Editorial
Interfaith Encounter in the Land of the Bible
About The Israel Interfaith Association
From the Activities of the IIA
The Ambassador Conference with Al-Liqa, December
1994
Opening Session
Some of the Lectures
The future of Interfaith relations in the Middle East
by Jack J. Cohen
The Background of Al-Liqua
by Dr. G. Khoury
Aspirations of Interfaith Dialogue for the Future
of the Region
by Rev. Munib A. Younan:
From the discussions
Jerusalem 3000 years
Jerusalem: The Legal and Political Background
by Ruth Lapidoth
The Significance of Jerusalem - A Jewish Perspective
by Raphael Jospe
The Significance of Jerusalem - A Christian perspective
by Geries S. Khoury
The Significance of Jerusalem - A Muslim Perspective
by Ziad Abu-Amr
Editorial
Interfaith Encounter in the Land of the Bible
The gains made by the Orthodox and Fundamentalist Jewish parties
in Israel's recent
elections have dismayed a lot of persons who hope for speedy
progress toward
greater mutual understanding and tolerance among the three Abrahamic
religions.
This reaction, while understandable as an emotional reflex, illustrates
how far we are
from comprehending the complexity of interfaith relations in
the land of the Bible.
In the first place, even before the establishment of the State
of Israel, Jews,
Christians and Moslems were wrestling with the slowly increasing
impact of
modernity on their religious traditions. The Jewish socialist
pioneers who laid the
groundwork for the state=to-come were estranged from traditional
religion and
attempted to create what they deemed to be a non-religious response
to the questions
entailed in Jewish resettlement in Eretz Yisrael. At the same
time, traditionalist Jews
had to begin to deal with the reconstruction of the Halakhah
as the effective
instrument for guiding the destiny of the Jewish people in an
era of renewed contact
with the Land.
Moslems, lacking a modern religious leadership, hardly recognized
the scientific
and social changes that were taking place around them, although
they were acutely
aware of the political revolution in which they were involved.
At the same time,
native Christians began to attend to the fact that, as a small
minority in a Moslem
Arab world, their political situation was anomolous. Nor were
they satisfied with the
fact that their religious guidance came largely from western-trained
clergymen.
None of the three religions has been able thus far to overcome
these internal
tensions and are thus not prepared for interfaith dialogue. No
individual and no group
can converse with others unless they are clear about and secure
in their own identity.
But the problem goes much deeper. In Judaism and Islam, land
plays a crucial role,
albeit in different ways. For Judaism, it is Eretz Yisrael alone
which can be the locale
of Jewish national fulfilment. Islam has a wider perspective,
as a result of its
missionary bent and its territorial conquests. Religiously, Christianity
has no
territorial claims, but politically, Arab Christians have adopted
the view of their
Moslem brothers that the land of the Bible belongs to the Arab
people.
The foregoing only begins to depict the unusual complex of issues
that govern any
kind of religious dialogue in Israel. Israel's elections are
undoubtedly a blow to those
of us who would like to be able to tackle the theological, educational,
moral and
spiritual problems that all religions face. But we should not
be surprised at the turn of
events. In any case, the traditional religionists who use Israel's
electoral system to
build up their power and to insure financial support for their
institutions are not those
Jews who engage in religious dialogue, either with fellow Jews
or non-Jews. Nor can
we expect fast results for fruitful dialogue from the readiness
of Israel's new
Fundamentalist Moslems to reach out to Christians and Jews. The
worlds represented
by the dialogists are simply too far apart.
If we remember that the Bible covers a millenium and more of
the history of
ancient Israel and its neighbors, and if we grasp the vast scope
of change in all areas
of life that occurred during that era, we shall possition ourselves
properly to continue
our quiet but meaningful efforts at interfaith understanding.
We in the Israel Interfaith
Association intend to maintain our sense of balance and to help
one another to raise
the level of religious culture among the Jews, Christians and
Moslems, in whose
hands lie the destiny of the State of Israel.
Jerusalem, June 1996
Jack Cohn
go top
From the Activities of the IIA
The International Council of Christians and Jews
During July 11-15,1993, the IIA was the host of the annual conference
of the ICCJ,
which took place at the "Carmel Forest" guest-house. The topic was:
"Sharing the
Blessing of Abraham in the Holy Land Today".
Our Activities During the Peace Process
On the 29th of November 1993, members of the IIA heard a lecture by
Prof. Aviezer
Ravitsky on the peace process from a Jewish point of view. The lecturer
explained
the dilemma in the religious-national Jewish camp between the ideal
"Eretz Israel"
and the need for peace with Palestinians.
Another lecture on the subject from an Islamic point of view was
given on
Monday, December 20th 1993 by Mahmoud Abu Bakr, from Isreali Television.
According to him, the secular Moslems are ready for peace, if Israel
promises equal
rights to Palestinians. The Orthodox have difficulties in deciding
and have a passive
opinion. The fanatic Moslems are opposed to the peace process for both
religious and
political reasons. In spite of their being a small group, they wield
a lot of influence.
A third lecture was held on Monday, January 24th 1994 by Fr.
Dr. Thomas
Stransky, Rector of the Tantur Ecumenical Institute, and Fr. Dr. Peter
Madrus, a
Catholic priest from Bet Sahur and a lecturer in Bet Jala. They emphasised
the
differences in expectations: while the Israelis hope for security,
the Palestinians hope
for justice and equality.
A Seminar on the Generation Gap
On the weekend of February 18-19, 1994 the IIA held a seminar in conjunction
with
the Konrad Adenauer Foundation in the Kibbutz Shfaim guesthouse. Seventy-five
members participated plus a number of other visitors. The subject was:
"Religious
Movements and the Generation Gap".
The seminar was opened by Yuval Tsameret, the chairperson of
the youth group of
the IIA. Dr. Menahem Klein, of the Hebrew University, referred to the
gap between
generations as a factor in the relations between religion and politics.
While in Egypt
the generation gap was considered an important factor in political
life, in Israel the
emphasis was on religious problems and on groups from different origins.
Dr. Gide on Aran from the Hebrew University talked about the
generation gap in
extremist circles. According to him, the new generation has to bring
changes, but the
youth usually support old leaders. For instance, the Iranian revolution,
and the
religious settlers in the seventies and the eighties.
A series of workshops enabled the active participation of the
audience. A member
from the Youth group, Yehuda Stolov, showed on the basis of Rabbi Kook's
writings,
how Kook's opinions changed in accordance with his age. Dr. Yakov Cohen
talked
about democracy and religion from the point of view of Mordechai Kaplan
and he
pointed out that one must not decide the effect of age by noting an
attitude. Yoseph
Emmanuel described the search for religous values among Israeli Youth
and the older
generation according to different documents from the sixties and the
seventies. Chava
Morris, who had participated in a conference for psychologists and
educators in
Egypt some time ago, reported this conference and about education for
peace.
In the final discussion hope was expressed, that additional seminars
would be
organized so as to help bridge the generation gap, bring opposites
closer and modify
opinions.
Almost a quarter of the participants were young, the participation
of the Israeli
Arabs was pronounced, and despite of the fact that the seminar was
held during the
Ramadan fast, Moslems and Druze paticipated too. It was regrettable
that a large
number of applicants weren't able to participate because of the limited
places.
A Lecture on Christian Communities
On Thursday, April 21, 1994, Dr. Daphna Tsimhoni, from the History Department
of
Ben Gurion University, Beer Sheva, gave a lecture to the members of
the Association
in Jerusalem on the subject "Christian Communities In Jerusalem And
The West
Bank since 1948". The lecture was based on her book which appeared
recently. Dr.
Tsimhoni stressed the change in the Christian situation under the Israeli
regime, the
pressures on the the Christian population and the participation of
Christians in the
Intifada. As a result, the participation of the Christians was recognised
and given
consideration in the Palestinian Liberation Organisation.
The Annual General Meeting
On Thursday, April 5, 1994, the annual general meeting was held at the
Hebrew
Union College in Jerusalem.
Before the meeting the Imam Rajai Abdo, manager of the Hisham
Palace Hotel in
Jericho and the representative of Islam of Israeli Television, lectured
on the subject
"Problems and Opportunities in Interfaith Dialogue under Palestinian
Autonomy".
First, he stressed that the name Islam was derived from the word "peace",
and to
commit murder in the name of "God Almighty" is a desecration of God.
He
explained what he calls "Real Islam", which seeks peace and changes
the Jihad, and
expressed hope that interests of the Arabs and Jews will advance the
peace between
them. According to him, the mutual faith was violated by the continuous
occupation.
Therefore a practical answer is needed and not only theoretical work.
The chairperson of the Board, Prof. Zeev Falk, who was abroad,
sent a brief report
in writing. He mentioned the difficulties of the IIA's work as a result
of the continual
terrorist attacks in spite of the peace process, and concluded with
a call for all the
inhabitants of Israel to act with tolerance and goodwill.
The chairperson of the secreteriat, Dr. Michael Krupp, gave a
detailed report about
his work of this last year.
Dr. Yehezkel Cohen reported on the work of the programme committee,
and Rev.
Rin Van Der Vegt gave financial report.
There was a discussion between, and the chair of the Board and
the
secretariat
were elected. The following decision was accepted:
"We Abraham's children - Jews, Christians and Muslems - who
are meeting here
today in Jerusalem, in the general meeting of the IIA in Israel,
express our joy at the
agreement which was signed yesterday between Israel and the Palestinian
people. We
know this is only a first step toward an inclusive peace between
Jews and Arabs, and
the road is still long until hatred and the lack of faith will be
eliminated from the
Middle Eastern nations."
Peace is a condition for appeasement; there is no appeasment
except in peace. It is
essential, then, for the peace negotiations, that are still ahead of
us, to refrain from all
violent acts. Yet, we know there still will be extremist Arabs and
Jews. Antagonism,
ignorance the lack of empathy will slow the process of peace making.
Our answer is
significant. We will defend ourselves against violence not only in
joining forces
against extremists, but also by strengthening mutual trust, goodwill,
stand and
brotherhood.
The tradition of our father Abraham obliges us to rule our sons, but
first to rule
ourselves, and to observe the fifth way, which is the way of peace
and justice.
Visit to Lod and Tel Aviv
The trip to Lod and Tel Aviv, on the 14th of June 1995, was one in a
series of
excursions to visit branches of the Association in different parts
of the country. In the
early afternoon we left Jerusalem and drove to Lod, where we had been
invited by
Mr. Rafat Debsi, a longstanding member of the IIA, who works for the
Lod
municipality on education. He received us in the community center of
one of the
neighbourhoods of his city wich has mixed population. We heard words
on education
and coexistence and made a tour through the neighbourhood, in which
we visited
several schools.
But "interfaith" also had its place. We saw the beautiful mosque
and heard about
its history from Mr. Debsi and then went to the church of St. George's,
where the
Greek Orthodox priest was prepared to answer many questions in an open
and
friendly way. We enjoyed the many pictures of St. George, who traditionally
came
from Lod. The dragon, according to the priest, was not from the city,
and should be
taken symbolically.
Not many members took part in this excursion and this proved
to be very
advantageous when our host invited us to his house and provided us,
on the veranda
with coffee, fruit and told us interesting stories about his "hadj"
to Mecca.
We drove to Tel Aviv, to the "Sinai"-congregation where the branch
usually meets.
The meal, prepared by the members from Tel Aviv and surroundings, was
very much
appreciated. Afterwards we heard about the interesting history of the
group, that had
started in the sixties as an independent organisation, organised mainly
by a Roman
Catholic lady from Canada, Mrs. Clotilde Mathys, and only later joined
the Israel
Interfaith Association. We discussed the difficulties of interfaith
work in a secular
city like Tel Aviv and heard from the chair, Mrs. Ruth Yeshin, about
the way in which
the activities are organised. Jerusalem and Tel Aviv are worlds apart,
also in interfaith
activities. It was good to learn something about one another and to
discuss
possibilities to improve our work.
IIA-study day on "Monastic life"
People came to the IIA-study day on "Monastic Life" from all parts
of the country.
Since we usually have very few programs during the summer, there was
much
interest in this on july.
A bus brought people from Tel Aviv and even Haifa to Jerusalem,
where other
members joined the tour. The first stop was at the Dormition Abbey
at Mount Zion,
where the study-leader for this day, the Rev. Astrid Fiehland van der
Vegt, first of all
gave a general introduction. Later the Abbot, Rev. Nikolaus Egender,
also spoke and
answered questions. There was great interest also in the personal reasons
for monks
to chose this way of life, and we spoke about the difficulties in integrating
into Israeli
society, about the work of the monks and about the difficulties in
finding enough
young people.
In the Old City we went to Deir es-Sultan. Sr. Abraham told us
about monastic life
in the Ethiopian church, and we received an impression of the enormous
differences
between churches and countries with a monastic tradition. After a short
visit to this
Ethiopian monastery on the roof of the Church of the Holy Sepulchre
we went to
have our lunch.
We left Jerusalem for the village of Even Sappir, to the monastery
of St. John in
the Desert, supposedly the place where John the Baptist, who was born
in the next
village, Ein Karem, lived for some time in the wilderness, feeding
on locusts and
honey. For a number of years the monastery was not inhabited, but now
Greek
Catholic monks live here, mainly of French origin. One of them showed
us the
spring, the grotto of St. John and the church, We took some time for
the questions that
had arisen during the past few hours. We heard about the daily life
of the monks, their
prayer and the ways in which they earn their living. The last question
could be
answered in a practical manner: we could buy honey at the exit, and
many IIA-
members took these sweet memories of monastic life home with them.
Visit to Holy Sites in the Western Galilee, 12 October
1995
We visited Nebi-Sabalan, over the village of Hurfish, site of the grave
of Zebulun,
son of Jacob according to both the Muslim and Druze traditions. We
continued to
Peki'in where we visited the grave of the mishnaic scholar Rav Hoshaya
of Tiria who
is esteemed by all the sects, as well as the cave of Rabbi Shimon son
of Yochai and
the ancient synagogue. We ended at the tomb of Nebi Shams in the village
of Yanuch,
who was described to us by Salah, a teacher who lives in the village.
The entire tour
was conducted by Shlomo Roded of Kfar Vradim.
Lectures for the General Public
As in every year, in November 1995, a new monthly lecture series began.
During the
course of the winter, the series dealt with the subject of "Pilgrimages"
in the various
religions.
Hosting groups from outside of Israel
In December 1995, a group of twenty five members of the young
leadership of the
German branch of "The International Council of Jews and Christians"
were in Israel.
They participated in meetings with young leadership of the association
and with
members of the Ratisbon program for Jewish studies for students of
theology. They
also heard lectures by representatives of the various ideological streams
in Israel,
academicians and clergymen, and they visited the Old City of Jerusalem,
Hebrew
University, Yad Vashem, the Knesset, the Supreme Court, Meah Shearim
(including
participation in a "Tish" of Carlin Hassidim) and synagogues.
Educational Projects
-In October 1995, a unique project began at the David Yellin Teacher's
College.
Two psychologists, one Jewish and one Arab, are conducting a year-long
weekly
seminar with occassional weekends for a group of sixteen students,
half of whom are
Jewish and half of whom are Arab. During the course of the year, the
students will
acquire communication skills, self-awareness, empathy for the other
and awareness of
the limitations of empathy, experience in conflict resolution, and
more.
The purpose of the project is to train members of the group and
encourage them to
initiate and lead Jewish-Arab dialogue groups, as well as to develop
an awareness of
the need for education towards tolerance in their common educational
work.
International Projects
-In April 1995, a Holocaust seminar was conducted in Cracow and
Auschwitz in
Poland with cooperation between the young leadership groups of "The
International
Council for Christians and Jews" of Germany and Poland. We are planning
to
conduct an annual seminar with the participation of young Israelis
in order to
establish for the first time tri-lateral discussions between Israeli,
Polish and German
youth on the subject of the Holocaust.
- In July 1995, two representatives of the association participated
in the annual
colloquium of the "International Council of Christians and Jews" in
Budapest. Two
additional representatives were supposed to participate but were inhibited
by
budgetary limitations. The participation of Israelis in conventions
of this kind is
critical both symbolically as well as for their contribution as by
Israelis.
- In autumn 1995, we established initial ties with the "Royal
Institue for Interfaith
Studies" in Jordan. There is a strong will on both sides to cooperate,
and in the
coming months a meeting will be taking place either in Israel or in
Jordan.
- We are planning to conduct an interfaith east-Meditteranean
conference in the
end of 1996 in Cyprus. We hope to include Israeli, Palestinian, Egyptian,
Lebanese
and Jordanian representatives, among others, for a three-day conference
dealing with
presentations of different cultures. The goal is to create an opportunity
for personal
interaction among participants in the conference by dealing with issues
that are not
politically charged and by the very essence of being together.
This conference will be organized with the cooperation of additional
institutions.
Ties with Palestinian Organizations
- During the past year, we began establishing ties with an organization
called
"Rapproachment" in Beit-Sahur which deals with Israeli-Palestinian
ties. Similarly,
our longstanding relationship with "Al-Liqa" of Bethlehem, an organization
orginally
established in order to conduct a dialogue between Christians and Muslim
Palestinians, has been strengthened as they opened up their discussions
to Jews and
Israelis. This process is testimony to the positive and dynamic influence
of
deliberation and dialogue.
Thus far, there have been two major events in coordination with
"Al-Liqa":
- In December 1994, eighty members of the two organizations participated
in a
weekend seminar held at the Ambassador Hotel in Jerusalem, entitled
"Towards
Religious Tolerance in our Region," and under the guidance of the Konrad
Adenauer
Foundation. Despite the obvious difficulties, the seminar was an exceptional
success:
the lectures and workshops were conducted as planned, at times with
heated debate,
the cultural evening had a festive air, and in particular, many discussions
took place
in the corridors and around the dinner table.
- In June 1995, twenty-five members of the two organizations
met in the Notre
Dame Hotel in Jerusalem to discuss the issue of Jerusalem. Of course,
this topic is
quite charged and the debates were, at times, fairly emotional. Nonetheless,
the
encounter was followed through to the end, and the atmosphere between
the
participants, on a personal level, remained friendly.
As a result of these ties, Palestinians have begun to join the
association. To date,
ten have joined, mainly form the Hebron area.
General Programs
- Promoting cooperation with "The World Conference on Religion and Peace."
At
the moment, we are working on two projects: one is the east-Meditteranean
conference mentioned earlier, and the other is organizing and sending
voluntary joint
delegations of Israelis and Palestinians to aid in Yugoslavian refugee
camps of
different religions.
- Assistance to the "Abrahamic Forum," which is a project of the "International
Council of Christians and Jews," (as well as others) for advancement
of dialogue
between Jews, Christians and Muslims. Within this framework, we would
also like to
strengthen our ties with the "Jewish-Arab Dialogue in Europe.".
- Involvement with groups of pilgrims: the current situation is such
that many
groups succeed in spending their entire time in Israel visiting Christian
sites only,
without any exposure to Judaism, and effectively without gaining any
significance
from the fact that their trip took place in Israel. Clearly, the situation
is different in
groups where members of the association are involved with the planning
and/or the
guiding of the tours. We are seeking ways to influence the programs
of additional
groups, perhaps by creating modular training units, training guides,
or leading and
counseling groups.
- Development of an educational itinerary of trips and seminars
that we will be
able to offer youth groups (schools, etc.) and adults (community centers
learning
centers and perhaps even workers' unions).
go top
The Ambassador Conference with
Al-Liqa,
December 1994
Opening Session
1. Greetings by Bishop Lutfi Laham, the chairman of Al-Liqa'
Centre.
Bishop L. Laham started his greeting by quoting a line from the
Gospel. "Blessed
are the peacemakers for they shall be called the sons of God." He continued,
"So I
dare say, blessed are all who are in this meeting, for even if we do
nothing, something
is being done when we sit with each other and see that we are in peace."
He mentioned another saying from the Holy Gospel stating, "Many
little people in
many little places doing many little steps that can change the face
of the world." He
explained the Al-Liqa' Centre has been in existence for twelve years
and the Israel
Interfaith Association for thirty years. Therefore, it is very helpful
that both groups
have come together in this seminar. Consequently, the Adenauer Foundation
should
be thanked for it has enabled these two associations to have a joint
seminar. For it is
not easy for different people from different places and different visions
always to
meet; and together to work for the important task of peace, tolerance,
dialogue and
love. Thus, to be able to build bridges for peace.
He added that it is inhuman to exclude our love and consideration
from people
who are momentarily against us, because you mustn't condemn somebody
and then
leave him aside for there is always hope, that people may change. Humans
are always
able to change, which is the sense of the Christian Incarnation. God
loves the
incarnated. To be good is the meaning of God within us. It is very
important to
educate people toward peace and tolerance, and moreover toward love,
respect and
pluralism.In each religion there is a little pluralism. The best work
of love is to build
upon earth something of what God is like. Therefore, we must gather
all our efforts to
accomplish this.
Bishop L. Laham concluded with noting the importance and difficulty
of the task
ahead; and that each person must try to take a little step for a little
love in a little
place.
2. Greetings by Dr. Yaakov Cohen.
Rabbi Y. Cohen greeted the audience on behalf of the Israel Interfaith
Association
and stated a few words based on the remarks of his beloved teacher,
Rabbi Mordechai
Kaplan, written in 1928. He read three sentence from his remarks about
universal
righteousness. Duty is to the law of human society what gravitation
is to the physical
order. We are here in this limited time to do our duty. A duty which
is imposed upon
us by the law of the universe and the Lord of the universe. A manifold
of social
institutions are agencies to set duty into operation. The agencies
from which we
come, namely the Al-Liqa' Centre and the Interfaith Assocation, and
in which we are
involved, are also institutions designed to set duty into operation.
The cosmic
conception of the moral law enables us to view absolutes. The law which
we are
seeking and try to follow is an absolute law, it is not given to us
to ever see
completely. This moral law enables us to view our duty as an absolute,
by which we
mean that it possesses a character which makes it greater than any
individual or
community. So we are here representing our different faiths. Now we
must transcend
ourselves and rise to heights far beyond those from which we have come.
I join our
distinguished religious spirits to welcome all of us to what we hope
will be a
heartfelt, heart rending and heart warming experience.
3. Greetings by Dr. Abbad from Bethlehem.
Dr. Abbad started his greeting with the words "Peace be on you"
, which he
translated from the Arabic version. He complemented the Al-Liqa' Centre,
the
Adenauer Foundation and the Israel Interfaith Association for organising
this
seminar, especially since it was held in Jerusalem, the spiritual capital
of the three
monotheistic religions.
He concentrated on three points, which he stated he had learned
during his work
with Al-Liqa'.
1. The art of listening, because by listening we learn.
2. The art of respecting the other, regardless if we agree
or not.
3. Insisting on achieving by success reaching a common
statement at the end of
every meeting. He ended by stating: I hope that this conference can
achieve all these
goals.
4. Greetings by Rev. Dr. Michael Krupp. Chairman of the
secreteriat of the IIA.
Dr. M. Krupp welcomed the participants of the seminar, especially
those from the
autonomous territory, since it is the first time that the IIA ever
met with groups from
the autonomous territory.
He continued that religious people have greater difficulties
now. Tolerance may
not be a big step but if we can be tolerant, it would be the basis
to operate from.
Religious people should find ways not to turn religion into an obsticle
in the way of
peace but to accomplish peace. Therefore together with the help of
the teachings of
the three monotheistic religions and the current seminar, the participants
of this
seminar may find ways to achieve peace.
go top
Some of the Lectures
The future of Interfaith relations
in the Middle East
by Jack J. Cohen
In talking about the future of interfaith relations in our region, we
can either try to be
prophets or state what it ought to be or what we should want it to
be. Since I am no
prophet, I shall confine myself to a few remarks about what future
dialogue ought to
be like, rather than try and predict what will happen. In other words,
I shall speak to
you about the present and the demands of the future on the way we should
behave
today.
What will depend of course on the outcome of the peace process
and the stance we
religionists take toward it? When we pose the question this way, we
are, I repeat,
dealing with the present as command. In striving for a better future
for us and all
mankind, we must act now in accord with the moral imperatives which
come to us in
the form of what we Jews call mitzvot, divine commandments.
Religion, as I understand it, is future-directed; but it always
challenges
us in the
here and now. We cannot say, "When peace arrives, we Jews and Arabs
shall be able
to talk about our theological and spiritual differences and agreements,
but for now,
we must put these matters in brackets and spend our time arguing out
our political
problem". We must rather say, "We shall deal with all our problems,
including our
political conflict, from our religious perspective with mutual respect
and common
devotion to peace" If we were to help our peoples, and particularly
our political
leaders, to give heed to the common message of the Abrahamic religions,
we might
then contribute to reasoned debate and to the preparation of civilized
interaction
between our peoples and our religions. Once a political modus vivendi
has been
reached, we shall still be unable to talk sensibly with one another,
unless we prepare
the ground now.
What, then, are we to ask of ourselves today? We have, first,
to recognize that
Judaism, Christianity and Islam are currently ill equipped to be partners
in dialogue.
We all need to examine ourselves critically. All of us love our respective
traditions,
for it is in them and through them that we become what we are as human
beings. We
achieve whatever fulfilment is given to men and women on earth as members
of
particular peoples and religions. But it is clear that traditions have
to grow, and it is
our task, the task of the living, to carry them forward into the new
age. So we have to
confront the unpleasant duty of asking ourselves honestly if our respective
Scriptures
are still to be accepted unconditionally as the Word of God or are
to be viewed as the
products of religious virtuosi whose messages contain both truth and
mistaken
conceptions of human nature and the human condition. Shall we continue
to read our
Scriptures with the instruments of traditional hermeneutics alone,
or shall we
supplement them with the advanced tools of the human sciences? Is the
Torah truly
the record of God's revelation at Mt. Sinai? If so, then by what right
do non--
Orthodox Jews criticize the Halakhah which derives from it? If not,
on what basis do
halakhists claim the authority to impose their standards on the majority
of Jews who
no longer abide by their dictates? Is the man, Jesus, to be conceived
also as the Son of
God? At the conclusion of the first World Parliament of Religions,
the chairman, John
Henry Barrows, stated, "I desire that the last word which I speak to
the Parliament
shall be the name of Him to whom I owe life and truth and hope and
all things, who
reconciles all contradictions, pacifies all antagonisms, and who from
the throne of His
heavenly kingdom directs the serene and unwearied omnipotence of redeeming
love--
-Jesus Christ, the savior of the world". In denying these attributes
of Jesus for their
own belief systems, are communicants of other religions to be seen
as pagans? Are
Christians who take Jesus as symbol but not as God incarnated to be
treated as
heretics? Is the Koran the final statement of God's revelation? Is
a Moslem who
studies the Koran critically thereby automatically a denier of the
truths it does
embody? If Mohammed is the seal of the Prophets, are we to say that
no further truths
about man and the universe have been uncovered since?
It makes all the difference in the world to future interfaith
dialogue how we answer
these questions. If we take religious history as the factual record
of divine
dispensations and their aftermath, how can we possibly reconcile the
conflicting
claims, or, indeed, even to discuss them fairly and dispassionately?
If we take the
stories of revelation as mythic attempts to probe the relationship
of man and God, of
land and nation and of the meaning and location of human salvation
(in this life or the
after-life), we can at least try and understand the substance of our
respective myths.
We might also gain some insight into the kinds of character structures
that are built by
adherence to one myth or another.
What, then, are the starting positions that we ought to take
into dialogue? Must
Jews insist on being recognized as the Chosen People? Must mankind's
hope for
redemption be founded on belief in Jesus as the sole savior? Is Islam
wedded to a
policy of missionizing, or is it prepared to recognize that there are
other roads to
salvation? James A Kirk has written that, "All the religions have been
born into a
world of religious pluralism, but, on the whole, they have ignored
this fact. Each
tradition maintains the idea of its own universality and sufficiency".
If that be the
case, the questions I have posed are too threatening, for were we to
answer them
truthfully, we should have to abandon many of our claims and retreat
into ourselves.
Religious discourse would have to be a set of monologues. Since many
of us are
incapable of relinquishing our anachronisms, we take the easy way out
and postpone
dealing with the basic theological and moral issues. We excuse ourselves
by arguing
that these problems will have to wait until the political conditions
are right--when
peace treaties are completed, when the Moslem Fundamentalists call
off their terrorist
activities, when the PLO repeals the clause in the Palestinian Covenant
calling for the
destruction of Israel, when the Jewish settlers abandon their homes
and return to the
1967 borders (or those of 1948, or earlier). We all know that this
delaying tactic is a
ploy, used by all sides. The fact is that peace is non-negotiable.
Without peace, there
can be no conciliation--we have never had a state of conciliation which
entitles us to
speak of reconciliation. But we cannot have peace unless we are either
forced into it,
in which case it will be fragile, or are convinced by common agreement
that,
theologically and morally, it is an absolute commandment of all religions.
Unfortunately, we cannot engage in the necessary self-examination
by ourselves.
Talking to ourselves in isolation leaves us all mired in our orthodoxies
and our
stereotypes of one another. Religious advance, like that in all areas
of life, can
eventuate only from the challenge of differing opinions and perspectives.
Thus, we
desperately need to interact.
By this time, we humans know that we are destined to live together
on earth. From
a religious point of view, can we find any justification for state
borders? Are they not
all accidents of history, dictated by force rather than human need?
And what is the
religious significance of land? Franz Rosenzweig, the Jewish philosopher
thought, at
least for a while, that Jews should not aspire to settle once again
on the soil of their
national homeland. He thought that land is destructive of national
spirituality. But
peoples can no more live without a soil beneath their feet than men
and women can
survive without their bodies. Nonetheless, we children of Abraham know
that "The
earth is the Lord's and the fullness thereof". How can we Jews and
Arabs escape the
trap into which we have permitted ourselves to fall by our insistence
that Eretz
YisraelFalastin can belong to only one of us? Obviously, we have to
cultivate a new
psychology. As Elisheva Yaron wisely suggested decades ago, we have
to regard the
soil for which we are fighting not as a beautiful woman being pursued
by two suitors,
but as a mother who desires the presence of her two sons. I do not
underestimate the
difficulty in having to revolutionize our state of mind, but unless
our dialogue can
produce such a result, we shall all have failed to realise the full
potential of our
theistic beliefs.
Another stumbling block to spiritual maturity is our attitude
toward
holiness. What
makes a place holy? Can holiness be shared? Here, too, a degree of
religious maturity
is required which none of our religions has yet achieved. What can
we expect of the
politicians or the statesmen, if even within our respective religions
we cannot agree
on the mythic nature of our claims of ownership of "holy" places. I
do not decry such
claims, for holiness is most certainly in the heart of the believer.
I decry only the need
which many people seem to have to convert the holy into a justification
for
irrationality. Disputes over sites or structures deemed holy by two
or more groups
have to be adjudicated only by compromise and respect for the feeling
of others.
Finally, in this incomplete agenda of interfaith dialogue, what
is to be our attitude
toward democracy? Is it merely a method of decision making, or is it
not also a set of
social values that contradict, at times, some of our hallowed religious
views and
practices? What form of polity best suits our religious conceptions?
Do the latter
stand up to democratic vision? Is democracy, as a Western invention,
out of place in
the Middle East? Are the professions of democracy of some states in
our region not
disingenuous, and if so, what should be the position to be taken by
our religions?
Clearly, we have a great deal to discuss together about our roles in
the spread or
curtailment of democracy.
These, it seems to me, are the preliminary stages of interfaith
dialogue in the
Middle East. We must start by acquiring the humility involved in being
able to listen
to others and by forthright articulation of our common problems with
ourselves and
with each other. And for this, we have to talk now and not wait for
a more propitious
time. The time is now. We need now to learn the lessons that others
have to teach us.
We need now to hear what others think of our tendency towards selfglorification.
We
need now not only to live and let live, but to live and help live.
All these needs are
grounds for dialogue. But let us also remember that in entering dialogue,
we must all
be prepared to change whenever, as a result of our talking together,
we become
convinced that we have been morally inadequate.
In my admittedly inadequate analysis, I have raised questions
which some of you
might feel are offensive. I have not, however, sought to hurt or offend
anyone. I
admit only that I have deliberately sought to disturb those who need
disturbing. I
hope they are few.
go top
The Background of Al-Liqua
by Dr. G. Khoury
Almost twelve years ago a group of Palestinian Christians and Moslems
from the
Holyland (Palestine, Israel) met together, and because of many reasons
at that time
they decided to organise and to establish a centre in which Christians
and Moslems
from the Holyland could meet and learn something about their history,
Arab--
Christian history and Arab-Islamic history. That means learning about
the past, to
know what and how in the past the Arab Christian and Moslem religions
worked, and
to look to the present time and make a certain evaluation. Of course,
since the
beginning the aim of such a meeting was to enable ourselves through
dialogue to
discover our own identities and the identity of others. In fact The
one simple reason
that we are living together every day.
Of course in the eighties, after the Islamic revolution in Iran,
we felt that the
Islamic movements of Iran were becoming stronger and stronger in the
Holyland,
which was easy for us to understand or accept or want. However, many
Islamic
movements also are misusing Islam for their political interests, no
less than the
Christians are doing or the Jews on the other side, and we were suspicious
about the
goals of these movements. We wanted to tell our Palestinian community
(Moslems
and Christians): look, we don't want to have another Iran or another
Lebanon here,
and so the idea is to let us read our history and have a vision toward
the future. The
relationship between christians and muslims, during the Lebanese war,
was
negatively influenced by the media. For the war in Lebanon was not
a religious war.
There was an international interest in Lebanon and they used religion
to implement
the political idea. But the media every day, on the television, radio
or in the
newspapers stated that a Christian killed Sheikhs and Moslem children,
or that
Moslems killed a nun or a priest. They did not state that, for instance,
twenty civilians
were killed in Lebanon, they emphasised that Christians are killing
Moslems and
Moslems are killing Christians. The aim of this was clear for us and
we wanted to
study this phenomenon. After the collapse of communism we started to
look for a
common enemy such as Islam. Without any justification, without any
serious study of
the consequences, they made Islam to a new enemy to demolish, and waited
to see
the results. This demolition and misuse was very clear during the Gulf
crisis and the
Iraqi-Kuwaiti War, where the media were using the religious elements
very strongly
to justify the war in the Gulf. At the same time the reactions of Moslems
to us
Christians in this part of the world, as Arab Christians living in
the Middle East, not
only in the Holyland, was changing. That was our hope as Palestinian
Christians or as
Arab Christians generally speaking. I was very happy yesterday when
I read in the
newspaper "Yediot Akhronot" a very short statement by Yossi Beilin.
He was very
clear about something which I was saying many years ago, before Beilin
was even
born, that Israel will not have an easy time with those Islamic movements
which
Israel cultivated. What I am referring to is, that in 1988 when I was
in Bethlehem
distributing pamphlets, the soldiers were against those who were giving
out "Fatah"
pamphlets, though pamphlets which were being distributed by "Hamas"
had free
acces. I witnessed this, I lived this. The tens of interviews they
had with Sheikh
Yassin during his imprisonment, aimed to convey to the West that Palestinians
are not
interested in democracy and not in a democratic state but that they
want an Islamic
state, which means Israel does not have a place in this part of the
world and we can
live as the people of the Book, we and the Christians in this case.
Some of these
cassettes were distributed to Europe through Israeli sources and were
shown to some
students here in the Palestinitan fundamental group, stating that this
is an Islamic
Intifada, but the fundamental movement was a very small group at that
time. Also
after that when Mr. Rabin put 413 reprentatives from the "Hamas" movement
outside
the country in no man's land, he did a very big favour to them because
it was a very
intensive course for them, for their strategy and their future. These
people did not
know each other. They came from different parts of the Gaza strip and
Jenin and they
had access to the International Community. Of course not only Israel
but we also are
suffering from this movement because fundamentalism, not only in Islam
but also in
Christianity and Judaism, is something which is not wanted by those
who want a
pluralistic society and community. For fundamentalism always excludes
others, and
we Palestinians do not want to exclude anyone. The majority of the
Palestininan
community wants a pluralistic, democratic state in which religion and
human dignity
are respected and cared for by everyone. If Christians and Moslems
meet and talk,
then it is very easy to produce progress between Christians and Moslems,
between the
brothers, not to speak of the Jewish community. It is not possible
to live without
talking to each other or having a dialogue. A dialogue without trying
to make the
other convert. We the Palestinian Christians are a very small minority;
speaking about
the West Bank and Gaza, including Jerusalem, we are only 50,000 Palestinian
Christians, while the Moslems are 2,000000. When speaking of fifty
thousand
Christians, I don't mean that any Moslem should become Christian by
brutalizing
him or baptising him. Our aim is to create a community in which Christians
and
Moslems would respect each other by knowing, hearing and learning about
the other.
God created us with one mouth and two ears to speak once and to listen
twice. I think
that listening to others is a liberation from suspicions and fear.
This is why "Al--
Liqua" had 12 yearly conferences and published 11 volumes on the relationship
between the Christians and Moslems in the Holyland. In addition to
this work, we
started a dialogue amongst ourselves, our Arabic magazine's main idea
is to produce
issues with different articles of the whole relationship between Islam
and Christianity
since the beginning of Islam up to now. There are hundreds of unpublished
manuscripts in the Greek Orthodox library about the history of the
relationship
between Islam and Christianity. In 1981, I met Joseph Emannuel and
he told me that
there is an International Christian dialogue in which he wanted me
to participate. So I
was in Heppenheim and Italy. The Bishop of Paris asked me what I was
doing there
at that meeting for I am a Palestinian Christian and therefore there
was no place for
me there, according to him. As a result of many different problems,
especially during
the Intifada years, we decided not to take part in conferences which
involved Israel.
This was our slogan after the 9th of December 1987. Two years later
the Live and
Peace Institute of Sweden suggested a trialogue meeting about the question
of the
Land. We received the approval of Arafat to participate in this conference.
After this
we went to six meetings and the last one was three days ago in Oslo.
The latest one is
this one for which we did not have to obtain the approval of Arafat.
I hope that in this seminar we will overcome our handicaps, not
only the political
ones but also the social ones: the media, for instance, which stress
the negative side.
Secondly, education, how to look at the image of others. We should
speak about
tolerance. I think that inter-religious dialogue in the Holyland is
a very important
element. It should be used by all of us to strengthen the peace process.
I think the
voice of the interfaith dialogue should be prophetical, looking towards
justice and
peace. I hope to work today and tomorrow and to continue this effort
in the future.
go top
Aspirations of Interfaith Dialogue
for the Future of the Region
by Rev. Munib A. Younan
"Dialogue is an activity which grows out of our life experience. Dialogue
is not only
a normal conversation, but is also an encounter between people. It
is not only a
dialogue of ideas it is also a dialogue of life. It takes place between
individuals and
communities as they live out their faith and convictions, bound together
by common
loyalties and traditions.... It depends upon mutual trust and mutual
understanding. It
demands respect for the identity and integrity of the other. Dialogue
happens when
the partners involved are willing to listen and learn and to question
their own self--
understanding as well as their understanding of the other. It is an
attempt to
understand 'the otherness of the other'.... It seeks to understand
the other as the other
wishes to be understood. In dialogue, we Christians try to follow the
example of
Christ; He embraced others in an open-ended love of self-denial (St.Mark
8:34).
Dialogue rests on the conviction that God's purpose for creation is
to draw all of
humanity into a relationship of love and peace."%1 Dialogue will not
succeed unless it
is frank and sincere. The former General Secretary of the Middle East
Council of
Churches (MECC), Mr. Gabriel Habib writes: "It registers what is happening,
recalls
what could be forgotten, resumes what was interrupted and anticipates
what is to
come. Such a dialogue seeks to speak the truth in the spirit of love.
However, this role
will be spoiled in the case of more exchange of courteous speeches
and will lose its
meaning."%2 Dialogue with all its difficulties and problems is the
only way in the
Middle East to listen in openness, accept the other, and draw resources
from each of
our three religious traditions to help us face present threats and
to work towards
pluralism, peace, justice, love, reconciliation, coexistence and a
Middle East free of
hate and fear.
I would like to address two topics concerning the aspirations
of interfaith dialogue
for the future of the Middle East :
1. The methodology of dialogue
2. The agenda of dialogue
1. The methodology of dialogue.
1.1 Dialogue in PalestineIsrael moves and should continue to
move in the future
in four circles.
1. Christian - Muslim dialogue
2. Jewish - Christian dialogue
3. Jewish - Christian - Muslim dialogue
4. Jewish - Muslim dialogue
These four areas of dialogue are distinct in nature. However,
each area affects the
other and even complements them. For example, the success of Christian-Muslim
dialogue in finding a common responsibility is tied to the success
of the other circles
and even offers an impetus to the others. My aspiration is that those
four dialogues
should proceed at full speed, should be taken seriously, and that all
their specialities
and pecularities, as well as their commonalities and differences, should
be accepted.
1.2 There have been some attempts and experiments in the past
to have large
gatherings devoted to interfaith dialogue. I believe that such experiments
have not
always been successful. The successful dialogue in this country is
the one that works
in silence with small groups that represent the grassroots. If I may
use the
terminology of Latin American Liberation theology, the successful dialogue
is the
one that is practised in base communities. It gives the opportunity
for better
interactions and better results. It avoids "fine talks" and deals with
issues of concern.
1.3 Then the inevitable question is raised: Who are those dialogue
partners? Are
they the elite and the intellectuals? Do they really represent their
societies or are they
only supporters of dialogue? I think that future fruitful dialogue
must involve the
different representatives of the reality of the society. To have people
who represent
their own ideas and agree on every item on the agenda does not promote
healthy
dialogue but rather monologue or a deceiving forum. This will not advance
justice,
peace and reconciliation. Now is the time to involve those that represent
both sides of
the debate in today's society.
1.4 At this stage, I believe that dialogue between local Palestinians,
both Christians
and Muslims, and Israeli Jews is still a new venture that needs to
grow. Dialogue with
the Jews has been carried out by Western Christians even in this country.
Dialogue
between Palestinian Christians and Israeli Jews is still new. We certainly
have to give
strong support to this kind of dialogue because, after all, it is the
Palestinians and the
Israelis who are destined to live together in this land. The more we
consolidate this
dialogue, the more we can get acquainted with the other and the better
the results will
be. This is not an exclusion of the internationals. We can learn from
their
international dialogues, but our contextual agenda is different. It
has a long history of
suffering pain and fear. We need to find and discover ourselves in
fear and insecurity
and pain so that the resurrection may take place.
1.5 In this country, it is very easy to individualize every project.
If you glance at
the "Guide to Interreligious Activities in Israel", you will find that
many institutions
exist and more are mushrooming due to a variety of factors, one of
them is the
financial support. I believe the individualization or the monopoly
of such efforts is a
danger. I think now is the time to coordinate and organize our exerted
individual
efforts. This country is very fertile for individualisation. This is
the very reason why
we should coordinate and organize ourselves. As a co-founder of Al-Liqa'
Center I
call on our Palestinian partners to continue to utilize our centre
for dialogue, as our
mandate at our centre is dialogue. We appeal to the Israelis also to
coordinate in order
to avoid confusion. We do not want boxes of dialogue that bear no fruit
and are only
for public consumption; rather, we want, in the present and future,
a coordinated
platform that allows the fruits of dialogue to ripen and mature more
quickly. Dialogue
between Palestinians, both Muslims and Christians, and Israeli Jews
is not a luxury,
but a matter of life.
2. The Agenda for dialogue
When one speaks about an agenda of dialogue, one has to move
from theological
to existential issues and concerns. We usually give less attention
to the theological
topics, but this leaves us ignorant of the others. The existential
topics are very
common because they speak to our past and present. However, to abide
in the
theological agenda is to escape reality and to abide in the existential
agenda carries
the risk of politicizing everything. By this I mean we cannot negotiate
a political
settlement or offer concessions in our dialogue. But we pave the way
for peace. I
think the right balance between theology and the existential agenda
is one that
promotes interfaith dialogue that helps the partners to mature in understanding
themselves and the other.
I will put the agenda in two points.
2.1 Peace Education
Our political leaders pledged to translate the peace process
into successful practice.
Our Al-Liqa interfaith dialogue has its own agenda for the present
and the future. It
ought to have the power for healing the sore wounds of the past and
to work for
reconciliation. I would like to elaborate.
2.1.1 When one speaks about peace education, one notices how
much one ignores
the other, or if you wish, how much one stereotypes. Peace education
must start in the
family, in educational institutions and in the media at the grassroots
level.
"The Israeli child is taught that hisher security is of utmost
importance, even to
the extent that security is idolized. Heshe is taught that to preserve
this security, the
child must resort to arms in order to defend himherself. In my opinion,
the Israeli
child must be liberated from such an inhibitive ideology of war to
be able to see that
the child's security depends on hisher neighbour's security as well.
If my
neighbour's welfare and well being is secured, mine is secured too.
There should be a
change in the fundamental principles of Israeli education, so that
the new era of peace
depends not on armies, but on a neighbour with whom one can live and
dream.
The Palestinian child knows only the Jew who is the occupier.
The only Jew who
enters the Palestinian home is the violent, rude soldier. The child
has harboured
hatred and disbelief toward the other with an ideology of generalization.
Through
peace eduaction, the Palestinian child must be liberated from occupation
and
redeemed from such inhibitions and taught to see in the Jew a neighbour."%3
Peace education ought to change attitudes, starting with the
new generation.
2.1.2 When one speaks about peace education, one usually forgets
the dimension
of justice. The biblical understanding of peace (shalom, salaam) reflects
the unity of
justice and peace. Although this refers at first sight to the spiritual
relationship of God
and His people, it is always given a social and political dimension,
especially in the
words of the prophets. Peace education speaks precisely about this
unity of
spirituality and social responsibility. In our peace education, justice
must be the
cornerstone for any deliberations. One may say that justice is relative.
Nevertheless
one should always promote justice as the basis for peace. Peace cannot
be realised
without incarnating justice. Only the unity of justice and peace can
be a factor to
eliminate any kind of fundamentalism.
2.1.3 Peace education is an education of reconciliation. The
last half century has
left the wounds of hatred, violence, occupation and violation of human
rights. The
wounds are deep. Can interfaith dialogue heal those wounds? The churches
in
Palestine have always called for the coexistence of the two nations
and the three
religions. Our peace education has to translate this principle of coexistence
into
reconciliation. It is not a coexistence by force or "fait accomplit"
, but a coexistence
through good will that has the reconciliation as its foundation. It
is Christ's death on
the cross, according to our faith, that reconciled us with God and
with each other, and
can still reconcile us through forgiveness.
2.2 The common responsibilities of the three religions
The aspiration for the interfaith dialogue is to discover the
common
responsibilities. The three monotheistic religions have a common responsibility
in the
development of social justice in PalestineIsrael as well as the whole
Middle East. We
are faced with great challenges involving human rights, women's rights,
children
rights, freedom, equality, disarmament, democracy, ecology and others.
In the past,
the war situation often forced us to forget them or judge them from
one's narrow
perspective. However, the three monotheistic religions have values
that are sufficient
to respond to the common responsibilities in the Middle East. If adherents
of the three
religions cannot be liberated to sense our social justice responsibilities,
then religion
can no longer be the conscience of society and of this region. It is
our responsibility,
emanating from our values, to promote social justice for the sake of
God whom we
worship. It is our responsibility not only to speak out against violations
of human
rights, but it is our obligation to respect the other and accept the
otherness of the other
in PalestineIsrael and the whole Middle East. It is our responsibility,
given to us by
God, to ensure that human beings in our region live in dignity as God
created them
and meant them to do. This issue is imperative in our agenda: to work
together, not
separately, until social justice is realised. As Jesus Christ said,
"If these were silent,
the stones would shout out" (St. Luke 19:40).
I conclude this paper by saying that the aspirations for the
future are a great
responsibility laid on the shoulders of the three monotheistic religions.
As St. Paul
said, "All this is from God, who reconciled us to Himself through Christ,
and has
given us the ministry of reconciliation" (Second Corinthians 5:18).
Footnotes:
1. Quotations are from : Guidelines on Dialogue with People of
Living Faiths and
Ideologies. World Council of Churches, Geneva 1990. And: Ecumenical
Considerations on Christian-Muslim Relations. World Council of Churches,
Geneva
1991
2. Habib, Gabriel. Muslim - Christian Dialogue in the Middle
East. Middle East
Council of Churches Newsreport, Vol. 7:7-10, July - October 1994.
3. Younan, Suad. Toward a Trilateral Peace Ethics. A Christian
Perspective. A
lecture held in Jerusalem in December 1994.
go top
From the discussions
Question:
Mr. Ibrahim Kandalaft asked the Interfaith Association the following
question:
He said that when he was hospitalised in a Jewish hospital, a
Rabbi came to pray.
When I asked the Rabbi to pray on my head, a nurse came and told him
that I am a
goy; the Rabbi immediately ran away. Mr. I. Kandalaft continued that
Jesus asked his
desciples to do and preach to the gentiles, for tolerance is both in
the Torah and the
Bible. Furthermore, he asked the question:- "How does the IIA tackle
this problem,
does this problem fall within their objectives and aims?"
Answer:
Prof. Yaakov Cohen assured him that the Rabbi wasn't a member of the
IIA. He
continued that in all communities there are people who are not open.
One of the IIA
objectives is to make these people understand what real pluralism is,
and in some
cases the IIA succeeded.
Question:
Another participant from the seminar by the name of M. Landau asked
Sheikh Rajai
Abdu the following question: "Where is the moslem dialogue?"
Answer:
Sheikh Rajai Abdu answered that there should be a dialogue amongst
moslems
themselves, another one amongst Christians themselves, and last but
not least
amongst Jews themselves.
He read a verse from the Qura'n, "We not only seek for the other
life, but have to
do for this life."
Concluding remarks - Blessings:
Miss Gabriel from the Konrad Adenauer Foundation thanked all
the organisations
which took part in this seminar. She stated that she, being a representative
from the
Konrad Adenauer Foundation, wants to emphasise two remarkable points.
1. With reference to Rev. M.Younan, who said in his talk
referring to the negative
side of individualisation of the dialogue, enterprises such as this
one, when two
organisations, one from the Israeli side and one from the Palestinian
side, come
together, are a big achievement which a lot of organisations try to
accomplish but do
not succeed.
2. There has been a good balance between all the religions
in this seminar. Other
organisations also try to do this but do not succeed.
Finally, Miss Gabriel thanked Rev. Rin Van Der Vegt and Rev.
Lutfi Haddad.
Mr. Landau stated that he has a metaphor to share appropriate
to the present
situation, problem and challenge of the seminar. A metaphor which comes
from a
Catholic friend by the name of Mr. Stransky, the directer of Tantur.
Mr. Landau
continued that education in our three traditions for centuries was
pretty much along
the lines of the image of a rocket-ship launched to heaven to salvation.
Jews believe
that the rocket was launched from Sinai and that the revelation was
for all mankind
and at some point the whole world will recognise it. The church came
and said that it
has been revealed to them that it is a two stage rocket and said, "People
of Israel
thank you very much for having participated in our rocket." Then the
moslems came
and said that it is a three stage rocket and the trust has been given
to them. We all are
moslems, now, in the rocket.
Mr. Landau concluded that the three religions must stop fighting
over which
religion came first and that the children should inherit God's blessing.
Sheikh Rajai Abdu recited a verse from the Qura'n. He said: "Our
Lord, condemn
us not if we forget or fall in error. Our Lord, lay not on us a burden
like that which
thou lay on those before us. Our Lord, lay not on us a burden greater
than we have
strength to bear. Forgive our sins and grant us forgiveness. Have mercy
on us. Thou
art our protector. Help us against those who stand against thee."
With the explanation of these words he closed the seminar.
go top
|