International consultation on "Christians and Muslims
in dialogue and beyond"
16-18 October 2002
Documents

Group I report: Reciprocal listening and working together in education and interpretation
Group II report: Fostering co-citizenship and upholding human rights
Group III report: Striving together in seeking justice and overcoming violence

Present situation

As Christians and Muslims, we were heartened to learn of many imaginative, local initiatives involving imam and priest, women and men, seeking to rebuild trust and mutual understanding, as well as to engage with sensitive issues, not least gender equality. Such shared action has often taken place in the most difficult situations, from Bethlehem to Kaduna. It was also evident that such welcome developments have to battle against multiple resistance: suspicion or indifference from religious and academic institutions; national contexts where one religion still aspires to hegemonic control of public space or where policy makers remain opposed to making space for any participation of religious actors, situations where the emancipatory potential of religions and inter-religious relations is neutralised by entrenched religious and cultural conservatism.

Common affirmations

As Muslims and Christians, we commit ourselves to the recognition and affirmation of the social fact of religious diversity as God-given. Humility requires of us the recognition that the other is bearer, too, of truth to which we must attend if our own understanding of God is to be deepened and enriched.

This recognition and affirmation must inform all levels of education, formal, non-formal and informal. In our religious formation, in our schools and colleges, in mosque and church, we affirm our determination no longer to speak or write about or for the other without the full participation of the other. We affirm the need to work collaboratively on producing joint textbooks on Christian-Muslim relations, as well as to examine religious and history textbooks in an effort to identify and remove prejudicial and stereotypical characterisations.

We affirm the need to move from general statements of intent to specific collaborative actions, which can make a difference in localities. Christian-Muslim relations have to be rendered visible and concrete: we need to engage the imagination and interest of a range of people outside our usual circles, male and female - especially mothers and teachers - young and old, working people and professionals, as well as actors in civil society. To this end we affirm the need to map good practice in our regions, and identify available materials whether websites, TV soaps, village dramas, collections of sermons and so forth. We need in our joint educational initiative to engage a range of issues which matter to people: environment, poverty and crime.

A critical question which requires further exploration

The critical question this raises for all is whether there is the intellectual, imaginative and institutional space in our respective religious traditions for the "other"? Post 9/11 all religious traditions are being scrutinised: their claims to enable human flourishing, to be custodians of ethical traditions essential for the common good will sound increasingly hollow if we do not demonstrate such active collaboration at many different levels of our respective educational projects.

Two priorities for common action in the next five years:

The creation (or strengthening where such already exist) of structural mechanisms for ensuring dialogue especially in the field of education - religious formation, schooling and at tertiary level - where dialogue is understood as training in living together as a crucial horizon informing both the ethos and content of such educational centres.

The creation (or strengthening where such already exist) of centres to train and equip with appropriate materials dialogue facilitators including imam and priest, social activists and professionals - especially women.

Developing appropriate mechanisms

Holland furnishes a suggestive example of mechanisms developed to enable good relations between imams and priests in that country, through the inclusion in the conversation of imams and priest from Indonesia. We would urge a multiplication of such bilateral arrangements: for Britain this might be Pakistan as a partner, for Germany, Turkey. For other contexts multilateral dialogue will be appropriate.

In addition, we would like prestigious religious centres - Vatican, WCC, Al-Azhar, Madina University - to develop protocols whereby mutuality and collaboration in training about the other be developed. Such initiatives could then lead to regional or national consultations which would further legitimise and encourage such actions.

Group 2: Fostering co-citizenship and upholidng human rights

Since the establishment of modern nation states, Christians and Muslims alike have been challenged to balance the relation between religious, cultural and national identity.

In terms of legal rights, the question of national identity corresponds to that of equal citizenship. The question of citizenship must be dealt with in the light of the specific historical experiences of different nations. In Christian-Muslim dialogue, there should be a greater deal of sharing of different national experiences.

Citizen rights are also related to but must nevertheless be distinguished from human rights. Universal human rights must not be violated but are rather supposed to be protected by states. But nation states may add certain conditions and lay down specific regulations for how to obtain citizenship and the full political rights that come with it. More important, however, are the positive rights that should accompany any notion of citizenship, such as equality, political participation, the right to be consulted, and resource sharing. The right to citizenship should also be regarded as a human right that must be respected once the formal requirements of citizenship are met, instead of being left to the unqualified discretion of the state authorities.

As Christians and Muslims, we affirm the fundamental value of human dignity that is central to our scriptural and theological traditions and underlies our various perceptions of human rights. As Muslims and Christians, we therefore affirm the fundamental rights of persons and groups that are stated in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and the subsequent conventions adopted by the United Nations. These fundamental human rights range from the rights of subsistence and democratic representation to rights such as freedom of religion, expression and association. We also reiterate our common conviction that in both a moral and legal perspective, rights must always be supplemented by duties. For instance, citizenship rights correspond with the duty to observe the rules of the state, to support the community and to defend the nation.

The question of human and citizen rights is also related to the wider issue of religion, state and society. Here, sweeping generalisations still need to be challenged. It is often said that in Islam, there is no separation between religion and state, whereas secularism is often supposed to be the underlying premise of the Western distinction between religion and politics. Reality is more complicated. In Islam, a full identification of state and religion has neither been agreed upon nor practiced universally. Also in states with a Christian majority, there are in fact many modalities of church-state relations (both in the West and worldwide). Furthermore, there is a need to distinguish between secularism as an anti-religious ideology and the principle of the secular (i.e., non-confessional) state.

Although a clear distinction (but not necessarily a full separation) between religion and state should be made, we also affirm our conviction that religion must be regarded as a matter of public importance and not merely as a private matter. The moral formation of the individual and the values of society need to be supported and nourished by religion, and the moral values that religions uphold should never be separated from politics.

As for the concept of citizenship, some would contend that being a citizen means belonging to a community which is not defined by religion but rather by geographical area and political government. Others would affirm the right of the state to define itself by reference to a specific cultural and religious heritage, provided that the state does not in any way violate the rights of the others to full political participation and freedom of religion. The implications of these two different approaches to state and religion need further discussion both between Muslims and Christians and within the ranks of both communities.

The question of state, religion and citizenship entails also the question of how individual rights and group rights should be balanced. In the Islamic tradition, certain political and religious rights were granted already in the classical period to the People of the Book (the ahl al-kitab). In Western societies, the principle of religious freedom was only applied at a much later stage. Once introduced, however, it was linked with the inviolable right of the individual rather than with group rights. But group rights have played a role also in the cultural and political practices of modern Western societies, while certain individual rights have been laid down right from the beginning of Islam (e.g., as reflected in the right of the individual to choose his or her madhab).

The relation between individual and group rights needs further consideration by both Muslims and Christians, in dialogues and deliberations that need to be sensitive to context. In some contexts, a system of group rights and affirmative action towards minorities has helped to protect Christians, Muslims and other vulnerable groups from discrimination on the part of the majority group. But in many cases, group rights have only been granted to certain religious communities whereas others have not been recognised and have hence been discriminated against. When associated with political representation (for instance, by way of reserving seats in parliament for certain religious minorities) a system of group rights may also lead to a general marginalisation of minorities. In light of this problem, many would say that group rights should only be applied in the cultural field, whereas political rights should refer to the individual only. In the cultural field, religious communities should (as a general rule) enjoy the freedom to organise themselves according to their own values and convictions, as long as their practices do not threaten public order or the life and health of the individual.

Although different arrangements of individual and group rights may be justified in different contexts, group rights will always have to be balanced by the right of every individual to opt in and out of religious communities. In this sense, religious rights are different from the rights of ethnic groups or national minorities. As adherents of missionary religions with a universal message, Muslims and Christians together should affirm the right of every person to change his or her religion, without sanctions of any kind regarding citizenship and political rights. This common affirmation takes away nothing from the mutual obligation and right to avoid and resist any kind of manipulation of religious identities.

Citizenship is not merely a legal issue: it has to do with social virtue, a vibrant civil society and a true political democracy. In our common support for equal citizenship rights in the legal field – without any discrimination based on gender, race, caste, social status, ethnicity or religion – we also affirm the necessity of fostering a spirit of co-citizenship through civic education, neighbourly interaction and active political participation.

PROPOSALS FOR COMMON ACTION IN THE NEXT FIVE YEARS:

• Formal recognition of the right to citizenship and sharing of national experiences
• The right to citizenship should be formally inscribed in international conventions as a fundamental human right. In order to achieve this aim, there needs to be co-operation between Christian and Muslim organizations, other NGOs and governments.
• There should be a greater deal of sharing of different national experiences regarding equal citizenship. The question of participatory societies should also be a central concern in Christian-Muslim dialogues.
• Further exploration of the relation between religion, state and society
• Muslims and Christian should join efforts in exploring how religion can be recognised as matter of public importance without being relegated to the private sphere or misused for political purposes
• We should further explore whether the alleged differences between Islamic and Christian approaches to religion, state and society correspond to reality or rather constitute a shared challenge
• To enable such sharing and exploration, inter-religious bodies should be established on the local levels – in addition to the existing national and international ones.

Group 3: Striving together in seeking Justice and Overcoming Violence

Assessing the current situation, the participants agreed that the ongoing prevalence of violence and counter violence, which often involve Muslim and Christian communities, are mostly the product of unequal distribution of power and injustices in political, economical and social conditions, at both the global and the local levels. The unconstrained forces of globalisation, the widening economic and social gaps and inequalities, lack of real democracy within many countries and, in the context of international relations, double-standards on the part of world powers, the growing pressure on cultural identities due to the continuing process of globalisation, the failure of many countries to institutionalise the principle of equal citizenship in their political and social structures, the growing use by international powers of military means to achieve political goals, the denial of the legitimate rights of people under military occupation, such as the Palestinians striving for independence and self-determination, the unconditioned support by the United States of Israeli policies in the occupied Palestinian territories - these and other factors breed common frustration and despair, which in turn feed extremism, militancy and therefore violence.

The participants also observe that what is described as a "global war against terrorism" is often used by some local regimes as a pretext for further oppressive measures and policies. This, in turn, provokes more violence. The critique of terrorism, as an intensified form of indiscriminate violence, should not overlook state terror and violence.

Although violent conflicts are mainly caused by political, economic and social factors, for several various reasons they are often made to take a religious and sectarian character and articulated in religious terms. Among these reasons is the deliberate use of religion by certain powers to serve narrow self-interests and political end. This situation has been reinforced by the 'clash of civilisations' theory manipulated by global powers to disguise structural sources of conflict under a cultural and religious mask. In these global and local contexts religion may then become an intensifier of violent conflicts whose real causes are to be found outside religion. Due to the pressures created by the forces of globalisation, the shrinking role of the traditional national state in meeting the needs of its people is paralleled by the increase in its oppressive measures.

Both aspects help drive many people to fall back on their traditional structures and identities which may extend beyond their national borders. These factors reinforce a current tendency to globalise conflicts with an apparent religious character whereby conflicts in one place with its specific causes and character is conceived of as a global one dividing people along religious and cultural boundaries, so that it spills over into other regions with grave consequences.

In response to this current situation of growing violence, the participants, Christians and Muslims made the following common affirmations:

In view of the above assessment and affirmations, the participants agree that one of the major priorities for common action is to work jointly in order to defend our respective religions against their abuse by political powers seeking to serve their political ends and narrow material gains, thus creating division along religious lines to mask their hegemony and exploitation as the major source of conflict and division. This should be done by drawing on our religious traditions and common values to address the real causes of conflict and to strive together for justice for all humanity of which we are but part.

This entails drawing on all our resources to offer guidance and education through available means including the media and the educational systems. In this context, it is important to encourage networking, co-ordination and collaboration, among organisations and institutions of similar concerns and interest. Inter-cultural exchange should be fostered to promote a global culture of diversity, pluralism and dialogue, grounded in our religions, to combat false interpretations that feed into exclusivism, militancy, extremism and violence.

Back to Interreligious Relations homepage
Back to WCC homepage