Consanguinity itself does not make an individual “sick,” but it affects the probability of an autosomal recessive disorder (which requires two copies of the same mutation) if there is such a mutation which runs within the family (with the word “if” emphasized). Consanguinity should be regarded as a complex issue due to socio-economic factors and health concerns.

In clinical genetics, unions between individuals who are second cousins or closer are considered “consanguineous” (inbreeding coefficient, F 0.0156). Incestuous unions (e.g. brother-sister, father-daughter) will not be included in the description of consanguinity in this article, and are obviously outlawed in every society and faith.

Speaking from a statistical geneticist’s perspective, consanguinity affects the probabilities of certain genotypes occurring in offspring. For example, approximately 6.25% (F = 0.0625) of the alleles (a variation at a particular location in the genome) are expected to be homozygous in the offspring of first cousins; and 12.5% (F = 0.125) in the offspring of double first cousins. See Figure 1 for different types of consanguineous unions.

Historically speaking, consanguinity must have been unavoidable during the initial stages of mankind. However, even when human population sizes reached considerable figures, there is a great deal of evidence that consanguineous unions/marriages were widely practiced in ancient societies, especially amongst the ruling and/or land owning elite. For example, many Egyptian Pharaohs, Holy Roman Emperors, and members of the Spanish Habsburg dynasty used within-family unions as a way to keep the wealth, “royal blood,” and/or “edification” within the family. 1-3 However, this is not to say taboos did not exist in other populations.

Though now taboo in Western countries, first cousin marriages were not uncommon in Europe and North America until the mid-19th century, again especially among individuals with high socio-economic status 7. For instance, Darwin married his first cousin, Emma (Wedgwood), in 1839. Yet, in the later half of the 19th century, scientific debates led to marriage between cousins being banned in 12 US states. 7,8

Consanguineous unions occur very rarely in Western countries for a variety of sociological (e.g. cultural) and statistical reasons, but the complete opposite is true in certain regions of the world where union of kin is seen as the default choice, for a variety of socio-economic reasons. Analysis of currently available data suggests that over one-tenth of the world’s current population is composed of families where the parents are related as second cousins or closer 7.

Although a great majority of consanguineous families do not produce deficient offspring, it is still true that there is a risk of unions with close relatives.

The genetic risk comes from the fact that union of kin results in an increase of homozygosity (or more correctly autozygosity) in the offspring, which translates into a higher chance of being homozygous for any allele within the family gene pool. If any of these alleles are autosomal recessive mutations, this increase in probability applies to these alleles also. This simple fact is the main difference between union of kin and union of unrelated individuals (coined the name “inbreeding depression”); as there are many disease causal mutations out there in outbreeding populations (e.g. in Western populations), 21 but because they are very rare, they do not get to meet their counterpart in the union of unrelated individuals, thus their homozygous effects are never seen. This is why extremely rare autosomal recessive disorders are mostly seen in regions where consanguinity levels are high.

Despite the risk of heritable disease (albeit small, as discussed above), why are consanguineous marriages still common in many populations? There are many factors including socio-economic, ethno-cultural, religious and geographical; however the former duo (i.e. social and economic factors) seems to be key.17 Sociological studies in communities with high consanguinity rates show that the relationship between the husband and wife was found to be stable due to higher compatibility of life style, social relationships, and the family members from both sides. It is believed that consanguinity can also result in more female autonomy4 through better relationships with her in-laws as they can support her in times of need,17,22 Families concerned with the transmission of cultural values may also seem to practice it more. Consanguinity is a social reality of many communities. It relates to a number of social dynamics in respective cultural habitats with quite a number communal and health consequences. It is significant to be aware of these dynamics and consequences to be able to make a fair analysis on cultures and lifestyles unknown to us.

References

1. Alvarez, G., Ceballos, F.C. & Quinteiro, C. The role of inbreeding in the extinction of a European royal dynasty. PLoS One 4, e5174 (2009).

2. Ceballos, F.C. & Alvarez, G. Royal dynasties as human inbreeding laboratories: the Habsburgs. Heredity (Edinb) 111, 114-21 (2013).

3. Paul, D.B. & Spencer, H.G. “It’s Ok, We’re Not Cousins by Blood”: The Cousin Marriage Controversy in Historical Perspective. PLoS Biol 6, e320 (2008).

4. Bittles, A.H. A Background Summary of Consanguineous Marriages. Available online: http://consang.net/images/d/dd/01AHBWeb3.pdf (2001).

5. Tadmouri, G.O. et al. Consanguinity and reproductive health among Arabs. Reprod Health 6, 17 (2009).

6. Bittles, A.H., Mason, W.M., Greene, J. & Rao, N.A. Reproductive behavior and health in consanguineous marriages. Science 252, 789-94 (1991).

7. Bittles, A.H. & Black, M.L. Consanguinity, human evolution, and complex diseases. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 107, 1779-1786 (2010).

8. Ottenheimer, M. Forbidden relatives: the American myth of cousin marriage, (University of Illinois Press, 1996).

9. Imaizumi, Y. A recent survey of consanguineous marriages in Japan. Clin Genet 30, 230-3 (1986).

10. Bener, A. & Alali, K.A. Consanguineous marriage in a newly developed country: the Qatari population. J Biosoc Sci 38, 239-46 (2006).

11. al-Gazali, L.I. et al. Consanguineous marriages in the United Arab Emirates. J Biosoc Sci 29, 491-7 (1997).

12. Jurdi, R. & Saxena, P.C. The prevalence and correlates of consanguineous marriages in Yemen: similarities and contrasts with other Arab countries. J Biosoc Sci 35, 1-13 (2003).

13. Hamamy, H. et al. Consanguineous marriages, pearls and perils: Geneva International Consanguinity Workshop Report. Genet Med 13, 841-7 (2011).

14. BITTLES, A.H. WHEN COUSINS MARRY: A REVIEW OF CONSANGUINITY IN THE MIDDLE EAST. in Perspectives in Human Biology 71-83 (1995).

15. Tuncbilek, E. & Koc, I. Consanguineous marriage in Turkey and its impact on fertility and mortality. Ann Hum Genet 58, 321-9 (1994).

16. de Costa, C. Pregnancy outcomes in Lebanese-born women in western Sydney. Med J Aust 149, 457-60 (1988).

17. Darr, A. & Modell, B. The frequency of consanguineous marriage among British Pakistanis. J Med Genet 25, 186-90 (1988).

18. Hoodfar, E. & Teebi, A.S. Genetic referrals of Middle Eastern origin in a western city: inbreeding and disease profile. J Med Genet 33, 212-5 (1996).

19. Wikipedia.org. Cousin marriage law in the United States by state. Vol. 2013 (2013). http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cousin_marriage_law_in_the_United_States_by_state

20. Hashmi, M.A. Frequency of consanguinity and its effect on congenital malformation–a hospital based study. J Pak Med Assoc 47, 75-8 (1997).

21. Ng, S.B. Targeted capture and massively parallel sequencing of 12 human exomes. Nature 461, 272-276 (2009).

22. Hussain, R. & Bittles, A.H. The prevalence and demographic characteristics of consanguineous marriages in Pakistan. J Biosoc Sci 30, 261-75 (1998).

23. Bittles, A.H. et al. Consanguineous marriage, a familiar story full of surprises. in Health and Ethnicity (eds. Macbeth, H. & Shetty, P.) 68-78 (Taylor & Francis, 2001).

24. Clark, C.J., Hill, A., Jabbar, K. & Silverman, J.G. Violence during pregnancy in Jordan: its prevalence and associated risk and protective factors. Violence Against Women 15, 720-35 (2009).

25. Assaf, S. & Khawaja, M. Consanguinity trends and correlates in the Palestinian Territories. J Biosoc Sci 41, 107-24 (2009).

26. Ober, C., Hyslop, T. & Hauck, W.W. Inbreeding effects on fertility in humans: evidence for reproductive compensation. Am J Hum Genet 64, 225-31 (1999).

27. Bittles, A. Consanguinity and its relevance to clinical genetics. Clin Genet 60, 89-98 (2001).

28. Dyer, O. MP is criticised for saying that marriage of first cousins is a health problem. BMJ 331, 1292 (2005).

While a lover who transcends his or her self with the wings of love and reaches the Lord in the horizon of passion and enthusiasm, and carries out his or her responsibilities toward the King of his or her with his or her inner and outer senses and faculties, the heart of that lover is set on His vision. Such a believer’s nature is “burned” with the light of Divine Grandeur or the Divine “Facial” Light, and lost in wonder and amazement. With the cup of love on one’s lips, while the veils of the Unseen are lifted one after the other, he or she becomes intoxicated with studying the meanings that come in rays from behind those veils, and is enraptured with the pleasure of watching the scenes behind them. One’s walking and stopping occur at the command of God, speech is no more than the inspiration that comes from Him, and silence, when observed, is done in His name. At various times, he or she journeys toward Him or is in His “company,” or is occupied with communicating His message to others. Some have defined love, in the context of God’s love of His distinguished servants, as bestowing favors, and as obedience, devotion, and unconditional submission in the context of a servant’s love of God. The following couplets of Rabi‘atu’l-‘Adawiya are significant in expressing this meaning:

You talk about loving God while you disobey Him;
I swear by my life that this is something very strange.
If you were truthful in your love, you would obey Him,
for a lover obeys whom he loves.

Love is based on two important pillars: that which is manifested by the lover’s acts (a lover tries to comply with the Beloved’s will), and the lover’s inner world (a lover should inwardly be closed to anything not related to Him). Heroes of love mean this when they talk about love. According to them, emotional concern with or love of any kind of pleasure, including spiritual, cannot be called “ love” in its true sense. It can only be figurative love.

Every lover cannot feel the same degree of love for the Beloved, for love varies according to the lover’s spiritual and emotional depth, the degree of consciousness of and care in obedience to the Beloved. For example, the love felt by those beginning the way is not established and constant. They dream of acquiring the rank of perfect goodness in the shade of the Truth of Muhammad as Ahmad and, at times, receive signs of knowledge of God, thrill at the twinkle of the “light” appearing on their horizon, and vaguely feel amazement and wonder. On the other hand, those who have made great progress fly in the heaven of love toward the highest point. They live in the bright climate of the Qur’an as embodiments and examples of the good morals of Prophet Muhammad, upon him be peace and blessings. While trying to represent his good morals, they expect no material or spiritual reward and demand no pleasure. Even at the summit of this holy representation, like fruit-bearing trees whose branches bend with the weight of their fruit, they lower their wings of humility and always mention the Beloved. If they are shaken with a fault or error, they severely criticize and fight with themselves. And finally, those most advanced in the love of God are like rain clouds in the “heaven” of Islam. They feel all existence with Him, live with Him, and see and breathe with Him. In a neverending cycle, they are filled with pangs of separation (from Him) and a desire to meet Him; when relieved or emptied, they mount on a beam of light and descend to the earth to embrace the whole of existence.

One who turns to Him with heartfelt desire and sincere enthusiasm, regardless of the degree of love, receives a reward according to the depth of feeling and concern for Him. The first group of people mentioned above receive special favor and mercy. The second group of people reach the horizon of perceiving the Attributes of Grace and Majesty, and are freed from defects of character. Those of the third group are illumined by the light of His Being, awakened to the reality of things, and are in touch with the dimension of existence behind veils. That is, the Almighty manifests the light of His Grandeur or “Face” to burn up the corporeal attributes of those whom He loves and elevates them to the realm of Divine Attributes, such as the All-Seeing and All-Hearing. He awakens them fully to the fact that they are poor and helpless before Him, and fills their hearts with the light of His existence.

One whose love has reached this degree, and who is rewarded with so much Divine favor, attains an eternal life beyond existence or non-existence. Like a bar of iron put into fire and thus appearing as a bar of fire, such a lover may be unable to distinguish the Divine Being and His manifestations, and therefore expresses feelings and experiences in terms associated with such false beliefs as incarnation and union (with God). In such circumstances, one must consider the Sunna’s established criteria. The expressions uttered by profoundly spiritual individuals lost in and intoxicated with love of God cannot be used as the criteria by which to judge them. Otherwise, we may feel enmity toward such friends of God, who are favored with His continuous company according to the Prophetic Tradition: A man is with him whom he loves, and, as declared in the hadith qudsi: Whoever becomes an enemy of My friends has waged war on Me.

O God! Endear belief to us and made it appealing to our hearts, and make unbelief, transgression, and rebellion hateful to us; and include us among those with right conduct and sound thinking. And bestow blessings and peace on our master Muhammad, the master the Messengers.

The Drive for Ecumenical Unity

First, when speaking of unity, Jesus never specified a date or time period. Most probably he did this in an attempt to limit human weakness and shortsightedness in this field. However, separation and scattering happened anyway. Rather than considering this something undesirable, we should recognize it as a normal result of human diversity and a source of richness for humanity. Human diversity starts with diversity in the white, black, red, and yellow races, followed by new-color races arising from interracial sexual relations between the original races.

According to Teilhard de Chardin,1 the human race is undergoing a process of permanent change, continuous development, and an unstoppable growth toward an ever-higher level of spiritualization in its quest to achieve a clearer and better understanding of the Divine Reality, the Divine Truth. All faith communities can accept that the perennial Reality from which all existing matter originated is also the final Omega-destination of all beings. Only then, after a long period of growth, will humanity and all religions be united in the All of the spiritual Reality.

After centuries of war and conflict, collaboration and unity among nations progressed with the creation of the United Nations (UN), its affiliated institutes, and the International Court at The Hague in The Netherlands. Sometime in the not-too-distant future, we hope that the dream of Baha’ullah2-the creation of a world parliament, a world government, a world currency unit, and a universal language-will be realized. Is it not time for the world’s diverse faith communities to realize a similar union in collaboration?

Second, people are talking of a small ecumenism between Christian faith communities and a great ecumenism between the world’s faith communities. The ecumenism appellation undoubtedly will be greeted with suspicion by non-Christian faith communities due to its Western origin. In line with the growing trend of including non-Christian faith communities in Christian ecumenist encounters, it might be advisable to replace ecumenism with dialogue. Interfaith dialogue then can be used for all interfaith dialogue encounters.

Third, our world is faced with the problems of an escalating gap between rich and poor and the ever-increasing poverty of 20 percent of the world’s population. Although the world’s political, financial, and industrial leaders acknowledge that something should be done, they have not reached any consensus on how to tackle these problems. Faith communities, in cooperation with non-governmental organizations (NGOs), could speed up this process by fulfilling the necessary role of pressing and pushing these leaders to reach some kind of agreement. However, to be effective and have a lasting influence they must be able to collaborate with each other.

After many years of meetings, it is becoming clear to more and more people that drives for unity between the Christian Protestant communities, as well as drives for unity between the Catholic Church and other Christian communities, are not making any real progress. A growing number of people now believe that such unity should be considered as a very long-term goal.

What should be sought now is not unity, but rather a union in collaboration. This seems to be happening due to advances in telecommunication technology, an acquisition of better knowledge and estimation of other cultures, and also the immigration of non-Christian faith communities to traditionally Christian countries. For example, this latter factor has made Islam the second largest faith community in the European Union.

Fourth, to realize such a union in collaboration, the following four attitudes must be present:

A True Interest in the World’s Problems. All interfaith meetings should deal with the suffering of so many of our brothers and sisters on this planet from a position of real concern and compassion. But more than that, they should formulate the sincere desire within themselves to do something about it. Such a global consciousness should be the basic mental attitude from which all faith communities start when working on interfaith dialogue.

The problems of poverty in South America and India, as well as many other countries, cannot be solved in a reasonably short time period by local and even nationally combined efforts. A change for the better in the socioeconomic infrastructures, many of which remain under the control of a small minority of landowners and industrialists who derive great financial benefits from the status quo, will be possible only through political and moral pressure from the outside. This represents a challenge for a United Religions Organization in collaboration with local politicians.3

A Clearly Defined Purpose so That Efficient Solutions Can Be Reached and Implemented. Efficient solutions will be produced only when all faith communities become a “One Voice Forum” having behind it the power of all their adherents. This could become a reality by creating a world religious organization, such as has been proposed by Episcopal Bishop William Swing’s United Religions Initiative (URI), launched in 1995. This body does not seek to unite all religions into one, but to bring them together at the same table so that their voice will be heard and taken seriously by the UN. An important step in this direction was the creation of the World Council of Churches (WCC) in Geneva, Switzerland.4 The WCC could become a basis for a world organization if non-Christian faith communities and the Catholic Church were to become members.

In the case of Europe, a more unified European collaboration should be studied to promote communication between European interfaith dialogue organizations. An umbrella organization, something like a European Interfaith Council, is urgently needed, as is a European interfaith magazine, to combine all efforts on a European-wide level.

Giving Priority to the Common Welfare. This involves subordinating personal interests to the interests of the whole, a problem often encountered on the political level. For example, the UN’s activities will remain very limited as long as America gives priority to its own interests. This is also applicable to NGOs and faith communities, for concentrating on their own organizational agendas, instead of on the common welfare of humanity, makes real dialogue and real collaboration difficult. As far as I know, only Japan places the welfare of the whole community above that of the individual in all aspects of life. This is perhaps due to its centuries-old Buddhist and Confucian background. Whatever the reason, this remains a unique world phenomenon that is not recognized or understood sufficiently by the world community.

Adopting a “Go and Learn” Attitude. In other words, we have to move beyond the typical Western attitude of “Go and Teach.” This attitude is characteristic of Christianity and Islam, for adherents of both religions believe in their religion’s superiority and that they have exclusive possession of the whole truth. Unfortunately, such attitudes have resulted in colonization, negating and even persecuting other cultures and religions. What is required today is the attitude of “Go and Learn,” of being interested in and learning about others, of coming to respect their identity and values.

Due to this new attitude, we might integrate some of these values in our own way of life and be enriched as a result. As long as the Catholic Church and other Christian denominations, as well as Islam, do not renounce their claim of exclusive possession of the Truth, the above-mentioned union in collaboration will remain an almost-impossible undertaking. The only way forward is one of accepting and recognizing other faith communities and working to go beyond the differences and similarities to arrive at a union in collaboration. Overall unity should not be the goal

Footnotes

1. Teilhard de Chardin (1881-1955): Teilhard aimed at a metaphysic of evolution, holding that it was a process converging toward a final unity that he called the Omega point. He attempted to show that what is of permanent value in traditional philosophical thought can be maintained and even integrated with a modern scientific outlook if one accepts that the tendencies of material things are directed, either wholly or in part, beyond the things themselves toward the production of higher, more complex, more perfectly unified beings…. Teilhard argued that the appearance of man brought an added dimension into the world. This he defines as the birth of reflection: animals know, but man knows that he knows; he has “knowledge to the square.” Another great advance in Teilhard’s scheme of evolution is the socialization of mankind. This is not the triumph of herd instinct but a cultural convergence of humanity toward a single society. Evolution has gone about as far as it can to perfect human beings physically: its next step will be social and spiritual. Teilhard saw such evolution already in progress; through technology, urbanization, and modern communications, more and more links being established between different peoples’ politics, economics, and habits of thought in an apparently geometric progression. (www.britannica.com)
2. Baha’ullah (1817-92): Founder of the Baha’i faith upon his claim to be the manifestation of the unknowable God. He propounded a comprehensive teaching that advocated the unity of all religions and the universal brotherhood of man. Emphasizing social ethics, he eschewed ritual worship and devoted himself to the abolition of racial, class, and religious prejudices. (www.britannica.com)
3. For more information, check out: www.united-religions. org/newsite/index.htm, or contact: United Religions Initiative, PO Box 29242, San Francisco, CA 94129-0242 USA; e-mail: office@uri.org.
4. The World Council of Churches (WCC) is an ecumenical organization founded in 1948 in Amsterdam as “a fellowship of Churches which accept Jesus Christ our Lord as God and Saviour.” The WCC is not a church, nor does it issue orders or directions to the churches. It works for the unity and renewal of the Christian denominations and offers them a forum in which they may work together in the spirit of tolerance and mutual understanding (www.britannica. com). It now has 337 Christian churches as members, mainly Protestant and Eastern Orthodox. The Catholic Church and Southern Baptists are not members.

1) Dialogue is only possible when we respect each other’s individuality. Thus, knowledge of others in their cultural setting is essential. By recognizing and accepting social, cultural, and religious diversity, an exchange of mutual values and union in collaboration, humanity ultimately will be led to unity.

2) Everything is actively involved in a continuous growth process toward a better world in an ever-higher intellectual and spiritual environment. This awareness that all people belong to the same family, through their common origin and destination, should lead to a higher universal responsibility to practice this awareness in our lives.

3) The inspiring role of the leaders of world religions, traditions, and other convictions is of prime importance in our effort to create a better world order in peace and justice. In their cultural and philosophical traditions, their churches, organizations and institutes are the organizations par excellence to proclaim and sustain universally accepted moral principles.

4) The tenets of world religions and other faith traditions have their roots in their native culture, have developed on the basis of their culture’s philosophical and moral concepts, and have approached and proclaimed the faith in transient expressions and culturally appropriate ceremonies. As pilgrims always on their way to new discoveries and subject to change, no faith community should claim exclusive representation of the Truth or superiority.

5) The world religions should move from their approach of converting to an approach of testifying. The essential elements of one’s own faith should be presented in a language understandable by the local faithful, so that dialogue between the world religions and faith traditions will lead to a better mutual knowledge and understanding, and to an exchange of mutual values. This will enrich one’s faith and that of others.

6) In the passionate search for the truth and a more comprehensive approach to spirituality, meditation should be re-evaluated and practiced to engender a deeper awareness of the Divine presence. Meditation crosses all religious boundaries and is universally shared and accepted. Silent meditation should be part of all interreligious encounters.

7) People involved in interreligious and intercultural dialogue must remain aware of and concerned about our world’s escalating ecological, social, economic, and financial problems.

Accepting these seven guidelines could become a major stepping stone to a union, in collaboration between the world religions and other faith traditions, that transcends doctrinal differences. Such a dialogue in collaboration with the political world would be the most effective contribution toward more efficient solutions to the world problems. At the same time, it would be an important stepping stone to a new world order of more peace and justice for all.

Elucidation Summary

Par. 1: Real dialogue is possible only in the presence of mutual knowledge and acceptance of cultural and religious values. Racism can be described as intolerance and non-acceptance of other cultures, with ignorance as its main cause. All opponents of racism argue for tolerance. However, tolerance implies discrimination, because one tolerates something that one wishes were not there. Given this, it should be replaced by acceptance of others in respect of the values inherent in their cultures, religions, and customs. Accepting others must mean more than tolerance”it should mean accepting them as members of the community without necessarily any loss of their unique identity.

Such mutual acceptance should integrate both sides’ values into a culturally richer community. Where there is respect, there will be willingness and even readiness to integrate some of those values to enrich one’s own cultural and religious values. Such respect for others requires a certain knowledge of the others’ history, historical and cultural development, ways of life, and other factors. Thanks to developments in communication technology, such knowledge is now readily available.

Par. 2: The recent trend of re-evaluating religion, spirituality, meditation, silence, and so-called soft human virtues can be considered in full agreement with the optimistic life-view of the Jesuit Father Teilhard de Chardin (1881-1955), as expressed in his main books on humanity’s slow but sure spiritualization progress, and with the Dalai Lama’s 1992 document The Global Community and the Need for Universal Responsibility.

The growth in common knowledge and an ever-higher intellectual heritage passing from one generation to the next has brought millions of people into contact with different cultures and religions. Our world is becoming multicultural, while the formerly mostly unilaterally decided national borders are losing their importance, as in the European Union (EU). Regional identity and languages are becoming more important in bringing people together.

One of the latest revolutionary trends is the political world’s overture to faith communities as partners and advisers in analyzing current problems. Jacques Delors, former president of the EU Commission in Brussels, has created inside the Commission a Forward Studies Unit to study the EU’s ethic dimensions. For the last 5 years, it has been organizing a yearly interreligious/interpolitical symposium in various European cities. Each time, some 120 people participated. The EU can be considered a forerunner in this field. Let’s hope that it will be followed by other governments.

Par. 3: In the individualistic West, there is a growing tendency to place the individual in the foreground as the decision maker in moral matters based on his or her individual conscience. This explains the attractiveness of the New Age movement and of innumerable new religious sects competing for followers in poverty-stricken South American and African countries. Many faithful Catholics and other Christians have lost faith in their churches as institutions, mainly because the highest authorities are slow to adapt to current needs and trends. Guidance from above remains an essential and irreplaceable element in people’s moral behavior. Nothing can replace the world religions as institutions.

The world religions, as institutions joining with the recent enunciations of free-thinking humanists that they also are a religious community, should unite globally in a union of collaboration to increase the effectiveness of their moral and ethical guidance in personal and worldly matters. Such a dream would receive the enthusiastic support of young people searching for a new ethical basis for their lives.

The ethical basis for such a union is available in the global ethic declaration of the Catholic theologian Hans Kung and his colleague Karl-Josef Kuschel of Germany. This global ethic, after vigorous discussion, was received enthusiastically, approved tentatively, and declared publicly at the Parliament of World’s Religions meeting in Chicago in 1993, which was attended by 7,000 religious and spiritual personalities from all world religions and traditions. Its main ideas are summarized in following three catch phrases:

– No human life without a world ethic for nations.

– No peace among nations without peace among religions.

– No peace among religions without dialogue among religions.

A second important ethical document is the Universal Declaration of Human Responsibilities, announced on September 1, 1997, by Tokyo’s InterAction Council and supported by the elderly statesmen of 28 countries. It can be considered an emanation of the Japanese and Eastern way of life, reflecting their cultural values and giving priority to responsibilities and duties above rights. It also is a most opportune addition to the Universal Declaration of Human Rights.

Grassroots parish and social workers, peace promoters, and NGOs should be involved in this union.

Par. 4: It is a very opportune trend that Biblical exegesis, as practiced in Christian communities for the past 50 years, is now a part of most Christian communities. This is not yet the case in Muslim, Buddhist, and Hindu communities.

It is now considered self-evident that Divine Revelation’s formulation is influenced greatly by the culture in which it originated, and that this form of presentation is not revelation itself. Although these presentations and interpretations undergo a continuous change appropriate to the believers’ ever-changing knowledge and ever-higher conscience level, the essentials never change. The revolution in Biblical exegesis from literalism to a culturally appropriate describing and relating interpretation, especially in Christian theology, is the most valuable evolution and development of the last 50 years toward interfaith dialogue and real inculturation. The liturgical changes in Catholic eucharistic ceremonies, such as replacing Latin with the local language, have been so many steps in this evolution of adaptation.

Accepting this position causes one to accept others as equals and limits, to a reasonable degree, any remaining feelings of superiority. These renewals also have been at the origin of the increasing number of interfaith dialogue meetings in the past 40 years, which saw one of its first happenings in Chicago’s international interfaith meeting, organized by the Parliament of the World’s Religions in 1893.

All of this has resulted in a growing understanding of other religions and cultures, and a growing mutual respect and acceptance of the values of others. This even has resulted in an integration effort of others’ cultural and religious values in one’s own faith-life as a rethinking and a deepening of personal faith. Advances in communication, as well as global migrations and the resulting inculturation process, have made a global interfaith dialogue possible.

Par. 5: Many of us accept the existence of a spiritual power or spiritual being, whether a person with a sublimation of human characteristics (compassion and love) or as a difficult-to-define karma or buddhahood, to which the spiritual existence of everything belongs as its origin and final destination.

Most religious scholars now admit that each world religion has its origin in a particular culture, of which the eternal truth’s wording and each religion’s religious ceremonies are a part. Culture changes over time, due to increased general knowledge, science, and lifestyles. Life, as it was experienced at the time of the founders of the world religions and other faith traditions, bears almost no resemblance to modern life and conceptions. Thanks to philology, archeology, and anthropology, we can better understand and interpret sacred texts and how they originated and developed in their contemporary contexts and surroundings.

Therefore, no faith community should claim to have the whole truth or be the world’s savior. Christians and Muslims, as well as other people of religion, should admit that claims of exclusivity have led to abuse.

Many fear that accepting other cultures or religions within their borders means losing their own values. In fact, each such encounter enriches one’s culture and values. A unification and further homogeneity of the world population, based on accepting and acknowledging the cultural values of others, enriches our own culture as well as the world’s culture.

This can be applied to religious perception. In the absence of claims to absolute truth, there is no need to convert others. As each world religion has its own unique values, passing them on to deepen the faith of others is an important element in drawing closer together. This realization also could end the rivalry between faith communities and allow people to choose the faith tradition they will follow. Such an acceptance and experiencing of these values and truths also will increase knowledge and perception of the Divine Mystery, the final and eternal truth.

Interfaith dialogue seeks to reach a better mutual understanding and to engage in common activities. Its main attitude is reconciliation in order to create a better and more peaceful world, to share the world’s resources more equally, and to help the underprivileged. Doctrinal, communal, or religious union should not be the real aim; rather, we should work for union in collaboration to do something together, to rise above discussions on doctrinal and ceremonial similarities and differences. Such union in collaboration is possible only in diversity and in conserving as much as possible our own identity in an increasingly homogeneous world. These are converging, not contradictory, developments. This is true for nations and countries where borders are becoming less important or even disappearing, and also for religions. It seems evident that such a union can be realized only by collaborating with each other in a common global range of activities.

Par. 6: The West’s growing contact with Hindu and Buddhist spirituality and meditation probably has contributed greatly to the recent interest in all kinds of spiritual practices, from yoga to Zen meditation and New Age meetings. Where the West has been used to more active prayers and active intellectual meditation as religious practices, the East has surprised us with other, more passive ways of approaching the inexpressible Divine Mystery. In their dictionary, there is no God as understood in the monotheistic religions. The Divine lives and is present in everything, especially in each person’s self. Buddhist and Hindu meditation and contemplation do away with the self to discover the real Self by becoming free of thought and desire, by becoming empty of the self so that the Self can reign. This way still might be reserved for a few, but the numbers of such people continues to grow markedly. Daily meditation can be practiced by anyone, for it is a matter of living in conscious awareness of others as members of the same family and of all the things around us. Just being aware helps us to concentrate on essentials, to eliminate stress, and especially to become aware of our brothers and sisters of the one Earth-family under the same Heaven.

Par. 7: The world religions and other faith traditions, given actual conditions, clearly are not ready to come to a unity of fusion. The unity that interfaith dialogue should seek is possible only in collaboration.

If the organizations active in interreligious/intercultural dialogue and in dialogue for peace really believe what they say they believe, then the most direct and efficient way to realize a one-voice world forum for all faith communities, the object of the United Religions Initiative, would be for the main interfaith and peace organizations (e.g., the Parliament of the World’s Religions, the World Conference of Religions for Peace, the World Congress of Faiths, the International Association for Religion and Peace, and many others in Southeast Asia) to transcend their self-interests and join forces with the United Religions Initiative in a kind of federal combination. Then they could work to create this kind of global organization, whose most appropriate name would be the United Religions Organization, as a worthy collaborating partner to the United Nations. This would be the expression, reverberating throughout the world, of a real human spirit of mutual love and compassion, and also of the Japanese and Eastern spirit of harmony in forgetting the self for the common welfare.