacted by Imam Gülen (RA) but also the impact on the broader interfaith community. This emphasis on interfaith dialogue is especially meaningful to me, as it aligns with much of the work I am involved in. We have been blessed with Muhammad (SAW) who was a mercy to all mankind. Imam Gülen understood this, and the Hizmet movement has carried out extensive interfaith initiatives around the world. It is this interfaith work, alongside the educational work, that leads me to call Imam Gülen as Hocaefendi (RA).

There are two blessings that I have received as a result of getting to know the Hizmet movement. The first blessing is to have shared space with such a humble human being, Hocaefendi. When I met him in Pennsylvania, the spirit of peace and God Consciousness surrounding him was evident. Despite the inhumane treatment and injustices inflicted upon him and his people by their homeland, he had not allowed it to harden his heart.

This is his legacy: education and peace for all. As an African American (Bilalian), I resonate with and look forward to continued collaboration with the Hizmet movement. May their grief be comforted, and may it inspire them to work even harder for the causes of education and peace.

One of the groups of people that suffer heavily from trauma are immigrants. In this issue, Dr. Tekin starts his article on trauma with the example of a couple from Iraq, tortured and abused by terrorists who killed their kids. Now, safe and away from the dangers of their home country, the couple cannot overcome their fears and pains, despite now living under a roof and having plentiful food and work. “Mass Trauma, PTSD, and Treatment Options” raises awareness of this epidemic, which is lived at both personal and public levels. Its effects will not only shape our populations, but will also leave indelible marks in our souls. 

Can one way of dealing with trauma and disasters be relevant to “the way we view the world and our place in relation to it”? Robert Howe suggests it is. “Fundamentally, the problem of environmental decline is a malady of tension – between the self, society, and nature,” writes Howe, for whom “the environment’s decline is a sign that modernity is suffering from a crisis of spirituality.” In his “Regenerating Life with Soulcentric Education”, Howe pinpoints the problem as education systems which value academic intelligences because they serve the economic values the system upholds. For him, the contemporary education is “the story of separation” in which humans are divorced from nature and the world by “othering” and “commodifying” them. One solution, for Howe, could be “regenerative education,” which educates healthy, soul-centered adults who understand why they are on Earth, why they were born, and who live with a sense of belonging to the natural and human communities. It is certainly an interesting piece to read and offers a renewed perspective on our lives.

“Turning the Unknown and the Different into the Familiar and the Friendly” by Ellen Michelson offers a second way of dealing with the troubles plaguing our world: interfaith dialogue. Ellen is the editor of The Menorah newsletter of the Congregation B’nai Israel, in New Jersey. She has been an active member of the interfaith community, and, together with the other members of her congregation, she reaches out to other faith groups to promote dialogue and understanding. Her piece offers a humble reading of what can be done today to overcome prejudice and to build a society that respects differences.

Interfaith dialogue has been a very controversial issue and there have been a lot of discussions about it: its necessity, rationale, and success (Kurucan 2006). These questions have made it obvious that people are not aware of the real meaning of interfaith dialogue.

Perelman and Olbrechts- Tyteca (1969) explain dialogue as follows: “… (it) is not supposed to be a debate … but rather a discussion in which the interlocutors search honestly and without bias for the best solution to a controversial problem” (196, 37). Related to this description, Gulen (2000) describes interfaith dialogue as “… seek(ing) to realize religion’s basic oneness and unity, and the universality of belief. Religion embraces all beliefs and races in brotherhood, and exalts love, respect, tolerance, forgiveness, mercy, human rights, peace, brotherhood, and freedom via its Prophets” (The Fountain, September 2000). These descriptions bring out another question: how useful and beneficial can interfaith dialogue be in solving problems?

Interfaith dialogue does not aim to change the ideas of people about their religions or faiths, but seeks to find common ground between religions, to focus on communities, and through an emphasis on harmony and peace, find solutions to many of our common problems. In fact, one of the reasons for interfaith dialogue is to “provide an atmosphere of freedom” (Kurucan 2006, 17).

Another major proponent of dialogue was Seyyed Hossein Nasr, a professor of Islamic studies at George Washington University. When he visited the Vatican in 1977 in a delegation, Nasr highlighted five areas that Christianity and Islam can work together to make the world better. These five areas are “dangers of modern technocracy and ecological ruin, energy crises, youth problems and decadence of morality and faith” (Kot 2009). In addition, Rev. Allman states, “The ability to discuss our religious and cultural differences is more than an ‘extra-curricular activity’; it is a skill which is vital for participants in democracy, especially a democratic society such as ours, which is filled with people whose differences are deep and complex” (The Network, 1999).

These statements show the importance of interfaith dialogue for the improvement of humanity and the goodwill of societies. Pinto (2003) highlights the role of interfaith dialogue in today’s society as “…an inevitable fact of our being-with-other-faiths.”

In connection to this, Swidler et al. (2007) state that, “In the past, during the age of divergence, we could live in isolation from each other; we could ignore each other. Now, in the age of convergence, we are forced to live in one world. We increasingly live in a global village” (Stress added, p.1).

Today most of the common reasons for dispute between religions, or between people of different religions, are that they do not understand one another’s beliefs or ideas (Baum 2011). Interfaith dialogue meetings, panels, conferences help these misconceptions and unfamiliarity disappear. And the result of such dialogues can be tremendous. As Smock states, “… when two or more faiths come together to explore or promote the possibility of peace, the effects can be especially potent” (viii).

The benefits of interfaith dialogue are obvious but still it is not an easy work. Once again, Smock (2002) highlights that “interfaith dialogue is a difficult, often painful endeavor” (viii). There are some prerequisites for interfaith dialogue to be successful. Swidler (2003) categorizes them as:

“1) an openness to learn from the other. 2) knowledge of one’s own tradition. 3) a similarly disposed and knowledgeable dialogue partner from the other tradition” (p. 12).

The importance of each prerequisite will be explained in detailed below.

Ingredients for a successful interfaith dialogue meeting

1) The most important component of interfaith dialogue is to remember the real meaning of dialogue. It is a two-way discussion that requires respect and understanding. This component may seem very simple to understand but it is very easy to forget. Swidler (2007) states that, “If this basic goal is kept fixed in view and acted on with imagination, creative and fruitful dialogue – and a growing transformation of each participant’s life and that of their communities – will follow” (p. 19). So for better results out of interfaith dialogue, the real meaning of dialogue should not be forgotten. Be sure to explain dialogue as “… a discussion in which the interlocutors search honestly and without bias for the best solution to a controversial problem” (Perelman and Olbrechts- Tyteca, 1969, 37).

2) In these meetings, participants must be aware of the fact that all of the participants are from different religious and cultural backgrounds, so interfaith dialogue is based on understanding and respecting all participants. In interfaith dialogue, none of the participants should try to discredit or question the belief system of the other participants.

3) Smock (2002) writes that stating the purpose of the meeting very clearly and choosing the right participants goes a long way towards determining the success of a dialogue. The purpose of the meeting should be decided by the participants before the meetings, very clearly and in detail.

4) While describing how to start dialogue, Bohme et al. (1991) state that suspension is an important part of dialogue. Listening to the other participants is a compulsory part of the process. During these meetings, all of the participants should be free of their biases and be open to understanding and recognizing new perspectives. Interfaith dialogue meetings are great ways to learn about different religions and different thoughts.

5) It should not be forgotten that in these meetings, we come together as people, not as belief systems, but these meetings provide an incredible opportunity to learn about, discuss, and understand other religions. “… the dialogue among the world’s religions and traditions should lead to a better mutual knowledge and understanding, and an exchange of the mutual values as an enrichment of one’s own faith and of the faith of the others” (Cosijns & Braybrooke, 2008, 55-56). However, a problem or mistake made in the meetings should not be used to generalize about a whole belief system. Kurucan (2006) states that by interfaith dialogue, “We refer to dialogue between the people of different religions” (17). So people in these meetings should not be seen as categories, sole representatives of their religions, but they should be seen as individual people, with their strengths and flaws – just like all of us.

6) Interfaith dialogue aims to find solutions to the problems of the world and other people by focusing on the similarities between belief systems. It does not focus on the differences and controversial issues.

7) Smock (2002) states that one-time interfaith dialogue meetings cannot be very useful, so there should be some follow-up sessions to enforce the benefits of the meetings.

8) In addition, it would be a good idea to learn about the religious practices of the other participants, see the differences between your own understandings, and be very careful about these differences during the dialogue process. Crowley (2006) states that setting the stasis – the parts that the participants may have different ideas about – is an important part of civil discussion. In interfaith dialogue, being aware of the stasis is important, so as not to offend the other participants.

9) No exclusives and no syncretism. Abu-Nimer et al. (2007) state that in interfaith dialogues, no religion should be excluded. This would be a huge handicap for the success of interfaith dialogue. Abu-Nimer et al. (2007) also highlights that trying to synchronize all religions into one can be just as dangerous as exclusiveness. As stated above, it is very crucial to accept all religions and religious people in their own belief system.

10) Dialogue can only happen between equals. If a religious group sees one group as inferior or even superior to another, no dialogue can happen. There cannot be sharing and understanding between the groups, which is the main aim of any interfaith dialogue.

Interfaith dialogue is an important concept in the globalized world. People from different religions live side by side in the globalized village and there are tons of problems that human beings face today. These interfaith groups are very crucial for a world in which “every day, almost 16,000 children die from hunger-related causes. That’s one child every five seconds” (www.bread.org). The role of the interfaith dialogue in solving these problems cannot be underestimated. Smock (2002) states that “while religion can and does contribute to violent conflicts, it can be a powerful factor struggling for peace and reconciliation (viii).

References

• Abu-Nimer, M. & Khoury, A. & Welty, E. 2007. Unity in diversity: Interfaith dialogue in the Middle East. Washington, DC: United States Institute of Peace.
• Bohm, D. & Factor, D. & Garrett, P. 1991. Dialogue: A Proposal. Retrieved from http://www.david-bohm.net/dialogue/dialogue_proposal.html
• Cosijns L.F. & Braybrooke , M. 2008. Dialogue among the faith communities. Lanham, MA: Hamilton Books.
• Crowley, S. 2006. Toward a civil discourse: Rhetoric and Fundamentalism. Pittsburg, PA: University of Pittsburg Press
• Gulen, M.F. 2000. “Necessity of interfaith dialog.” The Fountain Magazine. Issue 31.
• Kot, Z. 2009. “Muslim-Christian relations: The traditionalist interfaith dialogue” (Unpublished master thesis) George Washington University, Washington, DC.
• Kurucan, A. 2006. Nicin Diyalog: Diyalogun temelleri. Uskudar, Istanbul: Isik Yayinlari
• Perelman C.H. & Olbrechts- Tyteca, L. 1969. The new rhetoric: A treatise on argumentation. Notre Dame, IN: University of Notre Dame Press.
• Pinto, H. 2003. Faucault, Christianity and interfaith dialogue. New York, NY: Routledge Publications
• Smock, D. R. 2002. Interfaith Dialogue and Peacebuilding. Washington, DC: United States Institute of Peace.
• Swidler, L. & Duran, K. & Firestone, R. 2007. Trialogue: Jews, Christians and Muslims in Dialogue. New London, CT: Twenty-Third Publications.

Margaret Johnson is taking us to Mina, the tent city where Muslim pilgrims stay during the Hajj. Her memoirs is a personal one, as every memoir is, but one in which millions of pilgrims will pleasantly remember the many life-changing moments from their own experience of transformation, revival, meaning, companionship, servanthood, and mercy in the face of physical difficulties that come along with travel and camping with a large family of several million faithful.

As science unfolds many unknowns to us, we witness a universe that is intricately united across seemingly unrelated phenomena. This fact is so vividly displayed in the articles “The Sun and Its Distinctive Position” and “Why Is Cancer a Complex System” that one cannot help but be filled with awe and appreciation for all the blessings-a great majority of which we are unaware of-that make our lives possible.

Dorothy C. Buck celebrates the legacy of a pioneer in interfaith dialogue: Louis Massignon. The renowned French Catholic scholar of Islam and the Islamic world, Massignon died fifty years ago on October 31. Buck’s biographical essay narrates the story of a courageous man who dedicated his life and research to interfaith dialogue and particularly to the relationship of the three Abrahamic faith traditions, Judaism, Christianity and Islam.

Believing, Belonging, Behaving and Becoming are the four B’s of religion according to Douglas Golding, for whom these B’s give “a new formal structure for discussing religious belief and practice intelligently, just as there are formal structures which help us make sense of physics or chemistry or biology or economics or sociology, or any of the natural or social sciences.” Golding further says, “At a time when the patterns of religious adherence are changing, due both to immigration and conversion, it is more important than ever for us to understand what other people believe.”

We had a successful conference titled “Peacebuilding through Education” in New York in September. We are now moving on to our next event in Lahore, Pakistan: “Ideal Human and Ideal Society in the Thoughts of M. Fethullah Gülen,” a conference which will take place on November 21, at the University of the Punjab. Academics from different countries will join their Pakistani colleagues to discuss on their encounter with Fethullah Gülen’s thought and action in their respective countries and how the education movement he inspired is helping shape their future generations.

The learning that takes place through interfaith dialogue is one such example. The insight, emotions and experience generated by interfaith dialogue simply cannot be generated through reading textbooks. The color and depth that dialogue can add to understanding other’s faiths, one’s own faith, human psychology and society can in no way be attained through theoretical knowledge.

However, not everyone gains depth and understanding from such dialogue experiences. While some attain great levels of knowledge and wisdom, others gain nothing. Why is this so? How can two people with the same experience have such differing responses? There are three important principles which ensure that interfaith dialogue can be a teaching experience; firstly, to appreciate that interaction and sharing between people of different faiths is an important constituent of the learning experience. Secondly, to feel comfortable in knowing that interfaith dialogue and education about the “other” does not lead to confusion or conversion. Thirdly, to have the vision that dialogue can lead to cooperation.

Globalization and the increased need for education

In a globalized world where cultural and religious diversity is manifest, more awareness of the existence of other faiths and other worldviews outside our own immediate circle and society means increased interaction between people of different faiths and backgrounds. The need for knowing the “other” at some level becomes critical; lack of knowledge and interaction can dangerously reinforce the notion that the “other” is somehow alien. The moment the “other” is perceived as alien or foreign we enter unsafe grounds. As a result, education and dialogue have become strong instruments that are imperative for people seeking peace, ensuring that the “other” is not so alien.

A great deal has been written on the importance of learning through interfaith dialogue. In an article entitled “The Necessity of Interfaith Dialogue,” Dr. Yucel highlights the importance of interfaith dialogue in educating ourselves about the “other”: “The root of conflict is ignorance and ignorance is the source of prejudice. To get to know each other through dialogue is essential for the establishment of a world peace.” Swidler explains how the consequences of not having dialogue can be quite serious, even deadly: “We can no longer ignore ‘the other,’ but we can close our minds and spirits to them, look at them with fear and misunderstanding, come to resent them, and perhaps even to hate them. This way of encounter can all too easily lead to hostility and, eventually, war and death.”

Due to the importance of knowing the “other,” interfaith dialogue has been taken very seriously in multi-faith Australia. There is great diversity in Australia, not only within the Christian population, but also within the non-Christian population. 64% of the Australian population is Christian. The largest Christian denominations are: Catholic (25.8% of the population) followed by Anglican (18.7%) and the Uniting Church (5.7%). The number of people affiliated with non-Christian faiths has almost doubled in Australia in the past 10 years. The largest non-Christian religions are Buddhism (2.1%), Islam (1.7%), Hinduism (0.7%) and Judaism (0.4%).

There are many organizations in Australia that are involved in interfaith dialogue. These organizations have been established by individuals of different faith backgrounds. Affinity Intercultural Foundation is an example of such an organization that was established by a group of young Australian Muslims in early 2001 in order to facilitate the interaction of the Muslim community with the members of other faiths and to increase the awareness and understanding of the Muslim community by the wider Australian society. Affinity has organized numerous events and projects to foster dialogue between different faiths and cultures.

Initiatives undertaken by Affinity Intercultural Foundation will be used to explain the three important aspects of interfaith dialogue that enable progressive learning.

Interaction and sharing between people of different faiths is an important element of the learning experience

Education through interaction and sharing can achieve many outcomes which cannot be achieved through the reading of text books, even if one was to read volumes and volumes of text books.

Whenever we interact with each other, our ignorance is highlighted and we realize that there is clearly a gap in our knowledge of one another. We make assumptions, we stereotype and we pretend we know when we don’t. We come to the realization that we have no idea about certain things or that what we knew was incorrect.

Through interactions, we ask, we witness, we experience, and we learn. This type of learning becomes internalized because it has been experienced.

Sharing of sacred times is a good example of such learning; non-Muslims going to Muslim homes for iftar (breaking of the fast) during the month of Ramadan, Muslims visiting the church at Easter or Christmas or the synagogue for Sukkot or Hanukkah.

I have been told that entering a home where the last minute iftar preparations are taking place is quite a unique experience for a non-Muslim. The realization that nothing, absolutely nothing has been eaten all day and the witnessing of that first meal, is quite profound. So profound that it leads to many questions: Did you get really hungry today? How does fasting help you to connect with God? Does fasting make you feel more humble? As the meal is shared, the conversation leads from one topic to another.

The experience becomes even more interesting when the non-Muslim guests choose to fast for the day, purely to share the experience with their Muslim hosts. It becomes a trigger for further discussion as individuals reflect on their experience of fasting.

Such interactions and sharing can be defined as multi-dimensional education, as there is so much learning taking place through our words, actions, experiences, emotions and thoughts. Similarly, there is so much we learn from observing the experience of the other individuals. It is a learning which is alive and positively life-changing, an experience that cannot be replaced through the reading of volumes and volumes of textbooks.

Interfaith dialogue and education about the “other” does not lead to confusion or even conversion

A common misconception about interfaith dialogue is that listening to others talk about their faith will lead to confusion about our own faith. Some also believe that there is a danger that we will settle for the “lowest common denominator” or a “watered-down” version of our faiths. In reality, the opposite scenario has become the norm in interfaith dialogue circles; people actually feel that they learn more about their own faith and become better Muslims, Christians, Jews, Buddhists or Hindus through interfaith dialogue.

A project that has demonstrated this point is the Home Encounters project. Home Encounters is a community-based educational approach involving Muslims and Christians meeting on a monthly basis over six months.

At each meeting a new topic, such as monotheism, spirituality, or poverty, is covered from both a Christian and Muslim perspective. This is followed by an informal discussion and a question-and-answer session.

For previous groups who have participated in this project the experience has generated profound understandings of the other in their frame of reference. The key to success is the establishment of an atmosphere of trust in the informal setting of the participants’ homes, alternating between Christian and Muslim homes, and a willingness to understand. The right atmosphere and right attitude produce an environment of learning and sharing.

An insightful reflection by one of the participants of the first encounter reaffirms the presence of such an atmosphere:

Plates of Divine sweet talk gently moved across and around the table. So harmonious was the aroma of dialogue, so sweet was the taste of familiarity in beliefs that unity gently touched all hearts… And as the question and answers were shared like a summer dessert over coffee, learning, reflecting, understanding and peacefully digesting the different spices of faith, everyone only gained more appetite…

An outcome of the project, which surprised many of the participants, was that the discussions increased the participants’ level of knowledge and understanding of their own faith tradition. Reading up on the topic of discussion, studying the topic in preparation for a fifteen-minute presentation and finally hearing the topic being discussed and analyzed from various angles not only helped them to learn about the topic from the other faith perspective, but it also deepened their understanding of the topic from their own faith perspective.

The dialogue that takes place during the question-and-answer session are mentally stimulating as the questions that are asked by an individual from another faith are usually very different to the questions we would be asked by someone from our own faith. This enables us to consider the topic from unique angles, resulting in a more all-encompassing understanding. For example, a Muslim won’t often ask “Do you have a concept similar to the Holy Spirit in Islam?” or “How do you relate to God if you do not know what God looks like?” But these questions prompt a Muslim to search the answers to these questions, and by the end one has generated a deeper understanding of God, His Names, His Attributes and how they are manifested.

This deeper understanding is a mutual experience. This was confirmed by Rev. Grahame Ellis who also participated in Home Encounters; here he reflects on his first encounter:

… it was a Muslim question that compelled me as a Christian to this new affirmation…The fact is that I would not have had this insight if it had not been for a Muslim.

Such reflections highlight the importance of creating a positive environment so that true learning can take place through discussion, reflection, and investigation.

Dialogue leads to co-operation

Once a relationship has been developed and there is trust between the different faith groups, it is only natural that this will lead to cooperation. One of the first areas where there can be cooperation is education. Youth Encounters offers exactly this.

Youth Encounters, a project which involves four Muslim schools, four Christian schools and four Jewish schools has been organized every year since 2004. As part of the project, senior high school students from the participating schools go through training to prepare them for an end of year gala. The gala involves workshops where the students from the different schools come together and discuss various topics such as “my identity.” For many Christian students, this is the first time they meet a Muslim or a Jew. And for many Muslim and Jewish students, this is the first time they have the chance to converse at a deep level with a Christian.

The results are amazing. At the beginning of the gala, the students are quiet, unsocial, and serious, staying together with the students from their own school. However, by the end of the day, the students from different schools are having deep conversations, asking each other all sorts of questions and even exchanging email addresses to continue communicating with their new friends.

One student said, “I had never had an intimacy or conversation with other people with different beliefs. But we found a common ground which I didn’t know was possible.”

Another student admitted, “It takes away the textbook Jew and the textbook Catholic. It’s really interesting; you just have to try it. It’s an experience that you just can’t read from a paper.”

On the adult level, some projects have included co-operation in the areas of environment and peace. Coming together for a common concern facilitates unity and helps us to see our commonalities as we all strive to achieve certain goals that affect all of us, no matter what faith or culture we belong to. These are concerns which focus on our humanness and the emotions that come with being human, such as compassion towards those who die in places of conflict or feeling a sense of responsibility towards the environment.

An example of an initiative focusing on the environment is PowerShift 09, the first national youth summit on climate change; held in Australia, this event attracted 1,200 young adults from around the country. As was evident at this summit, there is a powerful unity that forms when addressing issues such as the environment. Awareness befalls upon all, this is an issue that must be tackled by all; otherwise the consequences will be felt by all. Thus, when we realize that we all share the same hopes, the same fears, and the same aspirations, a realization that comes with interfaith dialogue, co-operation comes easily.

In conclusion, the learning that takes place through interfaith dialogue plays a critical role in the globalized world in which we live. Thus we can attain a dialogue that is based on interaction, learning that leads to clarification, and a better understanding that leads to co-operation. It is through this learning that the attitudes of not only our youth, but the whole community changes for the better. Positive attitudes mean positive relationships, a key element for a harmonious society.

Zuleyha Keskin is the Vice President of ISRA (Islamic Sciences and Research Academy of Australia), Auburn, Australia.

It is quite interesting to find that although Nursi clearly states the necessity of interfaith alliance in the Risale-i Nur, and consequently encourages his followers to practice dialogue to establish this alliance, he does not dedicate any section of the Risale-i Nur to the principles of this interfaith dialogue and alliance. In other words, Nursi never titled any part of his works “The Principles of Interfaith Dialogue and Alliance.” Hence, the present article inquires whether Nursi simply ignores the principles of interfaith dialogue and alliance or whether there are implicit interfaith principles in his works.

It is my claim that it is possible to find implicit interfaith principles in the works of Nursi, and that the Twentieth and Twenty-First Gleams and the Twenty-Second Letter are especially good sources for these principles. In these sections, Nursi mainly deals with the different reasons for conflict among Muslims and teaches them his conflict resolution principles to end these conflicts with peaceful alliance. Therefore, it is easy for us to extract the principles of interfaith dialogue and alliance from these sections by paraphrasing Nursi’s conflict resolution principles in the context of interfaith dialogue because most of the principles in these sections are not related specifically to Islam, but to human nature in general.

Before presenting the list of paraphrased conflict resolution principles in the context of interfaith dialogue and alliance, we would like to demonstrate an example of paraphrasing: For instance, in the Twentieth Gleam, Nursi advises the following principle to resolve a conflict between different Muslim groups: “Adopt the just rule of conduct that the follower of any right outlook has the right to say, “My outlook is true, or the best,” but not that “My outlook alone is true,” or that “My outlook alone is good,” thus implying the falsity or repugnance of all other outlooks.” Although the context of this principle is the interactions between Muslims, it is perfectly right to practice this principle in the interfaith context because it is not related to Islam, but to human nature in general. Consequently, we can paraphrase this principle as follows: In dialogue activities, as Muslims, we can believe or even say that Islam is the right religion or even preferable to that of other religions, but we do not have right to say that other religions have no right in them at all. Similarly, in dialogue activities, Christians can believe or even say that Christianity is the right religion or even preferable to that of other religions, but they do not have right to say that other religions have no right in them at all.

After introducing this example, we can list the paraphrased interfaith principles from Twentieth and Twenty-First Gleams and the Twenty-Second Letter:

1. In our dialogue activities, as Muslims, we should only aim for our Lord’s good pleasure, not the acceptance of the members of other religions because “if Almighty God is pleased, it is of no importance even should the whole world be displeased.”

2. God commands in the Qur’an (Baqara 2:41), …do not sell My Revelations for a trifling price (such as worldly gains, status, and renown). Therefore, in dialogue activities, we should not water down our religious rules and dignity.

3. Human self is prone to make mistakes and deviate from the right path. Therefore, while dialoging with others, we should not trust our selves but God and always seek his help and forgiveness:

Yet I do not claim my self free of error, for assuredly the human carnal soul always commands evil, except that my Lord has mercy (which saves us from committing evil acts). (Yusuf 12:53)

4. If we want to dialogue with the members of other religions, we should accept them in their position and not criticize their religious beliefs and practices. If we like to be respected in our own beliefs, we should respect the beliefs of others. Similarly, in dialogue meetings, we should not excite the envy of the members of other religions by displaying or implying superior virtues.

5. Our primary aim in dialogue activities is God’s good pleasure and his help. Faith alliance is our secondary aim. In other words, we seek faith alliance because it attracts God’s help and support to us. Therefore, if we cannot establish faith alliance with the members of other faiths after all of our sincere efforts, we should not be disappointed. For God is the helper of his sincere servants and no alliance can be superior to God’s alliance.

6. In dialogue events, our actions should always be based on positive motives. That is to say, what motivates our actions should be the love of our own outlook, not the enmity of others’ outlooks. We organize or participate in dialogue events to represent our outlook, not to diminish the outlook of others.

7. In dialogue activities, by focusing on commonalities such as a shared land, a shared language, our common humanity, universal needs and fears, and so on, we will recognize again that what we have in common far exceeds what sets us apart from each other.

8. Because we need unity and inclusion within Muslims and among the People of the Book far more than division and exclusion, let us for now leave aside discussion of the issues that divide us.

9. In our dialogue activities, we should keep in mind that unity among Muslims and the People of the Book attracts for us the help of our Creator against irreligion.

10. The aim of interfaith dialogue is not to argue with the members of other religions. In order to refrain from argumentation, we should know that one who prevails in an argument finds himself in a dangerous position in comparison with his partner, first because he might fall into arrogance in his heart, and second because he may learn nothing new from the discussion. On the other hand, his partner learns new knowledge and his heart is safe from arrogance.

11. In our dialogue activities, we should seek sincere religious people because the people who are sincere in their religion will most probably be sincere in their dialogue with us as well.

12. If we see any hostility from the people that we dialogue with, we should remember the following principle: “If you wish to defeat your enemy, respond to his evil with good. For if you respond with evil, enmity will increase, and even though he will be outwardly defeated, he will nurture hatred in his heart, and hostility will persist. But if you respond to him with good, he will repent and become your friend.”

13. While we dialogue we should keep in mind that people all have different characters and one bad character in a group does not mean that all the people of that group have a similar character. In other words, it would be wrong to generalize one person’s mistake to the whole community. The Qur’an says, …no soul, as bearer of burden, bears (and is made to bear) the burden of another.” (Fatir 35:18)

14. Similarly, one negative aspect of a person does not necessitate that the person is bad as whole.

15. In dialogue activities, all that we say should be true, but we should not say all that is true. For one of insincere intention may sometimes take unkindly to advice, and react to it unfavorably.

16. In times when evil actions prevail, what could we need more than unity, friendship, and inclusion?

17. In times of conflict of opinions, we should act in a positive way, not a negative one. That is to say, we should strive to promote and diffuse our own belief, not seeking to tear down and destroy that of the other, but rather to improve and reform it.

18. In dialogue activities, we should remember that insisting upon consensus in our methods and approaches after finding agreement upon our aims and goals might be a fruitless wish.

19. At every stage of a dialogue activity, the following principle must be our guide: Love for the sake of God, dislike for the sake of God, judge for the sake of God.

In conclusion, we could say that although Nursi does not state interfaith principles explicitly, it is possible to find them mentioned implicitly in The Risale-i Nur and the above list is a good enough source for carrying out any dialogue interaction in a fruitful way.

Suleyman Eris is the author of Islam: A Brief Guide – Belief and Practice.

Like much of what I saw in Turkey, I spent a great deal of time processing the experience, letting it really sink in, and figuring out what it meant for me. I saw this experience as a powerful metaphor for the wider communion of God-seekers, attempting to live together on a world stage. Each of us as individuals and as units−places of worship, denominations, religions−each is spinning in a hungry drive to experience the divine, to understand and be a part of the mystery and magnitude of God. We are too often, however, distracted by the waxing and waning distances between the dancers, the different ways of spinning, insecurities in our own movement. We are colliding with one another in a clumsy, chaotic mess. If we could lift our eyes and our arms to God and just spin, moving in the ecstatic reality of God’s love, not only would our personal spiritual experience be enriched, but we would begin to spin together, to fall into a beautiful, cosmic dance, one of peace and harmony.

The question then comes: how do we do that? This place of harmony and peace, quite frankly, seems distant and illusory. Humanity is a diverse assortment of peoples, trying to live together in an increasingly small world. And, it’s not looking good.

There is a startlingly prevalent tone in the world arena of intolerance, judgment, and hatred. Mankind is tragically plagued with violence, hurt, oppression, and war, and too much of this takes place in the context of religious differences. Our differences aren’t going to dissipate any time soon, nor should they. What has to happen is dialogue. We have got to learn to love one another, to respect one another, and to communicate with one another. As people of God, we can do one of two things. We can couple our religious identity with that of a soldier, armed and ready for the clash of religious empires, or we can take our seat at the table of humanity with a voice of love, humility, and faith.

Religious tolerance is a huge first step that we must take, first in our personal lives, then toward a peaceful world communion. Religion is one of the most deep and penetrating faces of the human condition. It bears in it an energy of passion and intensity, a power that little else in the sphere of human existence does. We are inherently driven to seek a union with our creator, with the divine, with something that is greater than ourselves. While I personally believe that this hunger is a universal, natural core of our being, it undoubtedly manifests itself in infinitely varying ways. There is no ignoring the fact that there are huge differences and points of separation between the world’s religious nomenclature. There are points of convergence and divergence on every level, from East to West, Jew to Buddhist, Episcopalian to Baptist, and from me to you. The only way to love all in the context of this diversity is to acknowledge and respect those differences.

Now, it is important to note that religious tolerance is not merely a failure to stand up for what one believes. It isn’t a weak cop-out. It begins with a security and understanding of one’s own identity, one’s spiritual core. An awareness of and conviction to one’s own beliefs allows for calmly, strongly held, but permeable boundaries. Tolerance does not require an abdication of those boundaries, but neither does it call for a relentless defense of those boundaries.

Stopping at tolerance is not enough, though. There is no room for growth in merely recognizing differences and agreeing to respect one another from a distance. If we, as individuals, seek growth, and if we as a global religious community seek movement toward a peaceful existence together, have to take it further. We have to dialogue, to engage in a meaningful conversation with one another. Dialogue is a two way sharing between different sides. This means that through love, you share your faith with others. But, it also means that through love you seek a better understanding of those whose faith is different from your own.

Interfaith dialogue is an extremely powerful, highly underestimated tool for achieving peace in such a deeply divided world. Globalization is rapidly and forcefully changing the way we live our lives, whether we realize it or not. Every day, technology transportation, and communication are getting better, placing the entire world in our reach. Geographical separation is becoming much less significant and real. The cultural and religious separations, however, are not narrowing. I live in a tiny global neighborhood with Jews, Muslims, and Hindus, Baptists, Roman Catholics, Methodists and the like. We are neighbors who don’t understand one another, don’t talk to one another….we just stay at home, separated by high fences. The fences are there for a reason, we tell ourselves. Better yet, let’s build them higher, and let’s build some more. How much energy have we spent on building these barriers? We have to be intentional about breaking down those fences and living out the inclusiveness and universality of God’s immeasurable and unconditional love. This doesn’t mean losing our identity or abdicating our beliefs. It means making love, compassion, and understanding a priority.

One of Christ’s major endeavors as a social activist was to tear down the walls that separate humanity and to unite all of mankind under the banner of divine love. The Jewish community during his time was in a tumultuous state of tension between its religious identity and a growing Roman presence. Among the varying responses from the Jewish community, one of the most prevalent was that of the Pharisees. They believed that the redemption of Israel would come from a strict adherence to the complex codes of holiness and purity. Christ made clear, though, that it is Yahweh’s love, compassion, and mercy that supercede the walls that we build to separate and compartmentalize ourselves. He wanted to override the barriers that separate Jews and Greeks, Slaves and Free, prostitutes and tax-collectors, Pharisees and Saducees, rich and poor with divine love. We are called to do the same.

While there are very real issues that separate the religions of the world, our points of commonality are far greater. In loving one another we must understand, dig deeper into our differences. We must move away from a polemic approach to one another and toward a respectful appreciation for religious diversity. We must come to the table with humility and a sincere desire to grow.

In “The Dialogue Decalogue,” Leonard Swidler lists some commandments for effective inter-religious dialogue.

1. The purpose of dialogue is to increase understanding.

2. Participants should engage in both interfaith and inter-religious dialogue.

3. Participants should be honest and sincere.

4. Participants should assume that other participants are equally honest and sincere.

5. Each participant should be allowed self-definition.

6. There should be no preconceptions as to areas of disagreement.

7. Dialogue can only occur between equals.

8. Dialogue can only occur where there is mutual trust.

9. Participants must be self-critical of their religious traditions.

10. Participants must attempt to experience how the traditions of others affect them holistically.

Basically, interfaith dialogue brings people of faith together, creates a loving, respectful relationship between them, and offers immeasurable growth to every party.

I know I’m running on some really broad, abstract ideas, so I want to offer my real, personal experience with interfaith dialogue. My interest in dialogue between religions and within my own faith goes far back, but my recent trip to Turkey transformed that interest into something much deeper and more passionate.

We traveled all over the country, visiting important cultural and religious sites and spending time with people who were a part of this huge movement in Turkey and within Islam. The movement stems from the teachings of Fethullah Gulen, a religious leader and social activist.

I also left with a massive charge on my heart to bring Christianity to the table with equal fervor and conviction. We need to step it up, join our voices in this exciting and hopeful journey toward peace through understanding and education. We have so much to gain, and so much to offer.

I want to leave you with a quote by Huston Smith. “What a strange fellowship this is, the God-seekers in every land lifting their voices in the most disparate way imaginable to the God of all life. How does it sound from above? Like bedlam, or do the strains blend in strange, ethereal harmony? Does one faith carry the lead, or do the parts share in counterpoint and antiphony where not in full-throated chorus? We cannot know. All we can do is try to listen carefully and with full attention to each voice in turn as it addresses the divine.”

Interfaith dialogue activities all around the world continue at a fast pace, and more such meetings are being held all the time. Not a single day goes by without the blessing of the hope-inspiring news of peace-promotion events in some city or country, thanks to countless people of faith who look for common values and purposes under God’s will. They would like to cooperate against war, terror, poverty, and all kinds of discrimination in order to unite forces to glorify God’s Name and uphold human values and rights, peace, education, and the family structure. Prophet Abraham plays a key role in these interfaith dialogue activities, for he is considered the patriarch of all divinely revealed religions. “Paragon of Unity: Discovering the Essence of the Abrahamic Messages” explores his example through many of his outstanding virtues, like investigating faith, the willingness to worship the Divine alone, regard for nature, faithfulness to promises, hospitality, compassion, and devotion to One God. This article strives to promote peace according to the words of Prophet Muhammad, peace and blessings be upon him: “Those who believe in one God are but brothers and sisters.”

At times, one really feels like “that’s it, we have come to the end; we have failed”; . . . when one feels totally exhausted, without any energy to convey messages of human virtue, lofty values, compassion, and tolerance. September 2004 has left so many of us speechless in the face of the horror we have seen on the news about the seizure of a school and taking students as hostages in southern Russia (North Ossetia), and its violent ending. More than 300 people were killed including children, teachers, parents, and other innocent people. Despite certain names and photos being announced on TV screens and newspaper headlines, nobody knows for sure who is behind such atrocities. No religion should be held accountable for them, as no divinely revealed belief system promotes murdering innocents or causing any kind of harm to them. Terror has no place for faith, and thus a true believer cannot be a terrorist. Praying for the souls of the innocent casualties of all terrorist attacks, we invite all people to engage in sound thinking, thereby saving ourselves from the shock of any violence, and to concentrate our efforts on mutual understanding.

The Plaza of Abraham is a place that will host and welcome people of all faiths, especially followers of the Abrahamic faiths. The Plaza is envisioned as being built on approximately ten acres of land. On this land a large circle, called Abraham’s Circle, has been planned. Three places of worship are positioned on the circle. If the circle were a clock, at 3 o’clock there is a mosque, at 7 o’clock a synagogue, and at 11 o’clock a church is located. These will be active places of worship. People will feel safe and comfortable in these places. To illustrate this feeling of safety and comfort for our readers, we would like to them to imagine that they are going to stay in a foreign city, where they do not know the language. They may well prefer to stay in a hotel which is part of a well-known chain. A significant number of people visiting foreign cities would prefer to stay in a well-known hotel, because even though they have come to this foreign city to explore and discover new, fascinating facts of history and geography, even though they are there to visit places, meet people and otherwise live an experience that is novel and different from what their experience at home, they would still prefer to stay in a place that is familiar to them, as a starting point. In the same way do the places of worship on the Circle of Abraham serve as safe and comfortable starting points for people who want to discover other religions. They give the message: Come, you are safe here.

The imams, the rabbis and the priests to be employed in these places of worship are not simply religious leaders; they are scholars as well. They can and are willing to study different religions without any prejudice. They are also guides for other people in the dialogue experience, they serve to protect this effort from falling into a common dilemma: the blind leading the blind. In interfaith dialogue, in efforts where knowledgeable people are not involved, ignorant members of the groups can easily turn the atmosphere into a critical one. In order to prevent such occurrences, these scholarly religious leaders have authority over the people of their faith and there is an internalized approach to dialogue, based on such principles of interfaith dialogue as courtesy, respect, self-critical examination, abandonment of preconceptions and seeking first to understand before trying to be understood.

The plaza will also have a computerized digital library that provides access to digital copies of the main sources for all three religions. Scholars of the different religions will come together to discuss recent issues, and past and possible future interpretations of the religious sources. These efforts focus on searching for interpretations of the sources that foster peace, harmony and mutual coexistence instead of animosity.

A common value to each of these three faiths is hospitality. To bring this common value to the fore, Abraham’s plaza has a feast table covered by a large tent. Once a year a celebration will be held that will last for many days and weeks. Through this event, the People of the Book (as described in the Qur’an) become the People of the Tent. A feast like this is also likely to attract young people. The feast itself and the possibility of making friends from other faiths and nations is likely to be attractive to them.

We envision replicas of Abraham’s Plaza being constructed on all continents of the earth: Europe, Asia, the Americas, Australia and Africa. We envision plazas in major cities, as well as in any small towns where there is a representation of all these faiths. We live in a strange age. We have the best, most widespread and fastest means of communication and transportation to date. Yet the world still faces challenges of misunderstanding and animosity. Projects like the Abraham’s Plaza are needed to get everyday people involved in an interfaith dialogue and in the active pursuit of a more peaceful world.

Reference

• Feiler, Bruce. Abraham, a Journey into the Hearts of Three Faiths. Harper Collins Publishers, 2002.