FAITH & FREEDOM OF BELIEF-2019

FAITH & FREEDOM OF BELIEF

OUR WORLD

DECEMBER 2019

The role of faith in modern society

A publication by

NEW EUROPE


OUR WORLD

DECEMBER 2019


A publication by

NEW EUROPE

FAITH & RELIGIOUS FREEDOM

OUR WORLD EDITOR

Alexandros Koronakis

editor@ourworld.co

FAITH


OUR WORLD

DECEMBER 2019


A publication by

NEW EUROPE

Illustration title: Divide and decay

Concept: Alexandros Koronakis

Illustration: Lavrentis Horaitis

Among the many expectations we have of modern

societies is that they not only accommodate

diversity, but guarantee rights and protections

when it comes to faith and freedom of belief.

Historically faiths have indeed caused divisions and

even suffering – particularly when they have been

perverted by extremists Yet they have also laid the

backbone of our societies through the instilling of

value sets, but also strengthening notions such as

family, happiness, and work ethic, and defining

what has been used as a moral compass.

This illustration shows a society with an evolution

of faiths, both the old and the new, but also

society’s growing distancing from belief systems and

religions, and the dangers that such a divide not

only poses, but we are witnessing manifestations

of. A loss of values, a careless existence of

environmental deterioration, and the tragedies of

violence, war, greed, and injustice. This is not to say

that faiths and religious structures, convictions and

beliefs can be leveraged against the diseases in our

societies as a cure, but that in this day and age, we

cannot turn a blind eye to the contributions and

that faiths have to offer.

OUR WORLD

In partnership with:

NEW EUROPE

ISSN number: 2593 - 4163

Av. de Tervuren/Tervurenlaan 96,

1040 Brussels, Belgium

Tel. +32 2 5390039

Fax +32 2 5390339

info@ourworld.co

Published by Brussels News Agency SPRL

© 2019 Our World all rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted in any form by any

means, electronic or otherwise, without express permission. The Publishers accept no liability for third party views published, nor damage caused by

reading, viewing or using our content. All information is correct at the time of going to print, we accept no liabilities for consequent changes.

This edition is made possible with the support of the Faith and Feedom Summit Coalition

https://faithandfreedomsummit.eu/


EDITORIAL

The freedom

to be human

By Basil A. Coronakis

Founder of New Europe.

Faith has been the driving force for the humankind since

the very beginning of its existence. It is intrinsically

related to Religion, which implies freedom of Religion

cannot exist without freedom of Faith, and vice-versa.

Faith liberates from fear and inspires people to hope.

Hope is what gives people the strength to overcome difficulties,

from confronting illness to tackling all kinds of calamities.

In all of humanities search for what separates humans from

animals, it is indeed faith that divides humankind from other

living creatures.

Faith is an eternal, standard value of reference in an everturning

world.

It is a human need to believe and it is imperative that

civilized societies secure peoples’ rights in this respect, thus

guaranteeing them the ability to hope, which ultimately means

freedom of religion.

OUR WORLD | 2019

5


INDEX

Lighting a path to Freedom

of Religion and Belief

The freedom to be human................................................................5

By Basil A. Coronakis

Founder of New Europe.

The EU must work for Freedom of Religion or Belief for all............. 10

By Mairead McGuinness

First Vice President of the European Parliament.

We need FoRB climate change!...................................................... 14

By Ján Figeľ

Special Envoy for Promotion of Freedom of Religion outside the

EU appointed by the European Commission.

Still looking for freedom 30 years on from

the fall of the Berlin Wall............................................................... 18

By Neva Sadikoglu-Novaky

Co-Chair of the Freedom of Religion or Belief Roundtable. She

has been working in the EU since 2009 and she is a fellow at the

London-based Localis Think Tank.

Freedom of Religion and Belief: Why it matters .............................22

By Eric Roux

Current Vice-President of the European Office of the Church of

Scientology for Public Affairs and Human Rights and a wellknown

International Activist for Freedom of Religion and Belief.

The European Union as an agent for ensuring respect................... 24

By Luisa Ragher

Head of Human Rights Division , European External Action.

Service (E.E.A.S.)

Understanding religion.................................................................28

By Georges-Elia Sarfati

University Professor, philosopher, France

Address of the Holy Father on Nuclear Weapons........................... 30

Pope Francis

The Head of the Catholic Church and Sovereign of the Vatican City

State.

le of Religions in Europe ...............................................................32

Bartholomew I of Constantinople

Patriarch of Constantinople. Spiritual leader of 300 million

Orthodox Christians worldwide.

EU guidelines guarantee freedom of religion

or belief and protect individuals................................................... 36

By Federica Mogherini

High Representative of the Union for Foreign Affairs and

Security Policy / Vice-President of the Commission.

Red flags: When the faithful face abuse

Bloodstained Toy Horses: Slave Labor of Prisoners

of Conscience in China..................................................................38

By Massimo Introvigne

Sociologist and Editor-in-chief of “Bitter Winter”, a daily

magazine on Religious Liberty in China.

Refugees Escaping Religious Persecution in China:

What Would Europe Do?................................................................ 40

By Rosita Šorytė

President of the International Observatory of Religious Liberty of

Refugees (ORLIR).

Religious freedom in Africa.......................................................... 42

By Dr. Guy Bucumi

Lecturer at the Faculty of Law of the Université de Sherbrooke.

Researcher at the Research Chair in Law, Religion and

Secularism of the Université de Sherbrooke.

Russia: Over a hundred believers of

several faiths behind bars............................................................ 44

By Willy Fautré

Director of Human Rights without Frontiers International.

Rohingya crisis in Myanmar......................................................... 46

By Hans Noot

Director of Gerard Noodt Foundation for Freedom of Religion or

Belief.

Human Rights Inflation is a Threat to Freedom of Religion............ 50

By Aaron Rhodes

Former Executive Director of the International Helsinki Federation of

Human Rights 1993-2007. He is President of the Forum for Religious

Freedom-Europe and the author of The Debasement of Human

Rights (Encounter Books, 2018).

Extremism and the perversion of Faith

Is interfaith dialogue a way to combat extremism?....................... 54

By Reverend Bill Swing

President of United Religions Initiative- Ex Episcopal Bishop of

California.

Interconvictional dialogue as a way to combat extremism............ 56

By Robin Sclafani

Director of CEJI, a Jewish Contribution to an Inclusive Europe.

6 2019 | OUR WORLD

INDEX


The role of Faith and Religion

in our Societies

The Place of Interfaith in Religious Freedom

and Human Rights...................................................................... 60

By Martin Weightman

Director of All Faiths Network.

Secularism, a principle fostering social cohesion,

peace and freedom....................................................................... 84

By Giulio Ercolessi

President of the European Humanist Federation.

The Revitalizationof Religions...................................................... 64

By Bernadette Rigal-Cellard

Professor of North American Studies at Bordeaux Montaigne

University in France. She directs the Masters “Religions and

Societies” and the Centre for Canadian Studies. She is a

specialist in contemporary North American religions (including

Mormonism and Amerindian Catholicism), their international

locations and inculturation processes.

Religious Freedom Helps Businesses and Economies Grow............ 68

By Brian J. Grim, Ph.D.

President of Religious Freedom & Business Foundation.

Europe needs to reinvent its diversity............................................ 72

By Bashy Quraishy

Secretary General of the European Muslim Initiative for Social

Cohesion (EMISCO). Member of the Advisory Council of the

European Network Against Racism (ENAR) in Brussels.

The World Union of Old believers as a model

for the Church State relationship.................................................74

By Leonid Sevastianov

President of the World Council of Russian Old Believers.

Promoting our Common Spiritual Values...................................... 86

By Rev. Dr William A. McComish

Former Dean of Geneva Cathedral / President of the Association

of Geneva Spiritual Appeal.

True Religion and a Truth-full Society .......................................... 88

By Rabbi Michael Shevack

Founder of the Alliance for Enlightened Judaism- Board Member

of Israeli Palestinian Confederation.

Three negative Developments endangering

Freedom of Religion and Belief..................................................... 92

By Archbishop Thomas Schirrmacher

Director of International Institute for Religious Freedom-

Associate Secretary General for Theological Concerns of World

Evangelical Alliance. President of International Society for

Human Rights.

Inter-Religious Dialogue between

challenges and realities............................................................... 94

By Albert Guigui

Chief Rabbi of Brussels. Permanent Representative of the

Conference of European Rabbis at the European Union.

Freedom of Religion and the Council of Europe.............................. 78

By Valeriu Ghiletchi

Member of the Parliament of the Republic of Moldova. Ex

President of the European Baptist Federation (EBF)

(Ex) Member of the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of

Europe.

The Interconnection between Political and Religious Freedom..... 80

By Fréderic-Jerôme Pansier

Professor of law at University of Paris 1.

The Role of Religion in Society from

the Orthodox perspective..............................................................82

By Petar Gramatikov

Trustee of the Global Council of the United Religions Initiative.

OUR WORLD | 2019

7

OUR WORLD

X

A NEW EUROPE publication

OUR WORLD

10th edition

Coming January 2020

Lighting the path

towards Freedom of

Religion and Belief

LIGHTING A PATH TO FREEDOM OF RELIGION AND BELIEF

Mairead

McGuinness

First Vice President

of the European

Parliament.

View of a religious tolerance themed graffiti piece by an unidentified artist on a city center

building in Bristol, UK.

10 2019 | OUR WORLD


SHUTTERSTOCK

The EU must work for Freedom

of Religion or Belief for all

By Mairead McGuinness

OUR WORLD | 2019

11


Row of blocks at the Memorial to the Murdered Jews of Europe in Berlin, Germany.SHUTTERSTOCK

In promoting Freedom of Religion or Belief (FoRB), the European

Parliament seeks to defend a right that is universal, indivisible

and inalienable. It is a right which is enshrined in the Universal

Declaration of Human Rights, the International Covenant on

Civil and Political Rights, and of course our own EU Charter of

Fundamental Rights. It includes the right to hold any religious

belief or none.

Some 79% of the world’s population today live in countries

that have either restriction on the right to religion or belief or

a high level of social hostility involving religion or belief. Faced

with such threats to this most basic of rights, the EU over the

past five years has increased its efforts to promote FoRB for all.

The European Parliament - in particular through our Human

Rights Committee, and our Intergroup on Freedom of Religion

or Belief - has been at the forefront of these efforts. With the

creation of the EEAS, we pushed for FoRB to be mainstreamed

into EU diplomatic efforts; we also urged the creation of the post

of Special Envoy for FoRB in order to underline the importance

of the issue and give it some focus.

Five years ago, the Foreign Affairs Council responded by

adopting Guidelines for the Promotion of Freedom of Religion

or Belief. These ensure that EU Delegations around the world

monitor the situation on the ground, including by outreach

to faith-based and humanist organisations, and are ready to

intervene with national authorities to raise breaches.

Three years ago, the President of the European Commission

appointed the EU’s first ever Special Envoy for FoRB. The current

holder of that position, Jan Figel, has done an outstanding job

in a short period of time, including raising awareness among

national diplomacies of the scale of the problem and seeking

to coordinate responses. Currently, seventeen Member States

have created similar posts and I recently had an opportunity to

meet with them in Brussels when the Commission brought us

all together to stocktake our joint efforts on FoRB.

Within the European Parliament, I am responsible for our

institution’s official dialogue with churches, religious and

philosophical organisations, a function provided for by Article

17 of the Treaties. Article 17 TFEU covers a wider range of policy

issues than FoRB. But naturally, this freedom is very dear to

each of the stakeholders in our dialogue. Without full respect

for this core freedom in all its dimensions, churches, religious

communities and philosophical organisations would not be able

to play a meaningful role in society.

In our work to defend FoRB, we do not consider the merits

12 2019 | OUR WORLD

of different religions or beliefs, or align ourselves with any

specific religion or worldview. The EU is dedicated to ensuring

respect for the beliefs of each person and every community.

The question is sometimes asked why the EU pays

particular attention to FoRB among human rights. It is true

that FoRB is not a stand-alone right but closely connected with

a number of others: freedom of expression, of association, of

assembly. At the same time, FoRB is often the “canary in the

coal mine”. In places where FoRB starts to be curtailed, we

can be sure that other rights are also, or will soon be violated

too. We only have to look at the list of the worst offenders for

evidence of this: North Korea, Pakistan, China, Saudi Arabia.

If we are going to preach the FoRB message outside the

EU, we need to ensure that our own house is in order. These

countries will be the first to point the finger if there is any slip

on the European side.

The Parliament campaigned for the release of the

young Pakistani Christian woman Asia Bibi, imprisoned and

sentenced to death under that country’s blasphemy laws.

In the course of our efforts, the issue of blasphemy laws on

the books of a number of EU Member States was sometimes

raised. In the past couple of years, Denmark and Ireland

removed the blasphemy provisions from their statues; I hope

that others will follow.

Earlier this month, on the holiest day in the Jewish

calendar, a terrible attack was carried out on that community

in Halle, Germany.

It is shocking to realise that 75 years after the liberation of

the Auschwitz Nazi death camp, that we still have anti-Semitic

attacks being carried out in our cities.

FoRB includes the right “alone or in community, in public

or private, to manifest one’s religion or belief in teaching,

practice, worship and observance.” And yet we know that

here in Europe people can fall victim to hate crimes because

of their religious clothing or symbols.

We have a lot to do both inside and outside the EU, and

those policies need to be joined-up and coherent. The EU’s

recently-launched Global Platform on Religion in Society is

an important contribution.

As with Article 17, the new platform reaches out to both

religious and non-confessional voices. Both in foreign and

domestic policy, the EU has come to recognise that the issue

of religion, or lack of it, is crucial to understanding many

societies.

EU flags outside of European Commission headquarters, Berlaymont building, Brussels.SHUTTERSTOCK


We need FoRB climate change!

Scaling up European Union support to Freedom of Religion or Belief

By Ján Figeľ

IMPORTANCE OF FoRB

Freedom of religion and belief is a condition

of good governance, important for believers

and non-believers. It is a civilizational objective

and criterion, representing freedom of thought,

conscience, religion. FoRB protection is a

precondition of sustainable development. Why?

Development is another name for peace. Peace

is the fruit of justice. Justice is based on human

rights for all. FoRB is a very central right. Art. 18 of

the UDHR is in the middle of all universal HRs. It

combines our freedom implemented individually

and in community, in private and in public. It is a

litmus test of all HRs – if it is not respected other

rights suffer the same fate.

FoRB represents human dignity – the

foundational principle of HRs. Dignity express

my uniqueness, originality, my rights but also

my duties towards the other and towards the

community, I am living in.

GLOBAL SITUATION

FoRB – for decades was neglected, abandoned,

misinterpreted human right. Today 79% of the

global population lives in countries with high or

very high obstacles against FoRB (Pew Research

Center, 2017). The second bad news is that trends

are worrying, oppression is on the rise. Drivers

of persecution are totalitarian and autocratic

regimes, proponents of religious nationalism and

violent extremism, terrorists and non-state actors.

We can speak about four levels of problems and

crisis: Intolerance, discrimination, persecution,

genocide. This is not theory, as even genocides

represent current world reality.

In July 2019 Pew Research Center published

a Closer Look at How religious restrictions have

risen around the world. It analyses the decade

from 2007 to 2017.

First, government restrictions on religion - laws,

policies and actions by state officials - increased

markedly around the world. Indeed, 52 governments

impose either “high” or “very high” levels of

restrictions on religion (up from 40 in 2007).

Ján Figeľ

Special Envoy

for Promotion

of Freedom of

Religion outside

the EU appointed

by the European

Commission.

Secondly, social hostilities involving religion

- including violence and harassment by private

individuals, organizations or groups - also have

risen from 39 to 56 over the course of the study.

Thirdly, levels of government limits on

religious activities and government harassment

of religious groups have been rising over the past

decade - and in some cases, steeply. For instance,

the average score for government limits on

religious activities in Europe (including efforts to

restrict proselytizing and male circumcision) has

doubled since 2007, and the average score for

government harassment in the Middle East-North

Africa region has increased by 72%.

Fourthly, these trends suggest that religious

restrictions have been rising around the world for

the past decade. The level of restrictions started

high in the Middle East-North Africa region, and is

now highest there in all eight categories measured

by the study. But some of the biggest increases

over the last decade have been in other regions,

including Europe – where growing numbers of

governments have been placing limits on Muslim

women’s dress – and sub-Saharan Africa, where

some groups have tried to impose their religious

norms on others through kidnappings and forced

conversions.

In 2019 the UK FCO commissioned special

Report. It says that up to 250 mil. of Christians

are persecuted today, calling it “the most shocking

abuse of HRs today”. Muslim Rohingyas in

Myanmar suffer systematic persecution, like

millions of Uyghurs in China. Antisemitism is on

the rise, including in the West. My nomination was

a reaction to the genocide of Yezidis, Christians,

Shias committed by ISIS in Iraq and Syria. Bahai´s

suffering in Iran, Ahmadis in Pakistan.

Pressure is growing against groups from A to Z

(from Atheists to Zoroastrians). Atheism may lead

to capital punishment in 13 countries, conversions

in 22 states. And over 70 countries in the world

have blasphemy laws, some very stringent, like

Pakistan or Mauretania.

14 2019 | OUR WORLD


Woman feeling free in a beautiful natural setting.

shutterstock

If one minority is persecuted, many

others are persecuted as well. For too

long, FoRB was like a forgotten orphan,

a priority neither in foreign policy, nor in

development cooperation.

But there is also good news. FoRB

awakening is growing. In 2013 the EU

Guidelines of 28 Member States have

been adopted. In 2014 the first Intergroup

for FoRB and Religious Tolerance with

38 members emerged in the EP. At the

same time, there is a global IPP FoRB –

International Parliamentarians Platform.

Since 2015 there is an International

Contact Group of FoRB diplomats from a

growing number of countries. And since

2016 the EU has the first ever Special

Envoy for FoRB promotion.

After that, several Members States

established their respective Ambassadors,

Special Representatives and Envoys

- Hungary, UK, Germany, Denmark,

Lithuania, Poland, and Netherlands.

They joined Norway, Finland, Sweden,

and France. Some other EU countries

OUR WORLD | 2019

may join the group soon as well. Very

active transatlantic partners we have in

the US and Canada. There were already

two Ministerial summits in Washington DC

with concrete commitments, testimonials,

networks, side events. 104 governments

and up to 1000 religious and civil society

participants in July this year was a strong

call for global FoRB cooperation.

In time of growing tensions, violence

and conflicts we have witnessed

unprecedented rise of religious initiatives

for peaceful coexistence: Earlier ones like

Amman Message as a reaction to 9/11

and Beslan killing in 2004, Common

Word between Us and You from 2007,

and recent initiatives like Marrakesh

Declaration of 2016 on treatment of

religious minorities in Muslim majority

countries, Beirut Declaration 2017 called

Faiths for Rights, initiated by the UN Office

of High Commissioner for HRs,

Abu Dhabi Declaration on Human

Fraternity and Peaceful Coexistence

signed by Pope Francis and Grand Imam

of Al Ahzar Al Tayyib in February 2019. I am

glad to support growing PaRD initiative –

International Partnership on Religion and

Development bringing together more than

80 members and partner organizations.

In addition, the OSCE is more active in

FoRB area. Under Poland led proposal,

the UN General Assembly agreed to

devote the first ever International Day

of Commemorating Victims of Acts of

Religious Violence – August 22.

WHAT TO DO

I visited 16 countries on working

missions; spoke to many leaders,

communities, organisations, academia.

The role of SE gave me closer access to

human suffering.

I am convinced we need FoRB

CLIMATE CHANGE! The situation is

already alarming, trends are worrying.

And it concerns millions of people in many

regions of the world!

15


International community must

(1) Recognize the importance of FoRB;

(2) EU and MS must make FoRB

permanent and important condition of

external relations;

(3) We need to organize efficient

cooperation on FoRB promotion with

like-minded actors – against violent

extremism, religious fundamentalism and

intolerance.

With the adoption of the EU Guidelines

on the promotion and protection of

freedom of religion or belief in 2013,

the EU has committed to advance this

fundamental freedom in its external

action, including through its financial

instruments. Since then, there has been

a significant increase in FoRB-funding in

comparison to the previous period 2007-

12 (2013-18: 18 million EUR, 28 projects,

versus 4 million EUR, 23 projects).

Other entry points opted by EU

Delegations in the past for promoting

FoRB are e.g. non-discrimination and equal

citizenship, minority rights, intercultural/-

religious dialogue, prevention of violent

extremism.

The foundational principle of HRs is

dignity. Culture of Human Dignity is based

on respect of the universal principle: We

are all different in identity; we are all equal

in dignity.

Dignity is crucially important for

Christians (Dignitatis Humanae is Vatican

Council II major document on religious

freedom), for Muslims it is the Quranic

concept of Karamah, for adherents of

Bible it is Imago Dei and Medaber al kabot

in Hebrew tradition.

EU Charter of Fundamental Rights

starts with Dignity as the first out of four

main values. In India, the most populous

country, with secular Constitution

Preamble we can find call for dignity.

I had good experience when sharing

these principles at Punjab Institute of

Islamic Studies at the University of Lahore

or at Ahfad University for Women in

Sudan.

Human dignity may serve as a meeting

point for both, religious and secular

humanists. Punta del Este Declaration on

Human Dignity for Everyone Everywhere

from December 2018 is the recent proof.

I am happy that many scholars, experts

and activists signed up to commemorate

the 70 years of the UDHR, but also to

recommit to its foundational principle.

The document is still open for signatures.

The ethical principle of equal dignity

is a departure point for socio-political

principle of equal citizenship (inclusive,

dignified one). It brings us to a pluralist

society – like a mosaic,

to a civil state based on equal

citizenship. E. g. this is the best option for

the future of Iraq. The fair civil (secular)

state is blessing for FoRB and different

faiths coexistence.

Inter-religious and inter-cultural

dialogue must become a norm, not an

exception. Dialogue not just for dialogue

and exchange, but also as a quest for

truth, justice, common good.

This is spirit of also Art. 17 Treaty

Dialogue, where I was regularly invited

by FVP Timmermans.

We need to move from respect of

identity towards

1) awareness of interdependence,

and

2) ethics of shared responsibility.

Pope Francis and Grand Imam of Al

Ahzar, the latest one in Abu Dhabi, set an

inspiring example. People generally very

little read encyclicals or fatwas. However,

they see images and they get the message

immediately.

United Europe, it is a lesson on

common good, winning over hatred

and violence. It grew from the definition

of common ground, understanding,

definition of common values and

interests, bringing common good and

common future.

I know well from my missions that

the EU is welcomed when not teaching

or preaching, but sharing; when not

imposing, but proposing.

Evil is very successful today

because it has very widely spread and

influential allies. These are indifference,

ignorance, fear – they are siblings of evil.

Therefore, we must learn how to live in

diversity, not only to coexist in diversity.

We need to nurture allies of good –

engagement, education, courage.

Religious literacy is important (digital

one is not enough).

More and faster smartphones?

Yes, but this is not sufficient ambition.

We need smart people – in diplomacy,

public policy, schools, media, community

leaders (with modern smart technologies)

I am supportive of activities of the newly

established European Academy of

Religion in Bologna (2016) as network

of universities, faculties, journals and

scholars on nexus between religion and

different sciences.

I was happy to get FoRB visible at

European Development Days, and

especially when Lorenzo Natali Media

Special FoRB Prize was the first time

given to both professional and amateur

journalists (Tunisia, Burkina Faso). We

discuss a FoRB Award for the best students

at EMA Global Campus of Human Rights

in Venice.

Most of the information one can find

in my report. Nevertheless, I would like to

conclude on a more personal note.

CONCLUSION:

ON A MORE PERSONAL NOTE

When genocide in the Middle East

in 2014 started, I tried to persuade EU

leaders and Slovak government that

we have to do something credible to

help victims of persecution. I sent more

than 70 urging letters, we organized

public manifestations. When the EP

adopted a strong resolution demanding

to establish a permanent position of EU

Special Representative for FoRB, this

issue came back to me like a boomerang.

I want to thank Commission, especially

to the President Jean-Claude Juncker

for giving me the opportunity to start

something really important, sensitive and

unprecedented. He asked me for visibility.

I told him then, at the beginning, yes, but

we must keep visibility connected with

credibility. I think this agenda is now both

visible and credible. I had constructive

support of Commissioner Mimica and his

Cabinet, DG DEVCO led by S. Manservisi

with very reliable collaboration of V.

16 2019 | OUR WORLD


Manzitti, J. Journal and B. Philippe.

I held frequent meetings with EEAS, EP leadership and

committees, CSO, FBOs, media. Via Art. 17 Treaty Dialogue I

cooperated with the FVP Timmermans and DG JUST, but also

with Johannes Hahn and his DG NEAR.

In spite of very limited working conditions or because of that

I combined a lot of HARDWORKING, TEAMWORKING and NET-

WORKING. This was my recipe for success. This was behind very

encouraging stories of releases – of two groups in Sudan (Czech

Christian humanitarian worker Petr Jašek sentenced for lifelong

jail, and his two Sudanese collaborators; and HRs defender Prof.

Ibrahim Mudawi – threatened by lifelong imprisonment - with

five other activists) and famous Asia Bibi from Pakistan, being

double sentenced to death for blasphemy. It is important to add:

autocratic regime in Sudan in the meantime collapsed with U.

Bashir being investigated for his bloody crimes. In Pakistan, we

have started a series of activities promoting equal citizenship

and pluralism.

I want to thank all partners Member States, MEPs, EEAS,

Commission services, CSO, FBOs and academia for very good

cooperation on the common cause of FoRB protection. We are

not perfect, but we tried to be reliable and constructive partners.

The stocktaking event is not only on reflexion of the last years,

but also setting a vision for the future.

There are five recommendations in my report:

1. Work on FoRB within an HRs framework and through the

SDGs agenda - including education, gender equality, and peace.

2. Boost FoRB literacy.

3. Support engagement with religious actors and interreligious

dialogue.

4. Implement a more strategic and contextualized approach

at country level.

5. Step up coordination among MS and the EU on FoRB.

My report is not exhaustive text, but it is my input into the

two-day debate. I hope this conference will bring additional

points to the future FoRB agenda. And it will be handed over to

the incoming President and Commission for further reflexion

and decision.

My nomination in 2016 was invoked by the genocide in the

Middle East. Year 2016 marked Century of genocides – over 100

years. There were many, too many. What is coming next: Century

of hope or Century of continuity (business as usual)? The world

urgently needs a change; we must stick to the commitment

NEVER AGAIN. We need FoRB climate change! FoRB is part of

Robert Schuman’s legacy.

FoRB protection and promotion are in the best EU interest

and global responsibility. This is a preventive antidote against

persecution and the refugee crisis. The EU was born on fight

against totalitarian oppression, against political, ethnic and

religious persecution. This must stay alive in our memory and

become a permanent part of our responsibility.

Therefore our effort on FoRB protection and promotion

should continue. At the same time, it needs more adequate

institutional support, stronger political conditions, and more

efficient cooperation with MS, institutions and all relevant

partners.

Man, with open hands, worship God.SHUTTERSTOCK

OUR WORLD | 2019

17


Still looking for freedom 30 years

on from the fall of the Berlin Wall

By Neva Sadikoglu-Novaky

18 2019 | OUR WORLD


Remains of Berlin wall, detail of

old concrete wall, Germany.

SHUTTERSTOCK

In November 1989, the Berlin Wall fell marking the

triumph of western liberalism. The fall of the wall

and the iron curtain marked the end of the cold war

and the triumph of western liberal democracy over

communism. The values of western liberal democracy

of guaranteeing citizens’ rights and freedoms were in

stark contrast to the communist values that limited

these. One image that is seen to capture the fall of

the Berlin wall 30 years ago is that of David Hasselhoff

singing “looking for freedom” by the Brandenburg Gate

as happy people celebrate in the background. Three

decades later, many are still looking for freedom.

Freedom of faith or religion is legally acknowledged

as a universal right but in reality, it is yet to be enjoyed

by all. The types and degrees of violations vary.

However, discrimination and or violence based on

religion or faith is a reality in the West and East and

is impacting their socio-economic mobility and even

threatening their very existence.

Formally, the freedom of religion or belief is

enshrined in international law. It is enshrined in Articles

18 of both the Universal Declaration of Human Rights

and the International Covenant on Civil and Political

Rights. The European Union committed itself, in 2013

through its Guidelines, to advancing the promotion

and protection of freedom of religion or belief through

its external action including by funding projects to this

end. In May 2016, the EU even created the function

of “Special Envoy for the promotion of freedom of

religion or belief outside the EU” tasking the former

State Secretary of Slovakia Ján Figel.

Yet, internationally, we are seeing that these

freedoms are not being upheld. An independent review

into the global persecution of Christians commissioned

by the United Kingdom’s Foreign Secretary at the time

Jeremy Hunt, stated that “in some regions, the level

and nature of persecution is arguably coming close

to meeting the international definition of genocide,

according to that adopted by the UN.” The report finds

that many have been killed, kidnapped, imprisoned

and discriminated against. A century ago, 20% of the

Middle East region’s people were Christians - today

the figure is below 5%. Extremist groups in countries

like Syria, Iraq, Egypt, north-east Nigeria and the

Philippines explicitly single our Christians and other

minorities as requiring eradication.

Similarly, Muslims in places like Myanmar and

China have been facing persecution. In August 2018,

a United Nations mandated fact-finding mission found

that the military abuses committed in Kachin, Rakhine,

and Shan States towards the Rohingya Muslims in

Myanmar since 2011 “undoubtedly amount to the

gravest crimes under international law.” In China,

Neva

Sadikoglu-

Novaky

Co-Chair of the

Freedom of Religion

or Belief Roundtable.

She has been working

in the EU since 2009

and she is a fellow

at the London-based

Localis Think Tank.

OUR WORLD | 2019

19


the Muslim Uighurs have been facing

persecution and are being detained in

camps. At a hearing in the US Congress

in October of this year, testimonies of

Uighur women revealed how they were

being raped, sexually harassed and

forcefully sterilized.

Furthermore, the Jews in the

Middle East and Israel continue to

have their presence threatened. Israel

continues to be threatened not only by

the terrorist group Daesh but also by

countries like Iran.

The freedom of religion or faith is

also not being fully upheld in the West.

In Europe, Jewish, Muslims, Christians

and citizens of other religions and

faith continue to face violence and

discrimination. While they may not be

facing the same kind of persecution

experienced in other parts of the

world, the still face violence and

discrimination. This is limiting their

freedoms and limiting their socioeconomic

mobility.

For example, Europe’s Jewish

population, subject to genocide in

the 20th century, continues to face

violence and discrimination today.

The studies of the European Union

Agency for Fundamental Rights showed

that Jews across the EU continue to

experience anti-Semitism in the form

of vandalism, insults, threats, attacks

and even murder. 85 % consider anti-

Semitism to be a serious problem and

respondents rated it as the biggest

social or political problem where they

live. The community Security Trust

studies demonstrate the steady rise in

anti-Semitic incidents since 2013 in the

UK – a country that is among the most

tolerant in the world as illustrated by

studies like the February 2019 Frontiers

in Sociology study.

Similar issues are present across the

transatlantic in the USA. For example,

a recent study by the American Jewish

Committee shows that nine out of ten

American Jews believe anti-Semitism

is a problem in America with 72%

of American Jews disapproving of

President Trump’s handling of the

The end of the cold war did not

result in the end of history and

automatic access to freedoms.

Today’s pictures shows that

citizens, not only in far way

lands but also in the West, are

still looking for their freedoms

of religion and faith.

threat of antisemitism in America.

Research conducted by Pew Research

Center also showed that most American

adults (82%) say Muslims are subject to

at least some discrimination in the USA

today.

We are also seeing freedoms being

limited in the form of the economic and

social exclusion of religious minorities.

When we look at white-collar workers,

even in the EU institutions themselves,

the picture is concerning. The lack

of diversity as a whole in the EU was

reported on in the Brussels media in

2017. According to estimates by those

working on racial and religious diversity

reported in the media, roughly only 1

% of staff employed directly by EU

institutions have a minority background.

When interviewed by media on the

matter, Syed Kamall (Member of the

European Parliament for London at the

time) famously said “if you want to see

diversity in the European institutions,

look at the faces of the cleaners leaving

the building early in the morning and

contrast that with the white MEPs and

officials entering.”

A report by the Fundamental Rights

Agency that also came out in 2017

showed that nearly 40% of minorities

surveyed reported having faced

discrimination in the last five years, with

discrimination occurring most often

while looking for a job.

Looking specifically at the case

of Europe’s Muslim population, who

represent almost 5% of the total

population and are the EU’s second

largest religious group, we see that

islamophobia is widely experienced

and is, therefore, limiting freedoms. The

September 2017 study of Fundamental

Rights Agency focusing on the Muslim

population in the EU, showed that

Muslims face discrimination in a broad

range of settings. They found that

discrimination was faced particularly

when looking for work, on the job, and

when trying to access public or private

services. Studies also show that Muslim

citizens in EU countries are typically

poorer than the national average of

the country that they live in.

20 2019 | OUR WORLD

Francis Fukuyama, writing in 1989 about the end of the

cold war calls it the “end of history as such: end point of

mankind’s ideological evolution and the universalisation of

Western Liberal democracy.” He goes on to say that “the

state that emerges at the end of history is liberal insofar as

it recognises and protects through a system of law man’s

universal right to freedom, and democratic insofar as it exists

only with the consent of the governed” (Fukuyama, 1989, 5).

30 years on, we are seeing that we should not be taking the

freedoms that we fought hard for, for granted. The end of the

cold war did not result in the end of history and automatic

access to freedoms. Today’s pictures show that citizens, not

only in far away lands but also in the West, are still looking

for their freedoms of religion and faith. The reality is, 1989

marked only the start of our efforts to consolidate, promote

and protect the freedoms we fought for.

Going forward, we should be championing freedom of

faith and religion as passionately as the former UK Prime

Minister Benjamin Disraeli of Jewish background championed

church policy in 1864. Regardless of one’s faith, regardless

of whether they are religious, agnostic or atheist – we must

all be on the side of freedoms. The freedom not to believe

must be protected as fiercely as must the freedom of religion

or faith. And so, we must pay tribute to the spirit of 1989 by

taking bolder steps to deliver the freedoms of the promised

liberal world order.

Berlin: East Side Gallery - impressions from the art installation “Lichtgrenze” (light wall) to the 25th anniversary of the fall of

the Berlin Wall.SHUTTERSTOCK


Freedom of Religion and

Belief: Why it matters

By Eric Roux

Recently, I was having a chat with the

excellent Reverend Bill E. Swing, founder

of United Religions Initiatives (URI) and

former Episcopal Bishop of California, and I

was surprised when he told me: “I’m glad you

are doing what you do for religious freedom,

as before. I thought that religious freedom

was only an issue for the agenda of the farright

wing evangelical Christians.” Actually, and

indeed, many advocacy groups on religious

freedom, or freedom of religion or belief

(FoRB) as we say in EU, are only focused on

the rights of their own religious community,

even when sometimes they pretend to fight

for FoRB for all. Or sometimes they focus on

the rights of several religious communities,

but to the exclusion of others.

I consider that it is normal and sane

to defend the right to FoRB of your own

community. I’m a Scientologist and I will

definitely fight for the rights of Scientologists

to practice their religion freely and I expect the

same from Muslims, Christians, Sikhs, Bahai’s

and all others to defend their own religions.

But it’s not enough and if it is done in a way that

excludes some other religious communities,

it becomes even counterproductive and

detrimental to the very basis of FoRB itself.

The strength of the right to FoRB stems

from its universality.

We, basically all nations belonging to the

United Nations, recognized it as a fundamental

and universal right. Universal means

everywhere, and for everyone, whatever

their faith, belief or conviction is. It goes as

far (and actually it’s not so far) as applying to

non-believers to the same extent it applies

to believers. Freedom of belief is also the

right of atheists to be atheists, agnostics to

be agnostics, and the right to change religion

whenever you want and for whatever belief

you choose. And with that, your right to FoRB

is protected or at least should be.

Eric Roux

Current Vice-

President of the

European Office

of the Church of

Scientology for Public

Affairs and Human

Rights and a wellknown

International

Activist for Freedom

of Religion and Belief.

He has authored

several books and

articles on that topic.

He is also currently

serving as President

of the European

Interreligious

Forum for Religious

Freedom.

Now the corollary of this is that the

greatest threat to FoRB is to strip it of its

universality. And that is what happens when

some groups or activists defend only their

rights or the rights of a few to the detriment

or the exclusion of others. The universality of

FoRB declines, and it becomes finally a special

interest right or even a vested interest right,

and then its power shrinks in value. This is

the direction of no FoRB at all. We could even

say that when one religion is excluded from

FoRB, then there is no FoRB, as this right only

exists because it is universal. It’s its essence.

That means that each of us should defend the

right to FoRB of each one of us, without even

considering our own affinity or lack of it to

take into account.

One day I spoke to a Russian Orthodox Old

Believer Bishop in Moscow. He was one of the

most conservative Christian Orthodox I ever

met in my life. For him, theologically, I was a

devil worshipper. Nevertheless, Old Believers

have known persecution for centuries. Maybe

that is why he told me that whilst he was very

opposed to Scientology beliefs, he would fight

for our rights to practice freely our religion and

would always oppose any interference from

the government in this. That is what it takes to

be a real advocate for FoRB. A bit of courage,

even vis a vis your own beliefs.

Another thing that should not enter into

account is the social hostility that a religious

community can face in a particular country. It

was (and unfortunately is still) such an issue

that the UN Human Rights Committee had

to tackle it in its General Comment 22 on

Freedom of Thought, Conscience or Religion:

“Article 18 protects theistic, non-theistic

and atheistic beliefs, as well as the right not

to profess any religion or belief. The terms

“belief” and “religion” are to be broadly

construed. Article 18 is not limited in its

22 2019 | OUR WORLD


Hand of a man reaching to bird in the sky representing the freedom of thought.

shutterstock

application to traditional religions or to religions and beliefs

with institutional characteristics or practices analogous to

those of traditional religions. The Committee, therefore,

views with concern any tendency to discriminate against any

religion or belief for any reason, including the fact that they

are newly established, or represent religious minorities that

may be the subject of hostility on the part of a predominant

religious community.”

Finally, there is also a practical aspect when it comes

to advocacy, to focus on defending the right to FoRB of

others. This aspect was summarized by a young Muslim

lady, participating in the Ministerial for Religious Freedom

in Washington this summer, the biggest ever event on this

topic, organized by the US State Department but with 80

National delegations participating. She was commenting on

the benefits she got from participating in the International

Religious Freedom Roundtable in Washington, and she said

it this way: “Before, I was always defending the rights of

Muslims. And in our society, it was very, very tiring. I was

exhausted. When I joined the roundtable, I started to defend

the rights of Christians or the ones of Scientologists, and I

discovered that it was much more rewarding. Then I stopped

exhausting myself defending Islam, as I realized that I could

count on Christians and Scientologists to defend them.” And

that is the way it works. FoRB to be for all, or not to be.

OUR WORLD | 2019

One day I spoke to a Russian

Orthodox Old Believer bishop in

Moscow. He was one of the most

conservative Christian Orthodox

I ever met in my life. He told me

that whilst he was very opposed

to Scientology beliefs, he would

fight for our rights to practice

freely our religion and would

always oppose any interference

of the government in this.

23


The European Union as an

agent for ensuring respect

Q&A on Freedom of Religion and Belief with Luisa Ragher

Freedom of Religion and Belief: From

your perspective, is this term experienced

in practice in the European

Area?

The EU sees human rights as universal and interdependent.

In the EU, the right to religious freedom is enshrined

in article 10 of the EU charter of fundamental rights. Article

9 of the 1950 European Convention on Human Rights

grants freedom of thought, conscience and religion. The

European Union has a strong legislative framework that

ensures that freedom of thought, conscience, religion and

belief is underpinned by domestic legislation in all our 28

Member States. As we know that implementation of legislation

and public policies are always a challenge, we are

constantly monitoring our performance. The Fundamental

Rights Agency closely monitors how persons belonging to

religious groups, in particular Jews and Muslims, face discrimination,

hate speech and hate crime within the EU and

together with the European Commission ensure that these

issues are addressed at the national level.

In its external action, the EU advocates for freedom of religion

or belief for all individuals, and we try to ensure that

that religion is not invoked to curtail other human rights. In

this regard, the EU has consolidated Freedom of Religion or

Belief (FoRB) as one of its human rights priorities with the

adoption of the guidelines on the promotion and protection

of FoRB in 2013. Our areas of focus on FoRB are to combat

discrimination and violence against individuals on the basis

of their religion or belief, to promote the right to manifest

religion or beliefs and the right to change or not to have religion,

to support human rights defenders and civil society

working on this issue, to combat hate speech as well as the

criminalization of blasphemy.

Give us an example of the progress

made in the last years in the battle

against the discrimination on religious

affairs.

While human rights violations are widespread in many parts

of the world, and civil society faces a severe crackdown in

many countries, the picture is not all bleak. We have wit-

24 2019 | OUR WORLD


SHUTTERSTOCK

nessed some success on the battle against violence and discrimination on

religious grounds, thanks to the action of governments willing to implement

human rights reforms, and advocacy from civil society organisations and human

rights defenders, national human rights institutions, UN agencies and

the international community.

For instance, in the last year several individuals who were jailed because of

their religion or beliefs have been released from detention, after concerns

raised by the international community. We are also witnessing how some

countries are trying to liberalise their legislation on religious freedom or are

moving away from a strict implementation of religious principles in their legislation

(e.g. seeking equality in inheritance law between men and women).

It is worth noting that some religious actors and non-believers remain strong

human rights advocates across the world, for instance by providing assistance

and care to migrants and asylum seekers in distress, or by leading efforts

of inter-faith dialogue to tackle sectarian conflicts.

Does the rise of populism in politics influence directly

the freedom of religion and in what ways?

Luisa Ragher

Head of Human

Rights Division ,

European External

Action Service

(E.E.A.S.).

In our daily work, we witness how FoRB is contested around the world.

OUR WORLD | 2019

25


Whether they are perpetrated by nonstate

actors or governments who are

increasingly curtailing human rights,

the consequences for victims are severe.

Believers and non-believers in

many parts of the world continue to

suffer from violence, persecution, and

discrimination (even for instance in

access to public services, education,

and health). It is worth highlighting

that violence can also be perpetrated

under the pretext of a religious prescription

or practice (for instance violence

against women and girls including

“honour” killings, female genital

mutilation, early and forced marriages

or violence against persons based on

their sexual orientation or gender

identity). Religion is also often instrumentalised

to legitimate violence. We

have seen it happen before, and yet

it is happening again – in spite of our

international commitments and our

national laws.

Religious people and non-believers

also experience hurdles in manifesting

their religion in public and private

and have been attacked in their places

of worship. Criminalisation of apostasy

and blasphemy is another fundamental

human rights violation that many

individuals face.

The current political context is challenging.

We are often faced with situations

were individuals are being persecuted

due to their religious beliefs

(or for being non-religious) in conflicts

environments where the institutional

framework of the State is too weak to

address the human rights violations.

Humanitarian relief and state-building

measures have to be at the core of our

action in these contexts. Finding common

agreements in the multilateral

fora is also challenging. As the European

Union, we believe that working

together is the only way forward and

everyone who wants to work along this

line knows that it can count on the EU

for it. To fight both emerging and longstanding

threats, we should continue

to make use of our existing diplomatic

tools while also identifying opportunities

for new coalitions and partnerships.

Taking into account your

experience at EEAS so

far, at an international

level, which region do

you think that still faces

difficulties in the freedom

of religion?

Violations of freedom of religion or belief

can be observed worldwide, with

different degrees of intensity. We see

how individuals from all faiths as well

as non-believers are targeted around

the world due to their religion or belief.

Often majorities in one country are

minorities elsewhere. For instance, we

have seen during the last year an increase

of attacks against places of worship,

whether it’s against Muslims in a

mosque in Christchurch, against Christians

in churches in Sri Lanka or against

Jews in synagogues in Pittsburgh. In all

of these cases we have reacted publicly

to condemn the violence and to show

our solidarity with the victims.

This is why the EU advocates for the

promotion and protection of FoRB

globally. For this endeavour, we have

several tools at our disposal. EU Delegations

around the world monitor

FoRB violations, including through

their regular contacts with faith based

actors. Subsequently, the EU raises its

concerns for human rights violations

through demarches, statements or

during political dialogues with third

countries. We also engage with partners

across the world in multilateral

fora to find common solutions, in particular

in the UN, and our development

funds finance projects of inclusive education

and interfaith dialogue.

Over the past years, we have raised

our concerns for FoRB violations in our

human rights dialogues with countries

of the Middle East and North Africa

(MENA), Central, South and South East

Asia, as well as countries of the Western

Balkans and of the “Eastern Partnership”.

Our efforts are coordinated between

EEAS headquarters and our EU Delegations

around the world, in joint efforts

with the EU Special Representative for

Human Rights and the Special Envoy

for FoRB outside the EU. In order to improve

our understanding of FoRB and

our capacities to act, in-house trainings

have been strengthened over the last

years. To note that in the last European

Parliament legislature, the EU institutions

worked closely with the European

Parliament Intergroup on FoRB.

While we have achieved results, we

cannot afford complacency. Liaising

daily with NGOs, Member States, and

MEPs allows us to listen to new suggestions

on how to constantly improve

our work on defending FoRB.

Is education an important

factor for the new

generations to learn respect

the others? Do you

think you should name

another?

Our message is very clear: violence

and discrimination based on religious

grounds must stop, perpetrators

must be held accountable and victims

should be rehabilitated.

Violence has not only to be condemned

but also prevented. Preventing violence

and discrimination is essential

to obtain long term results. Education

is without any doubt a fundamental

aspect of prevention. For instance, we

are aware as how in some countries,

textbooks are used in schools to foster

discriminatory messages and curtails

diversity. Accordingly, the EU has tried

to address this issue in its development

cooperation. In our political dialogues,

we ask countries to stop discriminatory

practices in the education system

when we identify them.

Preventing discrimination and violence

and building respect within societies is

also sustained by other policies which

tackle impunity and seek reconciliation.

We can think of our commitment

to financing and supporting transitional

justice programmes as well as

providing assistance for reforms of justice

systems and of the security sector

around the world for instance.

Share with us your

thoughts regarding the

initiatives the governments

around the world

and the EU need to take

in order to go further

and make the freedom

of religion and belief

reality.

26 2019 | OUR WORLD


... in the last year several individuals

who were jailed because of their

religion or beliefs have been released

from detention, after concerns raised

by the international community.

Beyond local and regional situations, the work for human

rights is and must be a global effort. As EU, we believe that

the United Nations is the natural forum to advance and protect

human rights. Global rules and international agreement

should not be perceived as a constraint for some, but as a

protection for all. We also work actively with other regional

organisations such as the OSCE and we firmly believe in the

importance of regional human rights mechanisms.

The Human Rights Council in Geneva and the UN General

Assembly’s Third Committee in New York are pivotal in our

collective efforts to promote freedom of religion and belief.

Through those fora we have supported countries that wish

to better guarantee their citizens’ freedoms, and highlighted

egregious violations in need of urgent attention.

For many years the European Union has led strong resolutions

focused on freedom of religion and belief in both the

Human Rights Council and UNGA Third Committee. Last

March, the EU led the FoRB resolution at the Human Rights

Council, which renewed the mandate of the UN Special Rapporteur

on FoRB for a further 3 years. The work of the UN

Special Procedures is fundamental to monitor human rights

violations around the world as well as to assess and advise

governments on how to improve protections including

through legislation.

Far from being static, multilateralism and UN mechanisms

allows us every year to promote and protect FoRB through

new tools. The establishment in 2019 of an International

Day against religious persecution (22 August) represented

a good opportunity for all of us to publicly show our commitment

to tackling violence against believers and non-believers.

Several EU Member States, and non-European countries

have been strengthening their FoRB diplomacy by creating

mandates of Special Envoys for FoRB or by creating focal

points in their ministries of Foreign affairs. This has allowed

a stronger diplomatic coordination to discuss FoRB violations

and identify joint actions of public or silent diplomacy.

Finally, defending FoRB requires investment into educating

about religion and belief – and an openness to engaging civil

society actors whether faith-based and to their contribution

to the overall challenge of how we live together – here in

Europe and beyond. With this aim, the High Representative/

Vice-President Federica Mogherini launched the Global Exchange

on Religion in Society on 6 September.

The ‘Religion in Society’ approach recognises religion as an

important social force throughout the world. It emphasises

the importance of engaging religious or faith-based actors

alongside other relevant and non-religious or more secular

actors, to address the issues of living together in a globalised

world. Unlike other approaches, which privilege the position

of belief and generally expect participants to ‘declare’ a faith

identity as a condition of entry, the “Religion in Society” approach

more easily takes into account secular, humanist, or

non-religious positions. Concretely, the suggested exchange

platform will aim to connect and empower community voices,

who as active practitioners in their respective (majority/

minority) local settings are navigating issues like shared citizenship,

belonging, and management of cultural diversity.

OUR WORLD | 2019

27


Understanding religion

By Georges-Elia Sarfati

The etymology of the term “religion” is

controversial. The very idea of religion

may inspire respect and interest, or on the

contrary, arouse rejection. These contrasting

attitudes are related to the way individuals

have experienced religion, and to their

knowledge of a given religion’s history. It is

also difficult to assess religions without taking

into consideration their historical expressions.

The ubiquity of the religious phenomenon

throughout history has provided enough

material to reflect on the essence of religion.

What we know about the origin of the word

comes down to little, but deserves to be

remembered. It is commonly accepted that the

word “religion” originates from the Latin word

“religio”, and the verbs “ligare” and “religare”,

which mean respectively “bind” and “connect”.

According to this first etymology endorsed by

authors such as Lactance and Tertullian, religion

designates the way human being connects and

enters a relationship with the divine. This has

become a commonly accepted opinion.

Another rarer etymology derives the term

“religion” from the Latin “legere” and “relegere”,

which means respectively to gather and to

examine / to meditate. This explanation,

endorsed by Cicero, refers to the fact of

gathering one’s thoughts / to examine.

The two etymologies provide very different

insights on religion and its practice. While the

first denotes a relationship instigated by the

individual, the second denotes a relationship to

intelligence in itself. These two etymologies shed

light on two different conceptions of religious

life. In the first case (religion / religare- to connect

with the divine) is a form of communication, in

the second case (religion / relegare- to collect,

to examine) refers to a spiritual attitude that

precedes any membership. This semantic

difference modifies our understanding of

religion. Indeed, admitting the usual definition

of religion as a “system” of beliefs and practices

Georges-Elia

Sarfati

University Professor,

philosopher, France

allowing one’s to relate to a higher principle,

this “system” would change dramatically

depending on whether it is based on already

established principles or on a permanently

evolving re-examination. It seems that the first

definition defines the dogmatic systems, while

the second conception enables to inject a critical

dimension to the religious. Let’s go one step

further. In recognizing that the most irreducible

characteristics of religion is the recognition of

the existence of a superior principle, the whole

question then zeroes-in on one’s interpretation

of and approach to this very principle. This is on

these bases that religion can - when understood

as a critical examination – then open up to

the possibility of metaphysics, without any

repression of a personal reflection.

A rational

methodology can

therefore foster a

true consensus. From

this perspective,

what is regarded as

“religion” is not an

individual preference

or a cultural

automatism. Given all

the above, speaking

of religion should not

prohibit to think.

28 2019 | OUR WORLD


SHUTTERSTOCK

In fact, what allows us to assume that

there is a superior principle, the values

one’s can reasonably infer from this

examination and the objective reasons

for this hypothesis constitute a rational

approach to “beliefs” and “practices”.

The methodology used to deal with

questions such as: is the universe

absolute, was it engendered alone or is it

sufficient in itself? Is the universe eternal,

OUR WORLD | 2019

or does it have a beginning? Is there

an end goal for everything that exists?

determines whether the principles put

forward by a given religion are admitted

as being true or are regarded as simply

“beliefs”. In this regard, idealism (or

pantheism), materialism, monotheism

should not be assessed as ‘’beliefs’’

since all can be evaluated through a

rational methodology and determined

are false or true given what science

teaches us today about the structure of

the universe.

A rational methodology can,

therefore, foster a true consensus. From

this perspective, what is regarded as

“religion” is not an individual preference

or a cultural automatism. Given all the

above, speaking of religion should not

prohibit to think.

29


Address of the Holy Father

on Nuclear Weapons

Speech of Pope Francis, given on November 24, 2019, at Atomic Bomb

Hypocenter Park, Nagasaki, Japan

Dear Brothers and Sisters,

This place makes us deeply aware of the

pain and horror that we human beings are

capable of inflicting upon one another. The

damaged cross and statue of Our Lady recently

discovered in the Cathedral of Nagasaki remind

us once more of the unspeakable horror

suffered in the flesh by the victims of the

bombing and their families.

One of the deepest longings of the human

heart is for security, peace and stability. The

possession of nuclear and other weapons of

mass destruction is not the answer to this

desire; indeed they seem always to thwart it.

Our world is marked by a perverse dichotomy

that tries to defend and ensure stability

and peace through a false sense of security

sustained by a mentality of fear and mistrust,

one that ends up poisoning relationships

between peoples and obstructing any form of

dialogue.

Peace and international stability are

incompatible with attempts to build upon the

fear of mutual destruction or the threat of

total annihilation. They can be achieved only

on the basis of a global ethic of solidarity and

cooperation in the service of a future shaped

by interdependence and shared responsibility

in the whole human family of today and

tomorrow.

Here in this city which witnessed the

catastrophic humanitarian and environmental

consequences of a nuclear attack, our attempts

to speak out against the arms race will never

be enough. The arms race wastes precious

resources that could be better used to benefit

the integral development of peoples and to

protect the natural environment. In a world

where millions of children and families live

in inhumane conditions, the money that is

squandered and the fortunes made through

Pope Francis

The Head of the

Catholic Church and

Sovereign of the

Vatican City State.

the manufacture, upgrading, maintenance and

sale of ever more destructive weapons, are an

affront crying out to heaven.

A world of peace, free from nuclear

weapons, is the aspiration of millions of men

and women everywhere. To make this ideal

a reality calls for involvement on the part of

all: individuals, religious communities and civil

society, countries that possess nuclear weapons

and those that do not, the military and private

sectors, and international organizations. Our

response to the threat of nuclear weapons

must be joint and concerted, inspired by the

arduous yet constant effort to build mutual

trust and thus surmount the current climate

of distrust. In 1963, Saint John XXIII, writing in

his Encyclical Letter Pacem in Terris, in addition

to urging the prohibition of atomic weapons

(cf. No. 112), stated that authentic and lasting

international peace cannot rest on a balance

of military power, but only upon mutual trust

(cf. No. 113).

There is a need to break down the climate

of distrust that risks leading to a dismantling

of the international arms control framework.

We are witnessing an erosion of multilateralism

which is all the more serious in light of the

growth of new forms of military technology.

Such an approach seems highly incongruous

in today’s context of interconnectedness; it

represents a situation that urgently calls for

the attention and commitment of all leaders.

For her part, the Catholic Church is

irrevocably committed to promoting peace

between peoples and nations. This is a duty

to which the Church feels bound before God

and every man and woman in our world. We

must never grow weary of working to support

the principal international legal instruments of

nuclear disarmament and non-proliferation,

including the Treaty on the prohibition of

nuclear weapons. Last July, the bishops of

30 2019 | OUR WORLD


Pope Francis speaks to students in Japan.SHUTTERSTOCK

Japan launched an appeal for the abolition of nuclear arms,

and each August the Church in Japan holds a ten-day prayer

meeting for peace. May prayer, tireless work in support of

agreements and insistence on dialogue be the most powerful

“weapons” in which we put our trust and the inspiration of

our efforts to build a world of justice and solidarity that can

offer an authentic assurance of peace.

Convinced as I am that a world without nuclear weapons

is possible and necessary, I ask political leaders not to forget

that these weapons cannot protect us from current threats

to national and international security. We need to ponder

the catastrophic impact of their deployment, especially from

a humanitarian and environmental standpoint, and reject

heightening a climate of fear, mistrust and hostility fomented

by nuclear doctrines. The current state of our planet requires

a serious reflection on how its resources can be employed

in light of the complex and difficult implementation of the

2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development, in order to

achieve the goal of an integrated human development.

Saint Paul VII suggested as much in 1964, when he proposed

the establishment of a Global Fund to assist those most

impoverished peoples, drawn partially from military

expeditures (cf. Declaration to Journalists, 4 December 1964;

Populorum Progressio, 51).

All of this necessarily calls for the creation of tools for

ensuring trust and reciprocal development, and counts on

leaders capable of rising to these occasions. It is a task that

concerns and challenges every one of us. No one can be

indifferent to the pain of millions of men and women whose

sufferings trouble our consciences today. No one can turn

a deaf ear to the plea of our brothers and sisters in need.

No one can turn a blind eye to the ruin caused by a culture

incapable of dialogue.

I ask you to join in praying each day for the conversion of

hearts and for the triumph of a culture of life, reconciliation

and fraternity. A fraternity that can recognize and respect

diversity in the quest for a common destiny.

I know that some here are not Catholics, but I am certain

that we can all make our own the prayer for peace attributed

to Saint Francis of Assisi:

Lord, make me an instrument of your peace:

where there is hatred, let me sow love;

where there is injury, pardon;

where there is doubt, faith;

where there is despair, hope;

where there is darkness, light;

where there is sadness, joy.

In this striking place of remembrance that stirs us from

our indifference, it is all the more meaningful that we turn

to God with trust, asking him to teach us to be effective

instruments of peace and to make every effort not to repeat

the mistakes of the past.

May you and your families, and this entire nation, know

the blessings of prosperity and social harmony!

OUR WORLD | 2019

31


The role of Religions in Europe

Speech of Bartholomew I of Constantinople, given on November 11,

2019, at the College of Europe, Bruges, Belgium

In our time we face a world changing

rapidly, full of new challenges

and unforeseen possibilities for

development and progress. When

confronted with the contemporary

challenges, what should the required

stance for the Christian Churches be?

How could they make good use of their

precious spiritual and moral heritage,

their deep anthropological knowledge

and their philanthropic traditions? Over

the last decades, we have witnessed a

re-evaluation of the role of religion for

human existence. It is not by chance

that, in our present day, the talk

about the coming “post-religious age”

has been replaced by the discourse

of a “post-secular period,” in which

religions claim and play a prominent

public role and join all the remarkable

efforts of humankind. As Pope Emeritus

Benedict writes: “complete secularity”

(Profanität), “which was aimed for in

the West, is something deeply foreign

for the civilizations of the world. They

are convinced that a world without God

does not have any future.”

Religion remains a central dimension

of human life, both at the personal

and social levels. Without reference

32 2019 | OUR WORLD


to religion, it is impossible to understand the

past, to analyse the present, or to imagine the

future of humanity. Unfortunately, the ongoing

outburst of religious fundamentalism and the

terrible acts of violence in the name of God and

religion give to the modern deniers of religious

faith arguments against religions and support

the identification of religion with its negative

aspects. The credibility of religions depends

largely on their commitment to peace, the

way to which is, in our times, interreligious

dialogue and common witness in view of the

great contemporary challenges.

Dialogue is the most effective means

for addressing problems and it promotes

confidence and mutual acceptance. It is as

such a gesture of solidarity and a source

of solidarity. Never in history have human

beings had the opportunity to bring so many

positive changes to so many people and the

global community simply through encounter

and dialogue. While it may be true that this is a

time of crisis, it must equally be underlined that

there have also never been greater chances for

communication and cooperation. Humanity is

called to react and act collaboratively, working

as a whole for our common presence and

future. Nobody—not a nation, nor a state,

not science and technology, nor a church or

a religion—can face the current problems

alone. We need one another; we need common

mobilization, common efforts, common goals.

The attitude of the Orthodox Church towards

the modern world is not a defensive one. We

do not reject modernity and its contributions

to progress. Neither do we regard it as a

threat to our identity. We discern autonomy

from autonomism, protection of individual

rights from individualism. At the same time,

we fervently call upon the representatives of

modernity to avoid identifying Orthodoxy with

anti-modernism, conservatism, traditionalism,

orthodoxism and ethnophyletism, as well as

associating Orthodoxy with the rejection of

individual rights and individualism and with

the incapacity to accept secular ethics and the

secular state.

And above all, we hold that in the Orthodox

tradition and theology, reason (λόγος) and

freedom (ἐλευθερία) are highly appreciated and

respected. We have never sacrificed reason to

a supreme authority. We have never rejected

human freedom and synergy in the name of

OUR WORLD | 2019

Bartholomew

I of

Constantinople

Patriarch of

Constantinople.

Spiritual leader of

300 million Orthodox

Christians worldwide.

the sinfulness of the fallen human being. We

are continuing this tradition when we support

the core values of Orthodoxy, person-centred

ethics, respect for human dignity, peace

and reconciliation, love and philanthropy,

the protection of the environment. This

magnificent tradition is properly expressed in

the documents of the Holy and Great Council.

In this spirit, the Ecumenical Patriarchate

is also unshakeably committed to openness.

We engage in inter-Christian, inter-religious,

inter-cultural dialogue, we discuss with secular

institutions, with contemporary philosophy

and modern science. As an example of our

activities, we would like to especially stress

on our common commitment with Pope

Francis in ecological and social issues. The

Church of Constantinople is widely known for

its environmental initiatives. The Ecumenical

Patriarchate was the first to highlight the

spiritual and ethical dimensions of the

ecological problem, to stress the importance

of the Church’s contribution to its handling,

to showcase the ecological dimensions of the

eucharistic and ascetic ethos of Orthodoxy,

and to propose ways to protect the natural

environment. We have not only reached out

to Orthodox faithful, to Christians and other

believers, but rather to every man of goodwill,

while expressing our trust in the responsibility

of every individual and especially connecting

our hopes of the positive contribution of all.

We consider that the new generation—which

envisions a world that will function as a true

“house” (οἶκος) for all humankind and strives

toward this very purpose—is interested in our

message, to be especially important. The very

life of the Church is respect indeed and care

for creation in tangible forms, as well as the

source of its ecological actions. The protection

of the natural environment is an extension of

all that is experienced in the Church. Ecclesial

life is applied ecology.

The real interests of man are served only

within an intact environment. So, we consider the

approach of the ecological crisis in connection

with social problems to be especially important.

It is Pope Francis’ and our common belief that

the current economic developments within

the framework of globalization destroy social

cohesion, solidarity and the overall function of

interpersonal relations. It is precisely this spirit

that the Papal Encyclical Laudato Si’ (2015) and

our Common Message with Him, On the World

33


Day of Prayer for Creation (September 1, 2017), express. From

the very beginning, we have supported the idea that serving

our fellow human beings, preserving nature, environmental

justice and social justice, are inextricably interconnected.

It is quite characteristic that the Roman Catholic Church

started by addressing social matters and continues its way

to the Laudato Si’ Encyclical in 2015, which has the ecological

issue at its core; while the Ecumenical Patriarchate, which, in

1989, began concerning itself with the care for the natural

environment, today finds itself also engaged in a struggle for

a culture of solidarity, for the protection of the sacredness

of childhood, for the support of refugees, as well as in

initiatives against modern slavery. Therefore, it was natural

and beneficial for us to meet in our journey.

Our Church also has a fruitful encounter and cooperation

with the Protestant world, bilateral dialogues and its long

presence in the World Council of Churches and the Conference

of European Churches. In the framework of this dialogue,

aside from other issues, the idea of freedom in Christ, which

is at the center of Luther’s theology, is considered as an

essential point of reference, with particular emphasis on the

relations between Christian freedom and the modern idea of

a self-centred freedom, widely prevalent in today’s societies.

This modern freedom has at its fundament the idea

of the autonomous human person and expresses itself as

self-determination and self-realisation. The Reformation

strengthened the position of the individual. Without Luther’s

doctrine and actions, the freedom of the individual would

not have become the Magna Charta of Europe. In this sense,

Luther’s concept of freedom is very important for Christianity’s

dialogue with the modern world. Catholics, Orthodox and

Protestants must advance this dialogue with theological

seriousness and without theological minimalism, with the

unshakable goal of a common Christian witness to the world.

In our days we observe in Europe a distancing from the

tradition of solidarity and the transformation of society into

a gigantic market. Even children are being converted through

the educational system into consumerists. As it was rightly

said, childhood has basically become a term synonymous with

the incitement and exploitation of children’s needs and alleged

desires. For us, Europe is a great experiment of solidarity on

a continent that during the last century experienced the two

most bloody and terrible wars in the history of humanity. It is

a project of peaceful coexistence, freedom, justice and respect

of human rights and of pluralism. In this sense, Europe is

not a “Kopfgeburt,” that is, a product of the mind—as it has

been called in the past by the renowned sociologist Ralph

Dahrendorf—but rather embodies high human ideals and,

we could say, an idealism. It is not possible for the European

Union to merely exist as a plan of uniform economic politics

and economic development, based on the principle of the

“autonomy of the economy.”

The role of Christianity in the rise of human rights is a

well-discussed topic and an agreement exists on the main

points. Modern human rights presuppose the long schooling

of our culture in Christianity and they bear its stamp. Their

roots are found in the Biblical teaching about the dignity of

the human person created in the image and likeness of God.

The initially negative attitude of the Churches against them

was not based predominately on theological criteria, but on

historical circumstances and mutual prejudices.

In the Orthodox Church we are also convinced that the

existing tensions between Orthodox theology and modern

human rights are not primarily rooted in “principles,” but

rather in historical contexts. It is saddening to note that

some Orthodox scholars insist on regarding the discourse

on human rights as an “imported” one, as being unfamiliar

to Orthodox tradition. The Orthodox Church regards the

support of the social content of human rights as crucial. Yet,

the accentuation of social rights does not dispense us from

the concern of individual rights. Human rights are indivisible.

We especially underline that human rights are not a

threat to pluralism, as postmodernism claims, but rather they

ensure the necessary conditions for free cultural expression

and the respect of difference. Universality does not mean

uniformity. In this sense, religious freedom, which is a

constant concern of our own, belongs to the core values of

the European Union. It is a fundamental human right to freely

cultivate one’s particular identity. Nevertheless, pluralism

can only function creatively on the ground of common core

values. Otherwise, pluralism can devolve into nihilism, into

the postmodern ideal of “anything goes.” This is, in fact, the

negation of true pluralism, which is meant to be an expression

of freedom, or, as Karl Popper stated, “the credo of the West.”

Of course, the European Union did not come into

existence ex nihilo. It is rooted in a long tradition of values,

struggles for freedom and justice, and faith in the dignity of

man. Without these roots, it would be impossible to identify

itself as “Europe.” One of these roots is unquestionably

Christianity. The historical path and the identity of Europe

is directly connected to Christianity. We are convinced that

it is impossible to understand and to assess the European

culture, without reference to its Christian roots and Christian

past. The fundamental values, ethics, education (παιδεία),

art, science, economy, the social and political organization of

Europeans, have Christian origins. It is our steady conviction

that Christian Churches today can contribute to this culture,

thereby strengthening the European identity. Concerning

the particular contribution that the Orthodox Church can

provide, we believe that this is related to the centrality of

the social dimension of freedom, which safeguards against

the conversion of human rights into endless individualistic

entitlement. Our own view of Europe has an ethical and

spiritual foundation and orientation. We discern the concept

of a technocratic and economocentric Europe, a Europe whose

priority is the economy and the functioning of the market,

34 2019 | OUR WORLD


from a concept of Europe based on

human dignity, freedom and justice. It is

quite characteristic that these principles

come to the fore when Europe’s unity

and future are in question.

This crisis challenges the

fundamental values of European

civilization. It is impossible for the

current migration and refugee crisis

to be addressed by the values of

a bureaucratic, technocratic and

economically centered Europe.

The solution must be based on the

principles of the values of human

rights and solidarity, which have at

their core the protection of human

dignity. The natural allies of human

rights are Christian Churches. They

are able to decisively address the

issues of immigration and refugees,

by implementing and cultivating a

spirit of solidarity, and by supporting

relevant initiatives and tendencies in

the political and social world that have

the protection of human dignity as their

goal.

For us, the humanistic level of a

society is judged by the treatment of

the needy and suffering people in it.

The support of our fellowmen in need,

independently of social, political and

economic perspectives are at the core of

Christian ethics, of the commandment

of love (Mt. 22:37-39). But the true

faithful who really embraces and

practices this commandment will not be

satisfied only with this immediate help

to their neighbour. They will take the

next step: fighting against the causes

of injustice and for the foundation of a

society in which human dignity will be

the highest value.

We hear it often stated that the last

two centuries were times of struggle

for freedom and equality. If this is true,

then our century must become an era

of fraternity and solidarity. We are

convinced that the future of humanity is

related to the establishment of a culture

of solidarity. On the one hand, the

term “solidarity” points to the struggle

for social justice, freedom and dignity,

while dynamically expressing the social

Dialogue is the most effective means for

addressing problems and it promotes

confidence and mutual acceptance. It is as

such a gesture of solidarity and a source of

solidarity. Never in history have human beings

had the opportunity to bring so many positive

changes to so many people and to the global

community simply through encounter and

dialogue.

and political dimension of the term

“fraternity” formulated in the triptych of

the French Revolution “Liberté – Égalité

– Fraternité.” However, it also promotes

the idea of law, of social justice and

of the social content of freedom as

co-freedom, as cooperation for the

common good, and as co-responsibility

for the common “οἶκος.” On the other

hand, solidarity points to Christian

fraternity, to the unconditional love for

our fellowmen, and to the unbroken

bond between the love toward God and

love toward neighbour. Thus “solidarity”

holds together the two unshakeable

pillars of humanism and freedom: on

the one hand justice, and on the other

hand love.

The action of the Church cannot

replace politics and it does not aim to do

so. The Church can support all initiatives,

tendencies and developments, which

lead to an improvement of social

standards, to justice and peace, and

criticizes all anti-personalistic powers,

which undermine social cohesion and

solidarity, transform the human being

into a consumerist, to the detriment

of his fellowmen and nature, and

of the lives of future generations.

The most serious contemporary

threat of solidarity is economism, the

deification of market and profit. We

reject “economic reductionism,” the

reduction of the human being to homo

economicus, the identification of “being”

with “having.” We call for the respect of

the social parameters in the economy,

which are the basis for life in freedom

and dignity.

The history of freedom does not

begin with the birth of modern human

rights. Indeed, in Europe and across the

world, within the Christian framework,

and despite occasional inexpediences,

true freedom has been experienced

and witnessed. The core of this freedom

is not the claim of any rights but instead

the renunciation of individual rights for

the sake of love, which does not diminish

the importance of human rights

but actually increases our concern for

human dignity and basic rights. In this

sense, Christians are more humanist

than humanists themselves, because

the struggle to protect the human beings

is not just a moral imperative; it is

a commandment of a loving God.

OUR WORLD | 2019

35


EU guidelines guarantee freedom of

religion or belief and protect individuals

Declaration by the High Representative, Federica Mogherini, on behalf of the

European Union, on the occasion of the International Day Commemorating the

Victims of Acts of Violence based on Religion or Belief, August 21, 2019, Brussels

On this first International Day

commemorating the victims of acts of

violence based on religion or belief, we

pay tribute to all those around the world who

lost their lives and suffered attacks because of

their religion or belief. Persecution as a response

to religious belief or affiliation, or lack thereof, is

a violation of international law and requires joint

work to combat it.

There were many tragic extremist attacks

during the last year. Believers from any faith,

as well as non-believers in many parts of the

world continue to suffer from violence and

persecution. They face incitement to hatred and

violence and hate crimes by state or non-state

actors or both.

Freedom of thought, conscience and religion

are enshrined in Article 10 of the Charter of

Fundamental rights of the European Union

and protecting this right is a duty for the EU

and its Member States. EU legislation obliges

Member States to penalise the intentional public

incitement to violence or hatred directed against

a group of persons or a member of such a group

defined by reference to, among others, religion

or belief.

The EU has always been at the frontline in

promoting and protecting freedom of religion

or belief. The guidelines on the promotion

and protection of freedom of religion or belief

approved in 2013, reaffirm that state institutions

have a duty to guarantee freedom of religion or

belief, and to protect individuals from violence

based on the actual or assumed religion or belief

of the targeted persons, or based on the religious

or convictional tenets of the perpetrators.

Violence perpetrated under the pretext

of a religious prescription or practice, such as

violence against women and girls including

“honour” killings, female genital mutilation, child

Federica

Mogherini

Former High

Representative of the

European Union for

Foreign Affairs and

Security Policy and

Former Vice-President

of the European

Commission.

early and forced marriages as well as violence

perpetrated against persons based on their

sexual orientation or gender identity is also

unacceptable.

Majorities in one country are minorities

elsewhere. Marginalisation and scapegoating

of persons belonging to religious minorities

can be an early warning sign of more severe

persecution, as well as a wider crackdown on

the whole society.

Preventive measures are needed to combat

religious hatred, incitement and violence

related to religious persecution. The EU has

and will continue to increase its support for

such measures promoting freedom of religion

or belief.

Perpetrators need to be held accountable,

violence prevented and victims rehabilitated.

Tangible progress can be made through

multilateralism and collective action. This is why

the EU leads a Resolution on freedom of religion

or belief at the Human Rights Council and the

UN General Assembly every year. If a society

allows for the persecution of one minority, it lays

the ground for persecution of any community.

An attack on one minority is an attack on all of

us. This is why we keep committed to acting all

together.

The Candidate Countries Turkey, Republic of

North Macedonia*, Montenegro*, Serbia* and

Albania*, the country of the Stabilisation and

Association Process and potential candidate

Bosnia and Herzegovina, and the EFTA countries

Iceland, Liechtenstein and Norway, members of

the European Economic Area, as well as Ukraine,

the Republic of Moldova, Armenia, and Georgia

align themselves with this declaration.

* - Republic of North Macedonia, Montenegro,

Serbia and Albania continue to be part of the

Stabilisation and Association Process.

36 2019 | OUR WORLD

Red flags:

When the faithful

face abuse

RED FLAGS: WHEN THE FAITHFUL FACE ABUSE

Bloodstained Toy Horses: Slave Labor

of Prisoners of Conscience in China

By Massimo Introvigne

My children, and now my grandchildren,

love toy horses, perhaps because my

own mother excelled in equestrian

sports. When I was a child, my toy horses were

made in Italy. Now, they are made in China.

There are some, of high quality, manufactured

in Europe, but buying such expensive toys for

small children seems extravagant. Yet, my

decision is made. This coming Christmas I will

buy European toy horses for my grandchildren

and persuade them to get rid of the cheaper

Chinese ones.

I don’t do this to protect the European

economy against Chinese unfair competition.

For me, it is a question of human rights and

religious liberty. I am a scholar of religion

in China, and one increasingly worried by

President Xi Jinping’s crackdown on all religions.

I gathered documents about many stories of

persecution. One concerns toy horses.

Several million religious believers have been

arrested and are detained in different kind of

re-education camps or jails in China. More than

three million are Uyghurs and other Muslims.

Others are Tibetan Buddhists, dissident

Catholics, house church Protestants, members

of Falun Gong and of other banned religious

movements. The single most persecuted group

today is a Christian new religious movement

known as The Church of Almighty God (CAG).

More than 400,000 CAG members have been

arrested due to their faith, and hundreds of

cases of torture and extra-judicial killing have

been documented and mentioned in official

documents of the United Nations, the U.S. State

Department, and other international bodies.

One such victim was a woman from

Shandong Province called Liu Jixia. She was

42 when she was arrested for her missionary

activities on behalf of the CAG. In 2007, she

was sentenced to serve eighteen months in

the Ji’nan “re-education through labor” camp.

There, she was compelled to make toy horses.

Massimo

Introvigne

Sociologist and

Editor-in-chief of

“Bitter Winter”, a

daily magazine on

Religious Liberty in

China.

She had to work for 17 hours every day, then

for 20 hours when production needed to

be increased. The camp diet was very poor,

consisting only of cornmeal and pickles.

After a few months, Liu developed a

severe case of nephritis, due to overwork

and malnutrition. She reported to the camp’s

medical personnel but was told she was not

sick enough to stop working, and toy horses

needed to be produced. When she was released

in 2009, her nephritis had become chronical.

Visits and harassment by the police added to

her stress. She went from hospital to hospital,

but her condition did not improve. On August

20, 2012, Liu died at the First People’s Hospital

in Linqing, Shandong.

Her case is not isolated. In May 2003,

another CAG member, Ms. Deng Xiufen, from

Zhejiang Province, had died at age 35 in the

Moganshan Labor Re-education Camp in

Wukang Town, Huzhou City, Zhejiang, where

she was compelled to work as a seamstress.

Malnutrition and overwork caused her death,

together with abuse by the guards. Members of

the CAG and other banned religious groups in

re-education camps are forced to have yellow

card bearing the words “Special Disciplinary

Control” hung on their chest and are singled

out for abuse.

On March 9, 2015, Ms. Wang Honli was

sentenced to five years in a jail in Yunnan

for having been active in the CAG. She was

compelled to stitch hems and pack up jeans

and assigned quotas. These kept her busy until

late evening, and when she could not fulfill her

quotas she was punished with extra work. In

May 2017, her family visited her and reported

that her weight had fallen from 55 to just 32 kg.

On October 1, 2017, she died in jail.

In these cases, all duly documented, slave

labor led to death. I have personally interviewed

dozens of CAG members who survived and

38 2019 | OUR WORLD


SHUTTERSTOCK

escaped abroad, but whose health was seriously compromised

by years of slave labor in the camps. While I have researched

mostly CAG cases, for a book I published on the subject, there

are similar horrific (horror?) stories of slave labor about Uyghurs,

Falun Gong practitioners, and others.

All this raises serious ethical and political problems for

governments, the business community, and consumers in

democratic countries. Our shops and homes are full of products

made in China. How many of them come from the slave labor

of prisoners sentenced for their religious beliefs? Is the blood of

Sister Liu Jixia and her fellow prisoners of conscience in the Ji’nan

camp on the toy horses my grandchildren play with?

In August 2019, the NGO Citizen Power Initiatives for China

published a detailed report, Cotton: A Fabric Full of Lies. The

report revealed that Xinjiang has been transformed into the

largest cotton production area in China, something it was not

before. The reason for this development is the slave labor of more

than three million Uyghurs, ethnic Kazakhs, and other Muslims

detained in the dreaded Xinjiang’s transformation through

education camps – where not all inmates are Muslim since CAG

members are forced to work and be “re-educated” there too.

Because of the report, legislation was introduced in the U.S.

preventing American companies from importing or purchasing

products manufactured in Chinese labor camps and jails. Europe

should follow suit.

OUR WORLD | 2019

In these cases, all dully

documented, slave labor led

to death. I have personally

interviewed dozens of CAG

members who survived and

escaped abroad, but whose

was seriously compromised

by years of slave labor in

the camps.

39


Refugees Escaping Religious Persecution

in China: What Would Europe Do?

By Rosita Šorytė

Few today in Europe would really believe

that China is a democratic country

where human rights are respected. A

well-informed and free-thinking European

citizen would know that there is no religious

liberty in China. Although in fact all religions

suffer, Uyghurs and other Turkic Muslims

living in Xinjiang are among the most severely

persecuted. Almost every day the media is

providing us with horrifying facts. We, the

European public, already know that several

million Uyghurs are detained in the so-called

transformation through education camps.

We are not convinced, despite Chinese

propaganda, that these camps are merely

“vocational schools,” or nice places to spend

free time. China insists that the camps are a

necessity for preventing the radicalization of

Xinjiang Muslims. The truth is different. The

Chinese Communist Party (CCP) is trying to

eradicate the distinctive ethnic and linguistic

identity—not only the religious one—of

Uyghurs and other Turkic people, in its effort

to “sinicize” all the Chinese population.

While the tragedy of the Uyghurs, Tibetan

Buddhists, and Falun Gong is well-known, only

recently Europeans have started hearing about

a Christian new religious movement known as

The Church of Almighty God (CAG). In fact, it is

the single most persecuted religious movement

in China. Although some scholars believe the

figure may be exaggerated, and obtaining

precise statistics is impossible, the Chinese

government itself declared that the CAG has

four million members.

What is certain is that CAG is a fast-growing

group, whose ideas many Chinese regard as

attractive. Probably, this is the very reason why

the group is so systematically persecuted. In

China and abroad, the CAG is also opposed by

some other Christian churches. They regard as

heterodox its theology, which maintains that

Christ has returned to Earth and has appeared

Rosita Šorytė

President of the

International

Observatory of

Religious Liberty of

Refugees (ORLIR).

as a Chinese woman, worshiped as Almighty

God. They are also afraid of competition, since

the CAG has been very successful in converting

members of other Christian churches. While

theological criticism is understandable,

supporting the Chinese government’s abuse

and persecution of the CAG is inadmissible,

both for Christian churches and for those who

observe the situation in China from abroad.

This is particularly true for the European

Union, an alliance of States based until now on

the principle of shared values, where human

rights were an essential part of common

action. Until now, EU member States have

been guardians and most active advocates of

universal human rights. Today, unfortunately,

confronted with an unprecedented economic

and financial might of China, this principled

stance of our countries has started to erode.

While China is cynically abusing the basic

rights of its citizens, no major individual State

of the European Union has come forward to

openly criticize the crimes the CCP commits

against its own people. There have been some

critical statements under the safe umbrella of

the European Union, but none by individual

States.

It is not a secret that CCP leaders and their

families are exceptionally wealthy. Consequently,

they are detached from everyday life and the

challenges of the so-called working class, which

they, at least in theory, are supposed to protect

and represent. It is a strange Marxism, where

the Chinese leadership picks and choose what

it likes and forgets the rest.

One Marxist tenet the CCP still believes in, is

that religion is not compatible with the interests

of Communism and the “working classes.”

Any religious group or movement that is not

explicitly approved by the CCP becomes illegal.

Fast-growing groups are particularly targeted.

Torture is routinely used. More persecution

40 2019 | OUR WORLD


Silhouette of Chinese man climbing a fence with China flag.

shutterstock

and more torture also mean more

people escaping China and seeking

political asylum abroad.

In Europe, we are used to wealthy

Chinese tourists buying expensive

luxury goods. Chinese refugees who

seek asylum because they were severely

persecuted for their religion are less

visible. But there are thousands of

them. As of September 2019, there are

in the European Union countries and

Switzerland 2,405 refugees from The

Church of Almighty God—and more

Uyghurs, Tibetan Buddhists, members

of Protestant house churches, and Falun

Gong. Most of those who seek asylum

in Europe have been jailed, tortured,

followed and monitored before escaping

to Europe. Few of them were just the

lucky ones who happened to have a

passport and were fortunate enough

to get a visa. Most of them will never

be able to escape. Some will spend

their whole lives in jails or re-education

camps. Others will be tortured to death

OUR WORLD | 2019

or simply “disappear.”

Those lucky enough to be released

will be monitored and followed, and

told that they should never meet again

with their co-religionists, or else. They

will lose their jobs and their families,

and their health too, because of deep

psychological trauma.

I have met refugees from the CAG

in several different countries. Their

spirit is not broken, only because they

strongly believe in God. That belief

prevented them from losing their

minds. But the trauma remains, and

only becomes worse when their true

stories are not believed and asylum

is denied; unfortunately a frequent

occurrence in Europe. European Union

States should raise their voice against

religious persecution in China. But there

is something they can do immediately:

open their arms to those escaping

from China, where the only crime they

committed was believing in God and

practicing their religion.

Only recently

Europeans have

started hearing about

a Christian new

religious movement

known as The Church

of Almighty GOD

(CAG). In fact, it

is the single most

persecuted religious

movement in China.

41


SHUTTERSTOCK

Religious freedom in Africa

By Dr. Guy Bucumi

Religious requests cross actually all over the world.

It marks in a particular way African continent

because of the religious pregnancy of its societies.

Religious freedom has been early a priority of young African

democracies of 1990. All African constitutions guarantee the

freedom of religion and all African countries have also ratified

the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, which

guarantees the rights to “adhere in the religion of one’s

choice” and even the “right to change religion” (art.18).

However, despite these significant legislative evolutions,

religious freedom is being tested in several African countries.

The most notable and recent regressions concern, particularly

42 2019 | OUR WORLD


in West Africa and the Lake Chad basin, where

the Boko Haram Islamist terrorist group is

implanted and also in the Central African

Republic, where a religious war broke the

country since 2013. Another terrorist group, the

Al Shabab is implanted in the eastern region of

Africa. The religious intolerance in Africa is not

only the fact of terrorist groups (either Muslim

and Christians), but also caused by different

restriction of religious freedom by religious

rules; it’s the case of the Maghreb region where

the offense of blasphemy has been adopted in

criminal law, like in Algeria (2012) and recently

in Morocco.

In all these cases, the violation of religious

freedom is generally caused by exacerbated

conservatism or nationalism (I) and a religious

radicalism with an unpredictable future.

I. Exacerbated nationalism in Africa

It is a strategy of some governments to

control religious movements essentially in

Muslim African countries. Draconian rules

passed in different parliaments and close

control of religious institutions decided. In

Sudan and Eritrea for example, religious

minority movements are harassed, and police

raids and incarcerations have become regular.

The introducing of blasphemy and apostasy in

different African criminal law is the illustration of

the religious situation of countries where Islam

is the majority. In 2017, the Islamic Conference

Organization (ICO) took distance from the

United Nations Human Rights commission, by

adopting a resolution condemning “the offense

of defamation of religion”. The same year, the

American federal of religious freedom report

listed over 70 countries in the world where

apostasy and blasphemy offenses are practice

and among them, twenty African countries are

concerned. In 2006, the Algerian parliament

took a prescription introducing a penalty for

all religions reaching out. The same Algerian

parliament prescription reserve Algerian

citizenship to only Muslims. The penalty is more

violent in Mauritania, Libya and Egypt where

the criminal law predicts a death penalty to all

religious proselytizing and where intolerance

towards religious minorities is a current fact.

The violation of freedom of religion in

Africa is also a consequence of a religious

radicalization of some African societies.

Guy Bucumi

Lecturer at the

Faculty of Law

of the Université

de Sherbrooke.

Researcher at the

Research Chair

in Law, Religion

and Secularism of

the Université de

Sherbrooke.

However, despite

these significant

legislative

evolutions,

religious freedom

is being tested in

several African

countries.

II. Radicalization as a religious freedom

violation cause

Religious radicalization in Africa is a fact

of many Islamist and Christians groups or

movements. It is the case of Islamist groups like

Boko Haram in Western and Central Africa, Al

Shebab in Eastern Christians radical groups like

Anti Baraka in Central African Republic or the

Lord Resistance Army in Democratic Republic

of Congo and Uganda. All those radical groups,

both Christians or Muslims, are responsible

for many religious intolerance acts in their

influence area and occupied regions. Their

only presence provokes massive movements

of non-tolerated religious groups.

The pregnancy of religion in African societies

needs a particularly careful monitoring of

question from African authorities because of

its sensibility. The religious war in the Central

African Republic since 2013 is the object lesson

of the importance of the religious question in

the African continent.

OUR WORLD| 2019

43


Russia: Over a hundred believers

of several faiths behind bars

By Willy Fautré

Russia is the only country on the European

continent that imprisons people for

peacefully exercising their right to

freedom of religion. This issue was at the heart

of the statement of Human Rights Without

Frontiers (HRWF) at Session 7 of the OSCE/

ODIHR Human Dimension Implementation

Meeting (HDIM) in Warsaw on 19 September

2019.

As of 1 September, HRWF’s Database of

Religious Prisoners included 73 documented

cases of detention (both pretrial and postconviction)

in Russia: 62 Jehovah’s Witnesses,

2 Mormons, 2 Scientologists, 5 followers of Said

Nursi, 1 Tabligh Jamaat Muslim and 1 Sunni

Muslim in Crimea. A few Jehovah’s Witnesses

listed had been released and placed under

house arrest, but the criminal charges against

them were maintained.

According to the statement of the Crimean

Human Rights Group at the OSCE/ODIHR,

36 Tatar Muslims were accused of religious

extremism and terrorism, and subsequently

deprived of their freedom.

Followers of the late Turkish theologian

Said Nursi are serving prison terms ranging

from three to eight years for being involved

in a banned organization. One Tabligh Jamaat

Muslim was arrested in 2017 for missionary

activities and sentenced to four years in prison.

In March, two American Mormons were

arrested and imprisoned for three weeks for

allegedly carrying out missionary activities

before being expelled from the country.

In 2017, five Scientologists were arrested

for allegedly “participating in an extremist

organization, inciting hatred and enmity, and

violating human dignity” (Criminal Code Article

171 and Articles 282 and 282.1). Two years later,

two of them were still in pre-trial detention.

On the same day as the OSCE/ ODIHR

session devoted to freedom of religion or

belief, six Jehovah’s Witnesses from Saratov,

Willy Fautré

Director of

Human Rights

without Frontiers

International.

whose movement was banned in 2017, were

convicted and sentenced to prison terms

ranging from two to three years and six

months for allegedly organizing activities of an

extremist organization. Additionally, they were

all banned from holding leadership positions in

public organizations for a period of five years

and restriction of freedom for one year.

On 6 February 2019, Dennis Christensen,

a Danish citizen living in Russia who was in

pre-trial detention since 2017, was the first

Jehovah’s Witness in post-Soviet Russia to be

sentenced for exercising his right to freedom

of religion. He was condemned to 6 years in

a labor camp for his alleged role - denied by

himself and his congregation - in leading the

local Jehovah’s Witness branch in Oryol. His

sentence was upheld by an appeals court three

months later.

Russia is the only European country where

peaceful believers are treated as criminals for

reading their religious books in private, meeting

for prayer and worship at home, teaching their

faith to their children and sharing their beliefs

with others.

As of 23 September 2019,

· 252 Jehovah’s Witnesses ranging from 20

to 85 years old were facing criminal charges

· 42 were in detention (pretrial or prison)

· 23 were under house arrest

Concerns about human rights violations

resulting from the Russian Supreme Court

Ruling that banned Jehovah’s Witnesses in

2017 have been raised by the United Nations

Human Rights Committee, the European Court

of Human Rights and the European Union. The

Government of the Russian Federation denies

any human rights abuses, but their response

lacks credibility. Jehovah’s Witnesses in Russia

are being massively arrested, detained in pretrial

detention and prosecuted because of their

beliefs.

44 2019 | OUR WORLD


SHUTTERSTOCK

The EU has been very active in the defense

of religious freedom in Russia, in particular

concerning: the arrest and imprisonment of

Dennis Christensen, the ban of the movement

of Jehovah’s Witnesses, the confiscation of

all property belonging to 395 of Jehovah’s

Witness congregations and the deprivation

of the rights of 177,000 Jehovah’s Witnesses

to practice their religion.

At the OSCE/ODIHR conference, the

EU representative reemphasised the EU’s

commitment to support freedom of religion

or belief, stating:

“The EU focuses on the right of individuals,

to believe or not to believe, and, alone or in

community with others, to freely manifest

their beliefs in public or in private, in worship,

observance practice and teaching, without

fear of intimidation, discrimination, violence

or attack. Individuals have also the right to

change one’s religion or belief or to renounce

it. The EU does not consider the merits of

the different religions or beliefs, or the lack

thereof, but ensures that the right to believe

or not to believe is upheld.”

Russia is the only European country

where peaceful believers are treated

as criminals for reading their religious

books in private, meeting for prayer and

worship at home, teaching their children

and sharing their beliefs with others.

OUR WORLD | 2019

45


Rohingya crisis in Myanmar

By Hans Noot

46 2019 | OUR WORLD


Members of Myanmar’s Muslim

Rohingya minority walk through a

broken road at Shah Porir Deep, at

Teknaf in Cox’s Bazer, Bangladesh on

September11, 2017.

SHUTTERSTOCK

Freedom of Religion or Belief (FoRB) has been

officially and legally guaranteed by most of the

countries around the world. Unfortunately,

these legal protections are rarely fully implemented

or complied with. For example, it is in vain to assume

that in many countries, one is actually free to join his

or her preferred religion, change religions, share his or

her religious or non-religious beliefs, or for those who

are not members of the nation’s sponsored religion,

to find equal work opportunities. Moreover, the arm

of the law is often nowhere to be found when either

local magistrates or citizens harass people on the basis

of ethnicity, tradition, or religious affiliation.

It gets worse when a campaign of discrimination, or

worse yet, when a genocide, considered as “the crime

of crimes”, against certain religious or ethnic groups,

is actually state-sponsored. One such case is that of

the Rohingya in Myanmar (Burma). Since the 1960s,

more than a million Muslims living in the country have

fled their homes into neighboring countries. In recent

years, the crisis has worsened, resulting in what was

described as the world’s fastest growing refugee crisis.

An estimated 1.2 million people are still in dire straits.

Half a million of them are living in makeshift camps

with inadequate facilities, with meager food, and a

bare minimum of medical assistance.

The latest outflow of Rohingya’s dates back to

September 2017, when local Buddhist extremists in

Rakhine province, supported by the military, started

to execute a “textbook example of ethnic cleansing”,

as described by the United Nations Special Rapporteur

to Myanmar, Zeid Ra’ad Al Hussein. Looting, burning

down villages and shops, mass killings, tortures,

arbitrary detentions, forced labor, forcible recruitment,

extortion, gang rapes against Muslim women and girls,

trafficking, beatings, and an estimated 36 thousand

people literally thrown into fire. More than 43 thousand

Rohingya parents have been reported lost, presumed

dead during the 2017 crackdown.

The troubles had already started with the so

called Burma Citizenship Law of 1982, when people

of Rohingya ethnicity, as well as the majority of Indian

and Chinese and other so called “Bengali”, lost all of

their human dignity when they were denied legal

status, a fundamental human right. For the Rohingyas

especially, this is odd as they had lived in Burma for

centuries. Ever since the Citizen Law, the Rohingyas

are in effect stateless, making them refugees within

their own country of birth. They are severely restricted

in their rights, making it impossible to study, work,

travel, marry, practice their religion, access health

services, vote, practice medicine or law, run for office

and even making it difficult to buy and sell without

Hans Noot

Director of Gerard

Noodt Foundation for

Freedom of Religion

or Belief.

OUR WORLD | 2019

47


their National Registration Cards and

their ID number. Moreover, freedom

of movement is a fundamental human

right, but these people at this region,

under these circumstances, were not

allowed to leave their village to find

work, to exercise trade, to go fishing,

attend the funeral of a relative, or

visit a doctor without permission or

steep bribes to military officials. They

are proportionally high taxed over

practically everything they own, catch,

produce, buy or sell, including taxes

for the birth of a child or the death of

a family member. Discrimination and

restrictions make them vulnerable and

open targets to confiscation of land,

extortion, theft, rape, torture, arson,

displacement, and even murder. Forced

labor to build on the infrastructure in

North Arkan, especially amongst the

Rohingya’s is rampant. Many thousands

have died because of malnutrition.

According to Amnesty International,

an estimated 650 thousand have had

to flee their homes in Rakhine State

during the height of the troubles. Sixty

percent of them are children, many of

them without parents. Over the past

few years, 200 thousand Rohingya’s

fled from Myanmar into Saudi Arabia,

10 thousand into the United Arab

Emirates, 350 thousand into Pakistan,

40 thousand into India; 5 thousand into

Thailand, a 150 thousand into Malaysia,

100 into Indonesia and a whopping

890 thousand into Bangladesh, greatly

overstretching the country’s already

insufficient resources.

Myanmar’s government has refused

to acknowledge both the severity of the

situation as well as their participation

in it. Myanmar’s army chief told

Pope Francis in November 2017 that

there was “no discrimination in this

country”, and he praised the military

for maintaining peace and stability.

The country’s de facto civilian leader

and Nobel Peace Prize laureate Aung

San Suu Kyi refuses to discuss the

plight of the Rohingya, and blames

the whole matter to a “huge iceberg

of misinformation”. At the same time

It gets worse when a campaign

of discrimination, or worse yet,

when a genocide, considered

as “the crime of crimes”,

against certain religious or

ethnic groups, is actually

state-sponsored. One such

case is that of the Rohingya in

Myanmar.

in January 2018, it was proposed that

tens of thousands of undocumented

Rohingya would be “forcefully relocated”

to the uninhabitable island of Thengar

Char in the Bay of Bengal. The proposal

has been roundly criticized due to the

region’s vulnerability to flooding during

the monsoon season.

Putting aside accusations of

government complicity in ethnic

cleansing and killings, one wonders

about the government’s responsibility

to protect and support its citizens and

those who live within its borders. Why

the government denies millions of

citizens from their right of citizenship

and other human rights? Why no

effort has occurred to restore the

362 Rohingya villages that were razed

to the ground? Where is the arm of

international law that dictates that all

humans have a right to statehood?

Where are the trials that the United

Nations High Commissioner for

Human Rights calls for, that would have

provided the responsibles’ responsible

answers for alleged acts of genocide?

Why are journalists and aid workers

not allowed to enter Rakhine state if

they do not speak Ruaingga? Why are

even UN investigators denied visas to

investigate the violence there? Where

is the Myanmar government to ask for

international help, if they, themselves,

cannot handle an estimated 687

thousand of their citizens, men, women

and mostly children, having to run for

their lives over roads intentionally

made hazardous with landmines

laid by Myanmar’s military, or across

the treacherous waters of the Bay of

Bengal and the Andaman Sea? Where

is the regional crisis team that should

put pressure on Myanmar to solve this

issue once and for all? And for those of

us, in the West, where is the outcry and

media campaign that makes the general

public aware of these atrocities? Most

of the people I talked to, have no clue

of what is going on and seemed deeply

shocked when they heard these facts

from me.

Having stated that, it is important

to point out the enormous sums of

48 2019 | OUR WORLD

money donated by various UN agencies, the EU, the USA,

and some states, and neighboring countries dealing with the

influx of so many people, including Bangladesh, India, and

Pakistan. And truly, despite official denial of the government

that there is a crisis, not the Myanmar Military, but the

government has triggered wide response across Ministries

and agencies, designating land for these people, coordinating

relief and opening it up for private individuals to donate. As

a result of international cooperation, almost 100 thousand

people have been treated for malnutrition. Hundreds of

thousands of children have been vaccinated for diphtheria,

tetanus and whooping cough. Meanwhile, the US House of

Representatives has exerted great political pressure on the

Myanmar government by voting to declare what is happening

in the country as genocide. The E.U. Parliament has raised

concerns with its resolution 2576 of 14 June 2018, while Fact

Finding Missions on a high level have been conducted.

More progress and pressure are needed, though: The

lifting of monitoring and of journalists’ limitations, media

attention to raise awareness, food assistance, clean water,

maternity care, shelters that can withstand the cyclones,

sanitation facilities, cooking utensils, dignity supplies for

women and girls, basic medicine and hospital facilities to

treat and avoid measles, diarrhea, and cholera. Schooling is

needed for the estimated 300 thousand kids in school age.

In order to make help sustainable, the Rohingyas need legal

recognition, which would allow them to settle permanently

and integrate within the national economy and society. The

Rohingya people need financial support and aid to rebuild

their homes. Additionally, neighboring countries need to

clamp down on trafficking of Rohingya women. Bangladesh,

which takes the brunt of the foreign impact, needs financial

assistance from the international community. For their part,

Myanmar’s top military brass, including General Ming Aung

Hliang must be investigated for genocide, crimes against

humanity and war crimes.

And the government needs an overhaul to reflect climate

change on behalf of human dignity. The crisis in Myanmar

highlights the need for even more regional collaboration,

organized at the top level, with a clear and strong mandate to

act, facilitate, coordinate, and inform. This initiative, consisted

of government representatives from the neighboring

countries, needs to be backed by the international agencies

within the UN, EU, USA, OSCE, and others who wish to support.

This should focus on the needed pressure on Myanmar in the

way to become more effective. There should be a mandate

to design and implement a long term road map to solve the

issue for once and for all.

If the Rohingyas situation was described as “the world’s

most persecuted minority”, and if international crimes had

been committed, as has been alleged, then all alarm bells

should warn every nation, every aid organization, each

church, and each human being who is convinced that humans

are worth to be treated as such. A sense of human dignity is

called for. The Rohingyas need to find their way back home,

live there safely, and offered the opportunity to thrive. While

this may not be the first case of structural and severe mass

human suffering, let’s dream of a world in which this would

be the very last. And that not just for Myanmar, but also for

Yemen and Syria.

Myanmar’s minority Rohingya people build makeshift tent and take shelter at Balukhali Rohingya camp, in Ukhiya, Coz’s

Bazar, Bangladesh on Sep, 25, 2017.

SHUTTERSTOCK


Human Rights Inflation is a

Threat to Freedom of Religion

By Aaron Rhodes

50 2019 | OUR WORLD


Silhouette of bird flying and barbed wire

at autumn sunset background.

SHUTTERSTOCK

The concept of “human rights” has been stretched

thin by human rights activists, academics,

intergovernmental human rights institutions,

human rights courts and governments. At the same

time, rising numbers of people around the world are

suffering from restrictions on their basic freedoms as

the freedom of religion, in particular, is increasingly

violated. These two trends are not coincidental; they

are, in fact, related in ways that warrant close attention.

The fact that the idea of human rights has lost focus

and has been seriously exploited by actors with political

agendas is obvious, but it has gained a modicum of

legitimacy and acceptance recently. The United States

government established a “Commission on Unalienable

Rights” in 2019 to examine the problem, which has

led to a vigorous public debate. Given its classical

liberal foundations and tradition of constitutional

protections of basic freedoms, discomfort with human

rights inflation in American thinking comes as no

surprise. But it is highly significant that the European

Parliament’s Directorate-General for External Policies,

the previous year, examined how the “expansion

of the concept of human rights impacts on human

rights promotion and protection.” The consultation

resulted in the conclusion that “attempts to develop

new rights or to change the nature of human rights has

caused the system to be diluted and is continuously

undermining the protection of fundamental rights.”

The study found that some actors have sought to

use human rights mechanisms to address issues that

go beyond the scope of human rights. More and more

problems are labeled as human rights problems, and

there are more and more human rights standards,

treaties, “high level” international human rights

officials, international mechanisms and courts, all of

which offer a fertile ground for academics, lawyers

and the mainline human rights community, that is,

well-intentioned people seeking solutions to important

problems.

However, there is a darker side to this story; human

rights inflation is also driven by states that understand

the weak leverage international law and political

pressure have against their own oppressive policies.

Promoting human rights inflation is a tactic to violate

human rights with impunity. The Parliament’s study

found that in particular, collective, “Third Generation

Rights,” such as the putative “Right to Development,”

are tools promoted and used by undemocratic

states “seeking to undermine human rights through

expansion” with several goals; UN agenda cluttering,

resource absorption, weakening of human rights

scrutiny or accountability mechanisms, diversion of

attention from existing human rights or from their

Aaron Rhodes

Former Executive

Director of the

International Helsinki

Federation of Human

Rights 1993-2007. He is

President of the Forum

for Religious Freedom-

Europe and the author

of The Debasement

of Human Rights

(Encounter Books,

2018).

OUR WORLD | 2019

51


own abuse.”

Indeed, there is a strong overlap between the

main abusers of freedom of religion, and states

that promote “Third Generation Rights” and

United Nations human rights resolutions and

mechanisms that conflate human rights concepts

with their own ideological agendas.

According to Willy Fautré, the director of

Human Rights Without Frontiers and a leading

expert on freedom of religion, States are divided

to several categories: “Communist/totalitarian

atheist states,” including China (which incarcerates

over a million people because of their Muslim

religion), Cuba, North Korea, Eritrea, and Vietnam,

persecute followers of all religions.

Authoritarian states, identifying themselves

with one religion, typically violate the rights of

members of religious minorities. Russia has

made it illegal for 170,000 Jehovah’s Witnesses to

practice their faith and some other former Soviet

states with Muslim majority populations persecute

members of minority religious groups.

A number of countries with Islam as a state

religion, such as Iran, Pakistan, Saudi Arabia,

Malaysia, Algeria and others persecute for banning

Ahmadis, Bahá’is, Christians, and Jews. Muslims

themselves, in such states, are typically deprived

of the right to change their religion, a tragedy

affecting 1.3 billion people. Another very serious

case of state discrimination is in Myanmar, where

the Buddhist political establishment persecutes

Rohingya Muslims.

The regimes of all of these countries see the

freedom of religion as a threat to their authority

and power. All focus their human rights diplomacy

on promoting the doctrine of the “indivisibility and

equality of all human rights” ,which claims that

rights like the right to state-funded employment

counseling are as paramount as freedom of

religion. All show-off their social programs and

entitlements as evidence that they honor human

rights. All denigrate the notion that defending

basic liberties like the freedom of religion, which

allows individuals to form a moral orientation

informing a comprehensive array of life choices,

should be a priority for states and for the

international community. Some, like China and

Cuba, have actively, transparently and successfully

campaigned to water down processes that would

focus on their own violations. They have promoted

thematic UN human rights mechanisms that have

little or nothing to do with human rights while

opposing or weakening country specific mandates

That the idea of human

rights has lost focus and

been seriously exploited by

actors with political agendas

is obvious, but has gained a

modicum of legitimacy and

acceptance recently”

which focus on actual violations of human rights.

European countries have done little to stand

up to the debasement of human rights, and are

presented often, along with undemocratic states,

partner drivers of the trend, while freedom of

religion is far from secure in Europe. The EU

Charter of Fundamental Rights is among the most

expansive in the world. A number of decisions

of the European Court of Human Rights show

a tendency to create new human rights, like

the right to be free from noise pollution, while

others degrade religious freedom by, for example,

upholding laws banning wearing some religious

clothing. Others have upheld laws under which

citizens are prosecuted for criticizing religions,

which are essentially blasphemy laws defending

a politically correct secularism.

The mounting threats to the freedom of

religion around the world cast a dark shadow

on our future. We need more discussion and

more public information about how we, in liberal

democracies, should best defend the freedom of

religion, and human rights in general. There is a

critical need to shore up the concept of human

rights, so that it can function as a north star for

those seeking freedom and democracy.

52 2019 | OUR WORLD

Extremism and the

perversion of Faith

EXTREMISM AND THE PERVERSION OF FAITH

Is interfaith dialogue

a way to combat extremism?

By Reverend Bill Swing

SHUTTERSTOCK

For the past twenty-five years, I have been vitally involved

with others in the founding of and in the development of

the United Religions Initiative (URI). At our beginning, we

asked, “how can we do our part to end religiously motivated

violence?” We did not think that dialogue was our preferred

means of addressing religious extremism. Instead, we focused

on action. What can we do together? Doing, not talking, was

to be our trademark. We began with the assumption that

religious, humanist and tribal communities have raised

up millions, perhaps billions, of moral and spiritually alert

citizens throughout the world who want to cooperate in

practical ways to make life better for all.

But how to do that? We had to create a purpose statement,

establish principles, invent an organizational design while, at

the same time, growing a global community. This took four

years, and then we launched in the year 2000. Our highest

purpose was not salvation but civilization. Our path was

pragmatism at a grassroots level, not debate or resolutions

by large assemblies. We set out to tap into this vast reservoir

of conscience-driven individuals throughout the world and

to make positive changes in locales and across the globe.

So how are we doing nineteen years later? In Europe, we

have fifty-eight basic action units called “Cooperation Circles.”

Around the world, we have over one thousand Cooperation

Circles in one hundred and ten countries. What do they do?

They set up URI interfaith blood banks, interfaith football

matches, interfaith conflict resolution interventions, interfaith

tree planting sessions, interfaith journalist meetings,

54 2019 | OUR WORLD


interfaith film or music festivals and a thousand

other venues. Personally, I am involved in a

small Cooperation Circle called “Voices for a

World Free of Nuclear Weapons,” and among

our members is the former United States

Secretary of Defense and a Secretary of State.

(https/uri.org/prayer)

The interfaith movement has depended

upon an emerging design. Let’s go back to

the time in America when East Coast, mostly

European, settlers got in covered wagons and

made an arduous journey westward across the

North American continent. At that time – in the

mid 19th century - there were no such things

as “interfaith activities.” This mostly Protestant

pioneer group learned to “circle the wagons” in

times of danger, but ultimately the wagon train

moved West. Once they arrived at the Pacific

Ocean, their religious landscape was shocking.

Now immigrating Protestants were confronted

by new neighbors – Native Indians with

indigenous rituals, Spanish/Mexican Roman

Catholic missions, Confucianism from China,

Shintoism from Japan, Russian Orthodoxy and

a large secular constituency that cared nothing

about religion. Soon the new arrivals found

themselves in an interfaith world but did not

have an interfaith understanding of how to

make the best of the new situation. So they

just “circled the wagons” for a long time.

The tragedy of 9/11 was a pivotal moment

in America regarding interfaith understanding.

Most mayors of most large cities, after 9/11,

got on civic stages and surrounded themselves

with religious leaders of all traditions. The

unspoken message was that “we now live in a

nation where religiously motivated violence has

become a reality. We can either go back to the

old ways of siloed religious group or press on to

a new day where we come together for the sake

of our community.” This was an unconscious

invitation to create a new interfaith reality.

URI is simply one manifestation of that new

reality. Now, in most of Western society, schools

are interfaith, sports teams are interfaith, city

governments are interfaith! Large corporations

are now being forced, by their employees of

many faiths, to take into consideration the

unique religious calendar dates and personal

devotional habits of their employees. The

secular world might be doing a better job of

adapting to the new interfaith realities than

religious faiths, some of whom have difficulty

in granting respect to people of other faiths.

OUR WORLD | 2019

Reverend Bill

Swing

President of United

Religions Initiative - Ex

Episcopal Bishop of

California.

URI is simply one

manifestation of

that new reality.

Now, in most of

Western societies

schools are

interfaith, sport

teams are interfaith,

city governments

are interfaith!

Who knows! Interfaith is becoming a third

party neutral that makes room for all aspects

of civic life and all religions. Interfaith provides

safe havens for people of differences to come

together for the sake of the larger community.

But does all of this combat religious

extremism? We will have to wait and see.

Interfaith has to prove its worth in the real

world where forces are at work to make one

nation Christian and one nation Muslim and

one nation Hindu and one nation Jewish and

one nation Buddhist. There are also political

forces that want to marry with religious forces

to clamp a strangle hold on society and exercise

ultimate power.

URI is “small potatoes” in this large picture

of power. But I am convinced of two things.

One – if the world is going to choose the

healthiest path forward, it will need to have a

robust interfaith presence. Two – small is just

fine. Wars are not won with weapons dropped

from airplanes. Wars are won on the ground,

one village, one neighborhood, one house at a

time. Even so, the ultimate defeat of extremism

can only be won one village, one neighborhood,

one house at a time. And that is where

interfaith living comes in. URI’s investment is

in harnessing the vast untapped potential of

people of all faiths working together to create

more vibrant communities.

55


Religious coexistence: Quran representing Islam, a cross and rosary symbolizing Christianity and menorah, a symbol of

Judaism

shutterstock

Interconvictional dialogue as

a way to combat extremism

By Robin Sclafani

56 2019 | OUR WORLD


We often forget that Western

Civilization began as religion!

Western Civilization was the

Western Church of one of Constantine’s sons:

the Catholic or “universal” Church.

Extremisms seem to be spreading like

wildfire, with anger flaring from real or

perceived injustice and fear spreading in

the face of a real or perceived threatening

“other”. In a continuum of extremism in which

violence is at the far-end (ie: terrorism), we

can recognize the stages of escalation within

much of the political and public discourse

today. Increasingly polarized environments

provide fertile ground as extremists spread

propaganda to stir up fear and anger and

drive groups apart. Terrorist attacks feed

narratives of hate, purposely provoking

further polarization in our political and social

reality, where tribal-thinking can blind people

to the common humanity of the “other.”

Extremisms are increasingly present within

the fabric of nations, and these extremisms

are often defined along religious or racial

lines, with strong nationalist overtones, and

sometimes leading to violence. They emerge in

the mists of fear, othering, retreat into smaller

comfort zones, narrowing points of view,

marked somehow by identity boundaries.

We must find ways to reverse the course

of this vicious circle of polarization so that it

becomes a virtuous one, strengthening the

fabric of social cohesion.

While it is evident that a multi-dimensional

approach is needed, there tends to be an undervaluing

of the importance of interconvictional

and intercultural approaches to the process of

building resilience in order to prevent violent

extremism. The term interconvictional is used

here to encompass what most understand as

interfaith, but it includes those who are nonreligious,

non-believers, atheists, humanists

and secularists, all who are also crucial parts

of the religion and belief diversity of our

societies.

Interconvictional and intercultural

engagement, if done well, is a viable and

productive area of action that can effectively

address several different factors that have

been shown to contribute to one’s vulnerability

or resilience to extremist forces. Religion, like

any other belief system or ideology, can be

OUR WORLD | 2019

used to foment us vs. them paradigms and

drive wedges of division in society. Interfaith

or interconvictional perspectives, however,

counteract this negative potential and support

the positive force which religion and belief

can play in fostering mutual understanding,

respect and social cohesion.

Interconvictional and intercultural

approaches refer to processes of drawing

upon, facilitating amongst, learning about

or otherwise somehow engaging different

communities which may be identified due to

their religious, ethnic, cultural or other sociallydefined

commonality. Until more recently,

such approaches received little attention by

policy-makers, funders, or the media.

International organizations have recognized

the need to promote interconvictional

and intercultural programmes, repeatedly

reaffirmed through the Istanbul Process – the

United Nations international framework for

combatting discrimination and intolerance

based on religion or belief.

Despite international agreements, political

proclamations, and an increase in the number

of local interconvictional initiatives thanks to

small pockets of funding, there are still too

many policy makers who are not enough

convinced about the added value of integrating

interconvictional and intercultural processes

transversally across policy areas.

The most recent research into polarization,

such as that being done by the Building

Resilience against Violent Extremism (BRaVE)

project coordinated by the European University

Institute, highlights socio-economic, historical,

cultural, and communication-based factors

contributing to one’s vulnerability or resilience

to extremism. To different extents, each of

these four polarization factors can be directly

or indirectly addressed by interconvictional

and intercultural approaches, meaning that

investment to expand this area would be

worthwhile in terms of potentially meeting

multiple needs simultaneously.

The biggest role for the interconvictional

lies in the category of Cultural factors, which

responds to the following resilience indicators

:

Bonding Capital, also called Cultural

Identity and Connectedness, refers to the

importance for people to be familiar with and

Robin Sclafani

Director of CEJI, a

Jewish Contribution to

an Inclusive Europe.

57


feel anchored to one’s own cultural heritage(s) and in the

“mainstream” culture, feeling free and safe to share oneself

with others. The surprising side effect of interconvictional

programmes, such as the twice award-winning Belieforama

training programme coordinated by CEJI-A Jewish Contribution

to an Inclusive Europe, is that participants report they learned

as much about themselves as they did about others. Engaging

with difference helped them to see themselves in new light,

to bringing to consciousness elements of culture and identity

that were always implicit, and to want to learn more in order

to be better able to explain one’s own origins, inherited

beliefs and traditions. Interconvictional and intercultural

engagement fosters greater connectedness to one’s own

cultural identity and in relation to others. This type of activity

is most often found in the fields of youth work, non-formal

learning, and community dialogues. It can also be found

in educational contexts where religious literacy objectives

have been introduced into the formal curricula or school

development projects.

Bridging Capital refers to trust and confidence in people

from other groups; support for and from people from other

groups; having the skills, knowledge and confidence to

connect with other groups; valuing inter-group harmony;

and active engagement with people from other groups.

Interconvictional and intercultural approaches are first and

foremost building bridges between people and communities.

Relationships are built that can persevere in the face of

difficulties, generating solidarity and collaboration towards

joint objectives. Such joint objectives can include action on

many of the other polarization factors identified by the BRaVE

project, for example:

· Socio-economic: interconvictional efforts to address

income inequality and segregation issues

· Historical: interconvictional alliances to address

historical injustices, intergroup conflict or institutionalized

discrimination

· Communication-based: interconvictional

cooperation to report hate speech and promote positive

counter-stereotypical narratives

Linking Capital refers to trust and confidence in government

and authority figures; trust in community organisations;

having the skills, knowledge and resources to make use of

institutions and organisations outside one’s local community;

ability to contribute to or influence policy and decision making

relating to one’s own community. Interconvictional alliances

towards relations with government provides opportunities

for minority groups to have their needs heard and to feel

included in civic dialogue.

In practice, interconvictional and intercultural approaches

still tend to be taken up by public authorities ad hoc,

through grassroots initiatives, special calls for funding, or

advisory committees. As stakeholder consultations become

an increasingly common practice by political and public

leaders, there are new mechanisms for connections across

communities on a variety of issues of mutual concern. This

has been an emerging trend in the fields of hate crime and

speech, as demonstrated through action-research conducted

within the Facing all the Facts project. These developments

are good, and they demonstrate how interconvictional

approaches can be integrated into different policy areas.

But there is still a very long way to go until we have

effectively bonded, bridged and linked the social capital of our

societies so that people and communities are co-responsible

for creating inclusive environments where hate has no place.

As much as we must look towards governments,

policy-makers and community leaders to mainstream

interconvictional approaches across policy areas, we can not

wait for them to do it.

Just as the climate crisis calls on each of us to ask ourselves

how to reduce the size of our own personal footprint, the

crisis of polarization should call on each of us to ask ourselves,

“How can I take an interconvictional and intercultural

approach in my different spheres of influence? What is my

child learning about different religions and cultures at school?

How is the place where I work being inclusive and reaching

out across communities? In what ways is inclusive diversity

nurtured in the neighborhood where I live? What biases may

be functioning that blind us to ways in which some people are

excluded or discriminated? How can I forge new connections

on areas of common concern?

These questions point to the individual responsibility

which every person has in creating and ensuring inclusive

environments that build bonding, bridging and linking capital

so that our communities are resilient to the polarizing and

extremist forces which target some of our most vulnerable

peoples.

1

The Istanbul Process is a series of inter-governmental meetings, initiated in 2011, to encourage and guide the implementation of the 2011 UN HRC resolution

16/18 on “Combating intolerance, negative stereotyping and stigmatization of, and discrimination, incitement to violence and violence against, persons based on

religion or belief.”

2

McNeil-Willson, Gerrand, Scrinzi, and Triandafyllidou. 2019. “Polarisation, Violent Extremism and Resilience in Europe today: An analytical framework for the

BRaVE project”. European University Institute.

http://www.brave-h2020.eu/

3

Grossman, Michele, Michael Ungar, Joshua Brisson, Vivian Gerrand, Kristin Hadfield, and Philip Jefferies. 2017. “Final Research Report for Understanding Youth

Resilience to Violent Extremism: A Standardised Research Measure.” In Melbourne, Australia & Halifax, Canada: Alfred Deakin Institute for Citizenship and

Globalisation, Deakin University & The Resilience Research Centre, Dalhousie University.

4

Weller, Paul. “Learning from Experience, Leading to Engagement.” 2012. http://www.belieforama.eu/documents/learning-experience-leading-engagement-fullpolicy-document

5

Perry, Joanna. “Connecting on Hate Crime”. 2019. Facing all the Facts project coordinated by CEJI-A Jewish Contribution to an Inclusive Europe. www.facingfacts.eu

58 2019 | OUR WORLD

The role of Faith and

Religion in our Societies

THE ROLE OF FAITH AND RELIGION IN OUR SOCIETIES

The Place of Interfaith

Freedom and Human

By Martin Weightman

Martin

Weightman

Director of All Faiths

Network.

60 2019 | OUR WORLD


in Religious

Rights

OUR WORLD | 2019

61

SHUTTERSTOCK


Religion or Belief

Freedom of religion or belief is

arguably the most cherished right for

within it is contained the fundamental

expression of one’s self in relation to the

world and the value system that reaches

into one’s core of being and beyond. Be

it spiritual or materialistic, religion or

belief invariably includes an expression

of a person’s ethical and moral values,

conduct in life and vision of the future.

The issue of religion or belief spans

our modern society in a plethora of

ways, more so today than ever, with

multi-cultural elements consistently

growing, mixing, influencing and

diffusing the existing ‘norms’ of society.

And it is increasingly important in

a world where crime, drugs and other

social ills increase and tend to obliviate

moral and ethical standards - standards

that most commonly come from one’s

religion or worldview.

If there is a decline in moral and

ethical standards today, and there is,

it is to a significant degree because

many people adhere to a materialistic

and self-centered view of life rather

than a broader more encompassing

perspective of mankind as a family of

friends that have a spiritual dimension.

might variously be called, in religious

terms, right conduct, the middle way, the

path or salvation without doing so at the

expense of others? The simple answer to

this is to remove human aberration and

strive for an ideal goal. Aberration in this

context can be defined in a secular way

as a violation of human rights . Is not that

a large part of what religion or belief is

all about?

Interfaith for People

Inter-: between; among, mutually;

reciprocally (Oxford dictionary). In

a multi-faith society, we have to live

together. For interfaith to work vital

human rights have to exist and be

agreed upon by the participants. For

interfaith to work another element has

also to be in place and that is education.

It plays a vital function here. I do not

mean in the school especially, though

that certainly has its place. In societies

that bring together people of many

cultures, we must be willing to learn

and accommodate those other cultures

in whatever form they may express.

Unbiased and objective information

about them should be available. Too

often we see stereotyped versions of

a religion being pushed in the media

and on political platforms. A far more

balanced academic and journalistic

input to readable articles, on radio and

television, is vital. An opportunity for

religions to be explained by religions

themselves without the carping criticism

of detractors.

We can and do argue about

certain aspects of human rights, such

as homosexuality or abortion, from

differing belief perspectives. Or genetic

experimentation and no doubt other

issues. But surely these are secondary

to an over-riding intention to live and

work together within a human rights

framework.

Interfaith organisations, as well as

simple personal interactions between

people of different faiths, play an

important role in all the above. Bring

people of different faiths together and

within their varied activities show, learn,

work and educate one another through

dialogue and action.

Speaking with people of other faiths,

attending their festivals, working on

practical projects to improve society or

Why then does religion often have

a bad name?

Of course, countless millions of lives

have been ended in the name of religion

- wars fought, countries colonised,

people coerced, castigated, converted,

prosecuted and persecuted.

Would we not be better without

it? The response to that is, how much

of such wanton destruction and

suppression was for political expediency

and/or justification for acts of selfinterest

and power rather than a real

expression of the values of the religion?

Anyway, how could we be ‘without’

an expression of the fundamentals

of life which must have a place in the

fundamentals of human rights!

Yet how can we avoid the excesses

of the ‘religious’ past and present, the

justification for wrongness done in the

name of religion whilst bringing out what

Religion should not impose its

doctrine on the management

of a country, and this is a sane

separation of Church and State.

However, religions must have the

right to speak and be able to work to

influence the political sphere when

it comes to these fundamental rights

or in cases where issues would affect

their constituencies.

62 2019 | OUR WORLD

SHUTTERSTOCK

projects to deal with religious oppression around the world

are all interfaith. All these things dispel false information that

has seeped into society through false media impressions or

through rumour campaigns. They bring understanding about

why a religion has (for example) an expression of many gods

or why one faction is in disagreement, theologically, with

another. An open approach does not lead to a falling out

or a disagreement – quite the opposite. Be willing to let a

person believe one thing whilst believing in another. This

most often leads to finding a commonality of values that are

agreed upon, shared with one another and working together

to attain better conditions in our shared society.

Interfaith and Religious Freedom Roundtables

A more recent innovation in this field is an ongoing initiative

which is within the framework of interfaith – international

religious freedom roundtables are being established around

the world. Religion and belief representatives, belief interest

groups and interested persons can participate without

obligation, yet with the option to support and initiative

actions. Forged around the US model which has more than

100 attendees consisting of NGOs, faith based organisations,

government representatives and individuals – all there on an

equal basis. There is now an operational European roundtable

in Brussels with others growing up around the world.

This too is interfaith – acting together in the spirit and

context of human rights to end abuse, as well as support and

educate one another.

Interfaith at the EU institutions

Much of the above can be local, regional or national. Some

say that religion should stay completely clear of politics. That

is nothing more than an attempt to silence and strip religions

of their right to participate. Religion should not impose its

doctrine on the management of a country and this is a sane

separation of Church and State. However, as issues of human

rights and social reform are often closely linked to one’s

religious beliefs and are inevitably often political in so far as

they touch on state policy, then religions, as representatives

of blocks of citizens, must have the right to speak and be

able to work to influence the political sphere when it comes

to these fundamental rights or in cases where issues would

affect their constituencies.

At a European level, different forums such as the

roundtable described above, where religion or belief

representatives can raise issues about discrimination are

sorely needed. Others to develop interfaith activities, actions

and education are initiatives (which should be inclusive rather

than exclusive) should be encouraged and developed by

stakeholders as well as appropriate European institutions.


The Revitalization

of Religions

By Bernadette Rigal-Cellard

64 2019 | OUR WORLD


SHUTTERSTOCK

As professor of American studies and of

religious studies, I have specialized in the

field of new religious movements. They are

not a mere object of curiosity. To consider them as

unusual phenomena popping up around or outside

of mainstream religions would be a serious mistake.

The religious landscape is continuously changing

and the new religions of today may, in all likelihood,

be the mainstream religions of tomorrow.

One of the theories that I have found most

useful to understand the massive movement under

way is the theory of the revitalization of religion

by Anthony Wallace (1956): how in times of major

cultural upheavals, new prophets or founders of

spiritual systems will rise to offer solutions better

adapted to the changing circumstances. We clearly

are in a time of major cultural and social changes

and religions react to such transformations by

either losing strength or, on the contrary, by gaining

ground over the others, if they have understood

the real spiritual demands of people. Thus, some

religions will appear and die, rapidly or not. New

religions follow different patterns. Some are likely

to disappear when their founder dies, some will do

so rapidly, whilst for others it will take a long time.

Others will grow and survive through centuries,

a proof that they have been able to respond to

spiritual needs on the long term.

When the Mormons appeared in the United

States almost two centuries ago, who could have

predicted that they would have today so many

million followers around the world, and a state,

Utah, in which they dominate today? No one, except

maybe their prophet Joseph Smith. Some wanted

them to disappear: the Governor of Missouri, at

that time, even issued “Executive Order 44”, called

the “extermination order”, because he directed that

“the Mormons must be treated as enemies, and

must be exterminated or driven from the State if

necessary for the public peace”.

The Ahmadiyya Muslims offer another

interesting example: from a small minority following

Mirza Ghulam Ahmad in Pakistan at the very end of

the 19th Century, they now number more than 10

million, despite strong persecution, which continue

nowadays in certain countries. The story of the

Baha’i follows the same trajectory: from intense

persecution in their birthplace, Persia, to being a

major international movement.

Much decried in some places, the Church of

Scientology offers yet again a most interesting case

Bernadette

Rigal-Cellard

Professor of North

American Studies at

Bordeaux Montaigne

University in France.

She directs the

Masters “Religions

and Societies” and

the Centre for

Canadian Studies.

She is a specialist

in contemporary

North American

religions (including

Mormonism

and Amerindian

Catholicism), their

international

locations and

inculturation

processes.

OUR WORLD | 2019

65


study. In January 2019 (“The Visible Expansion

of the Church of Scientology and Its Actors”,

Journal of Cesnur) I published a paper on this

Church, after having gained access to many of its

facilities as well as its internal documentation at

its headquarters in Hollywood. It is experiencing

an impressive growth all around the world,

and it’s clear that it is not going to vanish in the

next century. With Scientology, I’ve discovered

many phenomena that are very interesting for a

scholar of religion. One feature that struck me is

to see other religious groups adopting parts of

Scientology to complement their own religion.

I cover an example of this in my paper: “This

study of the recent developments of the Church

of Scientology was triggered my interest when I

heard that the Druzes, in the North of Israel, were

taking Scientology courses. Having spent time

among the Druzes of the Chouf in Lebanon, I was

most surprised to hear that such an ancient and

secretive community, which parceled out rather

sparingly the tenets and practices of its religion,

could be open to another world view, one so

totally modern and western. I also learned that

Louis Farrakhan, the leader of the Nation of Islam,

(One of the theories that I have

found most useful to understand

the massive movement under

way is theory of the revitalization

of religion by Anthony Wallace

(1956)): how in times of

major cultural upheavals,

new prophets or founders of

spiritual systems will rise to

offer solutions better adapted to

the changing circumstances.

Bible laying on top of an american flagSHUTTERSTOCK

66 2019 | OUR WORLD


Marquee for the offices of the Church of Scientology located on 46th street in Manhattan, New York City near Times

SquareSHUTTERSTOCK

had followed Scientology courses and

that several members, including high

ranking ones, have done so too. I had

studied the Nation of Islam in the 1980s

and knowing their fierce cultural and

racial separatism then, I was puzzled

by such collaboration. After interviewing

several members of the Nation of

Islam – including high ranking ones – I

discovered that Scientology had helped

them overcoming their racial prejudice

and worldview and I could also see the

link with the ethical code promoted by

Elijah Muhammad, the founder of the

Nation of Islam.

What does that tell us? Why should

we be learning more about new

religious movements? Because as their

predecessors did, they are contributing

to the development of future trends,

with worldviews that might seem

unusual to older generations but are

much more relevant to current one,

they are regenerating actors, as Wallace

explained.

All this does not imply that

traditional religions are going to vanish.

Catholicism, Islam, Protestantism,

Buddhism, Sikhism, Judaism, etc.,

will continue to exist and might even

experience some “renaissance” periods

in the near future. But they have now

to share the religious landscape with

newcomers. As Belgian Cardinal

Joseph de Kezel said recently: “It must

be understood that Christianity was,

for a long time, the cultural religion in

Europe. Today this is no longer the case.

And it would be dangerous to go back

because it is always dangerous to have

one religious tradition that obtains a

monopoly. This is true for Christianity,

for Islam…for any religion.” Throughout

the ages, traditional religions have often

been positive forces, bringing civilization

and values, as well as hope for spiritual

freedom. Of course, they also share

some less redeeming features, and have

been at times used by political forces

to control and oppress populations.

Nevertheless, we also need to open to

and accept from newcomers in the field

of religion.

It is not only that the future will

be forged by the influence of some of

these new religions, it is also the here

and now, which already includes them

in the religious landscape. They are

here, they are acting and we need to

understand them and to know more

about them, if we want to avoid the

mistakes of the past, when intolerance

and bigotry brought the worst of us to

power, and many to death. Also, we can

remember what Gordon Melton said:

“there are enough people nowadays

to fill all the pews of a great variety

of religions, so the more choices, the

better for mankind…”

OUR WORLD | 2019

67


Brian J. Grim,

Ph.D.

President of Religious

Freedom & Business

Foundation.

68 2019 | OUR WORLD


SHUTTERSTOCK

Religious Freedom Helps

Businesses and Economies Grow

By Brian J. Grim, Ph.D.

OUR WORLD | 2019

69


My current work focuses on highlighting

how religious diversity & inclusion – or

workplace religious freedom – is an

asset to the bottom line. But I’m not talking about

knowledge of religious beliefs and practices.

It’s knowledge about how religion impacts the

workplace and the marketplace –our coworkers

and partners as well as our customers and clients.

Data can help us with this.

First, religion is not in decline. When I led the

international data project at the Pew Research

Center from 2008-2014, we projected that our

planet will have 2.3 billion more religiously

affiliated people by 2050 compared with

just 0.1 billion more religiously unaffiliated

people. That’s like religion “winning” 23-to-1.

This religious growth is changing the global

marketplace. Today, three of the top five

economies are Christian-majority. But in 40

years, only one is projected to be. The other four

top economies in 2050 will include countries

where Hindus, Muslims, Buddhists and the

unaffiliated predominate. Research shows

that this religious growth can be good for the

workplace and the bottom lines of businesses –

as long as restrictions on freedom of religion or

belief are kept low. In such countries, innovative

strength is more than twice as high as in

countries where governments and societies

don’t respect freedom of religion or belief.

But the data on respect for freedom of

religion or belief in the U.S. and worldwide are

very concerning. Annual studies that I initiated

while at the Pew Research Center find that

restrictions on religion and belief are high or

very high in 40% of countries. But because

some of these countries (like China) are very

populous, some 5.9 billion people (about 80%

of the world’s population) live in countries

with a high or very high level of restrictions on

religion. Since 2009, the number of people living

in countries with high religious restrictions and

hostilities has increased from 4.8 to 5.9 billion

people – that’s an increase of 1.1 billion more

people living in countries where freedom of

religion or belief is under duress, based on

studies from the Pew Research Center.

Research shows that high restrictions on

freedom of religion or belief damage or even

destroy the pillars of global competitiveness.

For example, innovative strength is more than

twice as high in countries where governments

respect freedom of religion or belief. One

indicator of that is whether some of a country’s

Euro banknotes and an evil eye (eye of the Prophet)

Next time you hear

about religious freedom,

consider its connection

to the economy. Even if

you are not religious, for

the sake of sustainable

development and human

flourishing, religious.

SHUTTERSTOCK

70 2019 | OUR WORLD


top entrepreneurs and successful business people stay in

a country or leave it. Bloomberg just published research

showing which countries are losing or gaining millionaires

through migration, with Australia gaining the most and China

losing the most. How does this compare with the level of

government restrictions on religion and belief in a country?

As I mentioned, it’s not surprising that China, the country

with the highest government restrictions on religion – as

measured by the Pew Research Center – is also losing the

highest number of millionaires seeking more free & secure

opportunities elsewhere. And Australia, a country with low

government restrictions on religion, is benefiting the most

from this migration of talent and resources. While the U.S.

has relatively moderate government restrictions, it has high

social hostilities, according to the past three annual reports

by the Pew Research Center.

Much is being done in U.S. companies to combat religious

intolerance. This year, for example, Texas Instruments’

Diversity Network celebrates 30 years of diversity leadership

and trailblazing. TI was one of the early pioneers of instilling

diversity into its corporate culture, embracing the premise

that a diverse employee base is likely to facilitate fresh and

valuable ideas; and that employees perform at higher levels

when they’re permitted to “bring their whole selves to work”.

Today the company has 15 grassroots, employee-led diversity

resource groups that help foster and support a diverse and

inclusive work environment, including faith-oriented groups

for Christian, Jewish and Muslim employees.

Accenture hosted a nation-wide webinar, “Religious

Literacy 101 – What does it mean to have an accommodation

mindset,” for Accenture employees on the case for being able

to bring your whole self, faith and all, to work. Accenture

has pioneered in both faith-specific and interfaith Employee

Resource Groups. Tyson Foods, along with many companies

across the country, employs chaplains to minister to the

needs of their multi-faith team members. Karen Diefendorf, a

retire US Army Command Chaplain, leads their chaplain force.

Worldwide, a number of companies adhere to a religious

or belief-based ethos. For instance, Sanitarium, the most

popular breakfast cereal company in Australia, is owned and

operated by the Seventh Day Adventist Church. The parent

company of Sanitarium was Sanitas, the original company

set up by then-Adventists John Harvey and W.K. Kellogg to

manufacture toasted corn flakes as a healthier alternative to

the greasy American breakfasts of the day. Yes, and now you

know the religious roots of Kellogg’s Corn Flakes!

Next time you hear about religious freedom, consider its

connection to the economy. Even if you are not religious, for

the sake of sustainable development and human flourishing,

religious freedom is important.

Coin of American dollar with motto: In God We TrustSHUTTERSTOCK

OUR WORLD | 2019

71


Europe needs to

reinvent its diversity

By Bashy Quraishy

Many years ago, when my family wanted

me to study abroad, I was given two

choices: USA or Europe. Coming from

an English-speaking country, the natural choice

should have been USA. I asked my Dad to give

me few days to think it through. There was no

internet, Google or Facebook to help me make

up my mind. But through my many pen pals in

Europe, I knew that European continent was

peaceful, diverse and a progressive place to

study. In a cold December month, I arrived in

Germany, got admission in “Goethe Schule” to

learn German and started my studies to become

“Bauingenieur”.

Nobody asked my religion, culture or what

traditions I came with. People were rather

interested to know how I was coping with

climate, how my studies were going and if I was

feeling welcome. Many strangers asked me if I

would like to have dinner with their family. As

a student, I travelled by rail and visited many

countries, from Italy to Denmark, where I live

now. Thinking of those days, my eyes usually

get wet, even today.

Europe was indeed a continent of peace,

human rights, democracy, rule of law and

protection of minorities. Unfortunately, the

scene has changed for the worse. Today, out of

28 EU member countries, from Finland to Spain,

17 countries have far right political parties; some

are even part of the government while others

are waiting to take charge. Many countries have

very powerful and very visible racist parties, anti-

Islam movements while numerous politicians

openly advocate Islamophobia, causing many

minorities to feel unsafe and afraid of what is

happening.

According to Guardian of UK, dated 20 Nov

2018, the number of Europeans ruled by a

government with at least one populist in cabinet

has increased from 12.5 million to 170 million.

From recession to migration, social media to

globalization, all these has been underlined as

Bashy

Quraishy

Secretary General of

the European Muslim

Initiative for Social

Cohesion (EMISCO).

Member of the

Advisory Council

of the European

Network Against

Racism (ENAR) in

Brussels.

the main causes of this phenomenon.

Of course, a genuine backlash against the

political establishment is present, but the

wave of discontent also taps into concerns

about a dilution of national identity and

the arrival of migrants and asylum seekers

from Muslim majority countries. As a human

rights campaigner, I have experienced how

mainstream media and populist politicians

explain the “real” reasons for this negative trend,

as a historical, cultural, religious and geopolitical

tussle between Christian Europe and Islamic

world.

Although, for over two decades, there have

been many surveys conducted by reputed

international and European organizations,

like Runnymede, PEW, FRA, OSCE, ENAR, Tell

Mama and others, that have documented the

accelerating Islamophobia in Europe, with both

verbal and physical manifestations. I would

particularly mention three newly published

books that highlight the Islamophobic narrative

taking over the West. Arun Kundnani’s -The

Muslims are coming, Arslan Iftikhar’s -

Scapegoats and Fear of Muslims - International

perspective on Islamophobia by Professor Pratt

and Dr. Woodlock. Regrettably, there are many

people in Europe - educated and knowledgeable

- who still claim that Islamophobia is a figment

of imagination of Muslims and a ploy to silence

the critics.

Talking about anti-Muslim sentiments, the

biggest milestone in forming such sentiment in

Europe was 9/11. The whole debate on migration

and minorities shifted from socioeconomic

issues to their cultures and religions, especially

Islam. Media and politicians as well as academics

don’t discuss the problem of the majority to

integrate in the society (ghetto problems, lack

of integration, radicalism and extremism among

non-European minorities, a coded term for

Muslims). Discussions are shaped around the

cultural incompatibility, religious threat and

72 2019 | OUR WORLD


SHUTTERSTOCK

how many Muslims would live in the

European Continent in 2050.

Some experts make projections

that put Muslims in the spotlight,

making them a numerical threat to

Western societies and their Christian

values. Networks with the name “Stop

Islamization of Europe” have sprung up

in many European countries.

Interestingly, according to the 2016

figures from Pew Research Center’s

analysis of Europe’s Muslim population,

roughly 5 percent of Europe’s population

of 500 million has Muslim affiliation.

So, this card of religion is played often

to discredit Islam, as a religion and its

followers ,as European citizens.

Coming to the solutions of

Islamophobia discourse, I would like to

suggest two remedies. Not as a pointed

finger but as a heartfelt request.

First, the duty of the European

authorities and institutions is to

acknowledge that the hatred against

Muslims has devastating effects, not

OUR WORLD | 2019

only on the daily lives of members

of Muslim communities, but also on

society as a whole, leading to tensions

and undermining our democratic values.

Europe can overcome this challenge,

only if we all work together, with a

commitment to protect and promote

human rights for everybody.

Secondly, the Muslim communities,

even if they feel diverse, angry or

disillusioned, they must make an effort

to be part of the societies they live in.

Europe is their home since 8th century.

They are not going anywhere. Their

security, wellbeing and progress is in

their own common interest. They have

the right to practice their religion and

various cultural traditions but keep in

mind that Islam teaches them to be

good to your fellow human being. That

teachings must be practiced.

To sum it up, Europe needs to reinvent

its diversity and humanism and Muslim

communities need to be part of the

present and future.

Talking about anti-

Mulsim sentiments,

the biggest milestone

in forming such

sentiment in Europe

was 9/11. The whole

debate on migration

and minorities

shifted from socioeconomic

issues to

their vultures and

religions, especially

Islam.

73


The World Union of Old believers as a

model for the Church State relationship

By Leonid Sevastianov

While pondering the current state of

religious freedom in the world, we

have to take into consideration the

historical background. Any society, any individual,

albeit being not completely determined, is

dramatically exposed to the personal history

and the history of the community he/she

lives in. Certainly, each of us is able to take a

responsible moral step by themselves, to make

our own existential choice, which is proven by

such prime examples as Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn

or other modern dissident thinkers, but to be

bent on making this step or choice real, a human

being has to walk the path of intellectual and

spiritual emancipation. A non-emancipated and

mentally constrained person, even more – a

non-emancipated society, cannot compete for

such a level of the moral responsibility reached

by emancipated people and societies. It is

testified not only by the European tradition of

the Enlightenment, but also by the much older

Christian tradition in Europe.

Speaking about the current situation with

regard to religious freedom in today’s Russia,

before criticizing by acknowledging well-known

issues, we need to gain insight into the massive

historical background of these issues in Russia

and in the Russian culture. Such insight would

let us take the next – after having criticized the

present situation – important step: to move on

to developing a sort of a road map for assistance

provided by the European community to Russia

in establishing and developing such term as

“religious freedom” in the forms of the Russian

culture.

I belong to the tradition of the protection of

religious freedom in Russia directly. My father, an

Old Believer and a Cossack, used to be a dissident

during the Soviet period. He used to collaborate

and afford any assistance to Alexander Men

and Gleb Yakunin in carrying out their activities

aimed at combating religious persecution. This

is why, I hope, my reasoning and conclusions

are built upon impartial experience gained in

the course of the family tradition and they are

Leonid

Sevastianov

President of the

World Council of

Russian Old Believers.

considered to be independent of any influence

of confessional and corporative subjectivity.

In reviewing the Russian history, we can

easily get convinced that there was an inherent

tendency in the tradition of Ancient Russia to

demonstrate a real religious tolerance. Ten years

ago, we managed for the first time to digitize and

widely publish the so-called “Illustrated Chronicle

of Ivan the Terrible”. This major work was

created by Macarius, Metropolitan of Moscow,

in the middle of the 16th century as a textbook

for Ivan the Terrible, the Tsar of Russia, and it

contained information on Biblical history, the

history of Russia and the Ancient World. While

reading this Illustrated Chronicle, my attention

was particularly drawn to the author’s tale

about the fact that Catholic (“Roman”) churches

and communities were allowed to co-exist and

develop freely in Russia since the first centuries

of its statehood.

The Illustrated Chronicle testifies that

Russia used to cooperate closely with German

catholic orders and that dual-faith practice was

widely distributed throughout Russia, which

means that Christian concepts used to get along

in people’s minds with beliefs that are today

commonly referred to as ”pagan ones”. While

reading the present chronicle, I have not come

upon any facts stating that there were forced

conversions in any religion or any persecutions

condemned by the State towards any religious

groups in Russia. Even during the so-called

Golden Horde period, Russian Princess visited

the capital of the Golden Horde to show her

wholehearted loyalty to Zoroastrianism. Exactly

during the Mongolian period, we can observe

extensive construction of temples (primarily,

monastic buildings) in Russia.

Religious intolerance occurred and stroke

its roots in Russia since the 17th century in

the process of establishing State control over

the Church, when religion became a State’s

tool and a main weapon for ideological

manipulation, primarily while implementing

foreign policy. At the beginning of the Romanov

dynasty, monarchs also implemented main

74 2019 | OUR WORLD


A Russian Old Believer Church in Ulan-Ude.SHUTTERSTOCK

military reforms resulting in replacing

professional mercenaries by forcibly

conscripted recruits. It makes sense – it is

a way easier to mobilize non-professional

soldiers for full commitment to military

actions turning them into “cannon

fodder”, while real political and economic

goals are being disguised as “combating

infidels” and “making Constantinople

free”, and it’s promised that a soldier

will get a 100% reward for the supreme

sacrifice in the afterlife. It is more

complicated to mobilize a recruit to rush

towards his death only by assuring him

that the Empire needs to be expanded or

needs to have access to the sea for more

OUR WORLD | 2019

profitable trading. A religious soldier who

lost his legs during the ”holy war against

heretics” will not seek compensation

for this. Thus, replacing professional

mercenaries with forcibly conscripted

recruits made religious tolerance in the

17th century extremely unprofitable.

Empire westward expansion was

boastfully presented as a “battle

with papists and Protestants”, while

southward expansion was publicized

as a fight against undipped Moslems to

let orthodox Slavs and Greeks groaning

under the oppression of “infidel” Turks

free.

Exactly since then Catholicism,

Protestantism and Islam have been

subject to demonizing in Russian political

mythology. For the same purpose, the

State implemented a bloody religious

reform in Russia in the middle of the

17th century.

Initially, in the 10th century, Russian

Orthodoxy was characterized by its

identity and transparency, but reformers

started tailoring it to “Greek” standards.

The church was renamed into the

“Greek Church” just to make ”free from

the oppression of Turks” Greeks think

there was no difference between their

own religion and the religion of “their

liberators”, what would have made them

75


accept the “religious idea as dominant” in military flareups

between the Russian empire and the Turkish-Persian world

and turn a blind eye to the purely economic goals.

The so-called Old Believers headed by Tsarist confessors,

particularly by Avvakum Petrov, a protopresbyter, rose

up against the politicization and manipulation of Russian

Orthodoxy carried out by the authorities in the Empire which

was getting more and more totalitarian. The main pathos of

their sermon was based upon the fact that Russian Orthodoxy

could not become a “tool” for satisfying the Empire’s needs

to manipulate “ignorant folks” by dealing with purely political

issues. Their appeal claimed almost all their lives, they were

violently burned at the stake after many years of imprisonment

and tortures, by which the authorities had been trying to shut

out alternative world views, to drag its preachers into the

paradigm of the new relations between the State and Church.

But the heroic sacrifice of the protesting leaders only triggered

a rapid growth of the Old Believers’ movement popularity,

despite severe persecutions carried out by civil and religious

authorities towards all the adherents of the above-mentioned

movement. Obviously, it was an exact moment when an

adamant opposition between the government and people,

which still exists, was born and consolidated in Russia; it was

a moment when the long-standing ”hybrid” civil war started.

It would be completely erroneous to assume that there have

been no ”religious wars” in Russia ever. They were, and they

were extremely violent. Stepan Razin’s, Kondratij Bulavin’s and

even Yemelyan Pugachev’s rebellions are considered nothing

more than wars between the Old Believers and adherents of

the new so-called Niconian faith. All three stages of this religious

war were violently repressed by the Tsarist authorities, and the

leaders and participants of the rebellions – except for those

Old believers rosary, Russian Orthodox Church, lestovkaSHUTTERSTOCK

76 2019 | OUR WORLD


who had managed to emigrate – were executed.

Some Old Believers emigrated mainly to the territories

of the modern USA, Turkey and countries of eastern Europe,

particularly to Baltic countries, Poland and Romania that used

to belong to the Holy Roman Empire.

While studying the history of the Old Believers outside

the Russian Empire, I have not come upon any cases when

local authorities showed their repressive attitude towards

them. Despite major conservatism of the Old Believers in

matters of dogmatism and morality, it seems that it would

have been difficult for them to find common ground with the

unfriendly environments of Islam and Catholicism. But no,

they were considered well-disposed and they used to be given

wholehearted support from the governments of European

countries and Turkey.

To illustrate that fact, it would be enough to recall the

history of the reconstruction of the Old Believers’ hierarchy

in the territory belonging to Bukovina, in today’s Ukraine. At

that time, it used to be an integral part of Austria-Hungary.

On a direct instruction of the Emperor of the Holy Roman

Empire in 1785, the Old Believers were entitled to live in the

territory of Bukovina, where they were exempt from all taxes

and compulsory military service. In the 1840-s, the Emperor of

Austria-Hungary issued a decree declaring that it should not

only be allowed to reconstruct the Old Believers’ hierarchy,

but it was ordered hereby to facilitate this process. To this

end, acting through its Minister for Foreign Affairs and Consul

in Constantinople, the Emperor entered into negotiations

with the Ottoman Empire and Patriarch of Constantinople

who actually set Metropolitan Ambrose, a member of the

Synod of Constantinople who lived in the capital of the

Ottoman Empire, free, because he agreed to heading the

Old Believers’ Church that is still colloquially called as the

“Austrian Agreement” and is considered to be the largest

group among the Old Believers. My research conducted in

the Vatican’s Archives last year convinced me that this case

was directly overseen by the Pope.

There is an associated question arising in this context: why

did the western diplomacy need to spend its time, money

and other resources to support the outlying, as well as in

terms of its ideology, Russian Old Belief? The message is

clear: Old Belief, despite its conservatism and sometimes

Russian nationalism, has always advocated the right to have

religious freedom and the need to perform actual separation

of Church and State. An Old Believer finds it unacceptable

when the State manipulates a religion in any way, on the

contrary, he/she thinks it is crucial to actually separate Church

and State. It is the first and main principle of Old Belief! To

uphold these values within already almost 4 centuries, the

Old Believers put their lives at the stake, were sent into

exile to the camps, fled their homes and lived sometimes

in isolation. It became clear for Europe that, by supporting

Old Belief, it was sending a message to Russia that it had

The message is clear: Old Belief,

despite its conservatism and

sometimes Russian nationalism,

has always advocated the right

to have religious freedom and

the need to perform actual

separation of Church and State.

to establish complete religious freedom to be a full-fledged

member of the civilized family of nations. Only in 1905, the

highest authority of Russia embarked on the path of the

construction of religious tolerance and equality, but already

in 1917, all the attempts were swept away by the bloody

vortex of the Revolution followed by a dark period of 70 years

characterized by totalitarian Bolshevik atheism. Undoubtedly,

such historical experience did not contribute to developing

a healthy political tradition of the inter-religious world in

Russia that is still seeking for its own model. It is not the

worst nightmare, because it’s better not to have any tradition

at all than to have an erroneous one.

Today’s Europe is intended, while pushing forward any

ideals of religious intolerance, to support projects of one kind

or another, focal points of civic engagement of one kind or

another that are not afraid of encouraging in today’s Russia

religious freedom as a basis of prosperity of any community.

This year, I founded the World Alliance for Old Believers

intended to push forward the historical ideals of the Old

Believers. Religious freedom and actual separation of Church

and State are the bedrock and the “first commandment” of

this astonishing spiritual, cultural and historical phenomenon

called “Old Belief”. Hereby I’m inviting all people of goodwill, all

leaders of European public opinion to cooperate. By working

together, we’ll turn Europe to a flourishing garden with various

flowers growing and bearing fruits freely, what used to be

eagerly desired by my ancestors – Old Believers.

OUR WORLD | 2019

77


Freedom of Religion and

the Council of Europe

By Valeriu Ghiletchi

The Institutions of the Council of Europe

get little of the publicity that the European

Union institutions do, and in fact probably

a significant majority of people in Europe do

not even know the difference between the

two. This is unfortunate because the Council

of Europe is the bedrock and the basis upon

which has been developed the European

Convention on Human Rights – which, similar

to the Universal Declaration of Human Rights

– holds forth a panoply of human rights upon

which our societies are expected to be bound.

Whether they do so or not is another matter,

but it stands as a basic agreement between

the 47 European countries. Furthermore, the

Council of Europe provides a legal framework

for them to be enforced through appealing to

the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR)

after all national legal remedies have been

exhausted.

This system is by no means perfect. It is slow

and has limited enforcement powers. Countries

such as Russia have refused to apply a series

of judgements they have lost in the ECtHR, but

never-the-less the Council of Europe has built

an impressive body of reports, resolutions,

recommendations, and judgements which

are used worldwide as standards for different

fields of human rights, including freedom of

religion or belief, around which this article is

devoted.

Since the 1990s the Council of Europe has

been something of a testing ground for religious

freedom and in particular for minority religions.

Different anti-religious pressure groups have

attempted to bring tough measures against

religious minorities, which they negatively

characterized as “dangerous sects”. Through

different Resolutions, they intended to

establish such measures as Europe-wide

observatories to monitor what was supposed

to be a “sect problem”. We are not here talking

about whether something was against the

Valeriu

Ghiletchi

Member of the

Parliament of the

Republic of Moldova.

Ex President of the

European Baptist

Federation (EBF).

(Ex) Member of

the Parliamentary

Assembly of the

Council of Europe.

law. The law is applied in each country and

this was never an issue, but the intention was

to establish new laws and regulations which

would have had the effect of harassing or even

persecuting religious minorities.

It is to the credit of the Council of Europe

that none of the “observatories”’ were ever

considered to be necessary. On the contrary,

it was considered that existing laws were

sufficient in determining the activity of

European citizens. Unbiased and objective

academic evaluation was also seen to play an

important role in this regard.

The most recent attempt was not so long

ago. 2014 was the year when a rather very

restrictive and punitive proposal was brought

to the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of

Europe by a French member of the Assembly,

Mr. Rudy Salles, entitled “The protection of

minors against excesses of sects”. This proposal

rang the alarm bell for me personally as I had

experience of being a member of a so called

“sect” (in my case Baptist, which is a minority

Christian group) in the Soviet Union and being at

the receiving end of state discrimination at the

time. The initial draft by Mr. Salles proposed a

variety of measures including observatories, as

mentioned above, and other sever limitations

which were to target what were alleged to be

the damaging effects of minority religions (or

sects). The story behind this is too long and

complex to go into here, but it is sufficient to

say that, during the debate in the Parliamentary

Assembly, all draconian measures were

overturned and mostly the common-sense

human rights guidelines to protect minors,

which would apply in any context regardless of

the religion of their parents, were adopted. This

can be found on the Council of Europe’s site

This resolution was later strengthened in

2017 by another resolution brought this time

by me: “The protection of the rights of parents

78 2019 | OUR WORLD


SHUTTERSTOCK

and children belonging to religious

minorities”, which emphasized on the

basic human right of parents expressed

in the European Convention on Human

Rights to bring up their children

according to their own religious beliefs .

The Council of Europe has taken

up many religious freedom issues –

not just concerning the minority issue

above. In 2015 I was the author of the

Resolution 2036: “Tackling intolerance

and discrimination in Europe with a

special focus on Christians” .

It concretely proposes measures

that should be taken by Member states

to ensure the effective enjoyment of

the protection of freedom of religion

or belief afforded to every individual in

Europe.

Thankfully, the “sect issue” is

now pretty much old hat and all the

dramatizations whipped up by those

anti-religious elements has been shown

to be baseless. Of course, when it comes

to breaking the law, religions should

have no special protections and this was

never the issue. The issue is whether or

not the basic human right of a person to

believe in whatever she or he chooses

and to practice that belief within the

law, was protected.

And it is admirable that the Council

of Europe, in spite of many fights and

pressures, maintained good standards

in this area. As I said at the beginning, it

is unfortunate that the Council of Europe

does not enjoy the same exposure and

relevance as the European Union does.

This is particularly unfortunate because

the human rights role played by the

Council of Europe is a vital one which

needs to be elevated within European

countries and not relegated to the

sidelines of our democracies today.

The human rights role

played by the Council

of Europe is a vital

one which needs to

be elevated within

European countries

and not relegated to

the sidelines of our

democracies today.

OUR WORLD | 2019

79


SHUTTERSTOCK

The Interconnection between

Political and Religious Freedom

By Fréderic-Jerôme Pansier

The purpose of this text is to discuss the link between

political freedom of an Independent State and Religious

Freedom. Are the two notions compatible and exist in

one Single State at the same time?

First: Religion is the basis for Independence

The birth of all Nations is based on the need of Religious

Liberty. It is possible to reinforce this sentence by many

examples. The founding of the United States was an alliance

of deists to win religious freedom and the disestablishment

of state-religion : “The evangelicals wanted disestablishment

so they could freely preach the gospel; the rationalists

and deists wanted disestablishment because they felt an

enlightened government should not punish people for

their religious views. The combination of the two agendas

would transform America, helping to make it both intensely

religious and religiously free.” (Thomas Kidd, “God of Liberty:

A Religious History of the American Revolution “). Since

the Independence, America has always been religious and

religiously diverse.

Freedom of religion is protected by the First Amendment

of the U.S. Constitution, which prohibits laws establishing

a national religion or impeding the free exercise of religion

for its citizens. The Fourteenth Amendment, adopted in

1868, extended religious freedom by preventing states from

enacting laws that would advance or inhibit any religion.

The modern approach shows that most of the actually

debated questions (same sex marriage, abortion, prayer in

80 2019 | OUR WORLD


the classroom, divorce) are deeply connected

with religious beliefs.

Most of the modern wars against the

powers are in the name of religion: no need to

explain the religious aspect the recent Islamic

Revolutions or in the conflict between two

trends of the Islamic religions Iran and Saudi

Arabia. It is in the name of the religion that

recent difficulties troubled the World’s peace.

Second: The Independent State wants to

suppress Religious Freedom

Once freed, the paradox is that the newly

independent State has two options:

- either, the State is a religious one and

the religion is deeply linked with the political

institutions. It is the case of most modern

Islamic states: Islam is not only a religion but

also constitutional Law, Civil Law… Every part

of the citizens’ everyday life is based on the

new religion – hence there is no room for any

independent attitude nor for any other religion.

Many of the present Islamic states correspond

to this situation: if the state religion is Shi’ite

religion, it will be impossible for any other

religion to exist, even an Islamic one. This

ostracism is quite logical: since the Political

Power is based on one religious’ belief, it will be

impossible to admit any other religion except

the State Religion.

- Or, the State is not a religious one and

tries to give some independence to the citizens.

However, this freedom given to all religions

does not last long. One day, or another, the

religious leaders are going to resist or to

criticize the political leaders; by response, the

political power is going to fight against and to

try to forbid the free exercise of all religions. It

is the present situation of China in which all the

religions, and not only the Islamic practitioners,

are or will be going to be forbidden. The United

States’ International Religious Freedom Act of

1998 requires the office of the Secretary of

State to compile a list each year of countries

that have “engaged in or tolerated systematic,

ongoing, and egregious violations of religious

freedom,” according to the State Department’s

January 4, 2018 press release.

A Free State does not allow freedom of

religion, except the International conventions.

In reality, the freedom of religion is a power

running against the political power; this is

the reason why the political power tends to

eliminate freedom of religion. In religious

OUR WORLD | 2019

Fréderic-

Jerôme

Pansier

Professor of law at

University of Paris 1.

This difficulty to admit

a total freedom of

religion, even in Western

Democratic State, shows

the difficulty for the

States to admit a rival

power. This is why it is

a daily fight for certain

religions to be freely

admitted and exercised.

states, the freedom of religion is running

counter the monopoly, thus the political power

wants to eliminate any other religion.

The only way to protect the freedom

of religion goes through international

conventions.

For example, the Universal Declaration of

Human Rights adopted by the United Nations

General Assembly on December 10, 1948,

defines freedom of religion and belief (Article

18).

However, the fact that a country has ratified

it does not mean that the freedom of religion

is complete.

Even in France, some religions, characterized

as “sects” or “cults”, have been prosecuted

and condemned mainly because they were

characterized as such. This characterization is

in itself an effort to crush on the freedom of

religion of such minorities. It could be useful

to create a “freedom of religion scale” which

could identify, state by state, the freedom of

religion. China could be noted zero (out of ten)

and France five. The only country which might

receive a Ten mark would be the United States.

This difficulty to admit a total freedom of

religion, even in Western Democratic States,

shows the difficulty for the States to admit a

rival power. This is why it is a daily fight for

certain religions to be freely admitted and

exercised. From this fight, may the light be

coming: “Jehovah will fight for you and you shall

hold your peace” (Ex. 14:14).

81


The Role of Religion in Society

from the Orthodox perspective

By Petar Gramatikov

Orthodox thinking on religious pluralism

is becoming an increasingly imperative

topic on the theological agenda.

A doctrine which denies the possibility of

salvation to the bulk of humanity violates several

fundamental principles of Orthodox theology.

From this perception, Dr Paul Ladouceur

(Adjunct Professor, Orthodox School of

Theology at Trinity College University of Toronto

- “Orthodoxy and the Non‐Orthodox”, Papers on

Ecumenicity and Ecumenoclasm in view of the

Holy and Great Council of the Orthodox Church,

June 2016) postulates that “in the first place, it

denies that God is a good and loving God who

seeks the salvation of all humans, but rather

turns God into a cruel divine caricature who

creates humans whose only final destiny can be

eternal torment. This is not at all the Orthodox

notion of God as the Lover of Humankind

(philanthropos), the Merciful One (eleémón), the

Most Compassionate (panoiktírmōn).”

Patriarch Bartholomew’s roles as the

primary spiritual leader of the Orthodox

Christian world and a transnational figure of

global significance continue to become more

vital each day; he co-sponsored the Peace and

Tolerance Conference in Istanbul (1994) bringing

together Christians, Muslims and Jews, as well

as organized several world conferences on

ecological themes for what has been named

the “Green Patriarch”. Anna Maria Aagaard, a

Lutheran theologian from Denmark, analyzes

the Patriarch’s understanding of “European idea”

and state-church relations: “The Patriarch values

religious freedom and pluralism as they reflect

the mystery of God’s freedom and God’s respect

for human freedom... The Patriarch’s views on

secularism and European Enlightenment are

far more reflective than the one-sided negative

assessments made by some church hierarchs.

The Patriarch attributes Europe’s commitment

to democracy, human rights, and religious

freedom both to the idea of Christian Europe

Petar

Gramatikov

Trustee of the Global

Council of the United

Religions Initiative.

and to the process of secularization that over

time emancipated political, social, and cultural

spheres from ideological dominance and

religious fanaticism.”

In His address at the Concordia Europe

Summit “Migration Challenging European

Identity” (June 7, 2017, Athens, Greece) His All-

Holiness Ecumenical Patriarch Bartholomew

stressed: “The core of human rights is the

protection of human dignity. This is the basis

not only of political and individual rights, but also

of social, cultural and the “third generation” of

human rights, that is, community-rights. These

are the cornerstones of European identity. Let

us transform the “threat of otherness” into the

opportunity to foster a culture of solidarity and

inclusion.”

The Ecumenical Patriarch, His All Holiness

Bartholomew I, spiritual leader of 300 million

Orthodox Christians worldwide, delivered a

public address at the Ecumenical Centre in

Geneva as part of his official visit to Switzerland

on the occasion of the 25th anniversary of his

enthronement as Ecumenical Patriarch and the

50th anniversary of the Orthodox Centre of the

Ecumenical Patriarchate in Chambésy, stressing

out that “We must all work together for the

promotion of a culture of solidarity, respect for

others, and dialogue..” he said and reiterated

his invitation to all member churches “to work

together in a common quest, renewing the true

vocation of the church through collaborative

engagement with the most important issues

of justice and peace, healing a world filled with

conflict, injustice and pain.”

The Role of Religion in Society is among

the first issues to be addressed not only by

the leadership of the world religions but also

to be implemented in the daily life by the

grassroots religious communities through a

sort of religious-style crisis management to

promote enduring, daily interfaith cooperation,

82 2019 | OUR WORLD


A priest standing with his back to the altar in the temple of an Orthodox Church

shutterstock

to end religiously motivated violence

and to create cultures of peace, justice

and healing for the Earth and all living

beings. The global United Religions

Initiative (www.uri.org) was born on June

26, 2000, by people of diverse religions,

spiritual expressions and indigenous

traditions throughout the world. We

implement our mission through local

and global initiatives that build the

capacity of our member groups and

organizations, called Cooperation Circles,

to engage in community action such as

conflict resolution and reconciliation,

environmental sustainability, education,

women’s and youth programs, and

advocacy for human rights.

Аs a community of great diversity,

including diversity of perspectives on a

wide range of global, regional and local

issues, we believe that this diversity

of perspectives has the potential to

deepen our understanding and lead

to shared insight and wisdom. URI’s

OUR WORLD | 2019

Preamble, Purpose and Principles are the

foundational tenets of our Charter and

our global network, amongst all:

- respect the uniqueness of each

tradition, and differences of practice or

belief.

- unite to build cultures of peace and

justice.

- unite to build safe places for conflict

resolution, healing and reconciliation.

- unite to support freedom of religion

and spiritual expression, and the rights

of all individuals and peoples as set forth

in international law.

- encourage our members to deepen

their roots in their own tradition

- seek and welcome the gift of

diversity and model practices that do

not discriminate.

- practice healing and reconciliation

to resolve conflict without resorting to

violence.

- seek and offer cooperation with

other interfaith efforts.

As a community

of great diversity

including diversity

of perspectives on a

wide range of global,

regional and local

issues, we believe

that this diversity of

perspectives has the

potential to deepen

our understanding

and lead to shared

insight and wisdom.

83


SHUTTERSTOCK

Secularism, a principle fostering

social cohesion, peace and freedom

By Giulio Ercolessi

In the public debate, the secular State is sometimes

misrepresented as being in contradiction with fundamental

rights, especially religious freedom. On the contrary, we

think that secularism fosters social cohesiveness, civil peace

and fundamental freedoms for all.

Secularism, in its strictest meaning of separation of the

spiritual and temporal domains, has several consequences,

which are beneficial to individuals as well as to society as a

whole.

First, secularism contributes to society’s cohesiveness.

It creates a public arena for a political debate based on

everyone’s equal citizenship, i.e. belonging to the political

community with equal rights and dignity, independently of

any particular belonging to a specific community or group. It

boosts social cohesiveness because, in the political sphere,

people are primarily recognised as citizens, and not as

members of a distinctive group. It leads to political equality

and creates the conditions for inclusive democratic politics.

The democratic political order, set up by all citizens, stands

above any particular religious law.

Second, as in a secular political order, no religious

organisation is recognised by the State or has an organic

84 2019 | OUR WORLD


link with it (as for example in the USA or

France), equality of all religions is ensured.

No religion stands above the others, thus

guaranteeing an impartial playing field and an

equal understanding of religious freedom for

all religions, irrespectively of factors such as

the size of their presence in the country. As

the historical example of France shows, this is

beneficial even for the former official religion

because links with the State usually come

along with State control and an unhealthy

mix of temporal and spiritual domains that

in the long term undermines the specificity of

the religious message. Churches benefit from

greater freedom in comparison with situations

where a concordat or a state religion is present.

Secularism is inherently liberal as the State

pulls out of the spiritual sphere. However, the

main benefit of State neutrality on religious

affairs lays in the equality of all persons and in

social cohesiveness: as no religion or doctrine

stands above the others in the legal order,

all citizens are equal, irrespectively of their

religious affiliation. The Equality and inclusion

of all citizens fosters social cohesion.

Last but not least, the separation of the

temporal and spiritual domains is a crucial

guarantee for the respect of fundamental rights

for all. All citizens are recognized as equal,

believers (in any religion) and non-believers;

it goes hand in hand with a strong defence of

fundamental rights for all.

Freedom of speech is crucial to an open,

democratic society. It includes the right to

religious worship and even to proselytism, but

also the acceptation by Churches of freedom of

speech for all, including the freedom to criticize

and even mock dogmas or objects of worship,

as well as the fundamental right of all persons

to change or leave the religion in which they

were brought up. The right to change or leave

one’s religion is of the utmost importance and

should be clearly recognized, as many religions

seek to actively prevent it or even criminalise it,

even though it is a right recognised by European

and international human rights law. Indeed,

non-believers and apostates are persecuted in

many parts of the world in the name of religion.

Moreover, many people face criminal lawsuits

in many countries, even within the European

Union (Poland, for example), threats, or even

murder, because of their critical stance towards

religion, the most heinous recent example

being the murders of the filmmaker Theo van

OUR WORLD | 2019

Giulio

Ercolessi

President of the

European Humanist

Federation.

Freedom of speech is crucial to

an open, democratic society. It

includes the right to religious

worship and even to proselytism,

but also the acceptation by

Churches of freedom of speech

for all, including the freedom to

criticize and even mock dogmas

or objects of worship.

Gogh and of the Charlie Hebdo journalists.

A strong secularist approach also effectively

protects the rights of the weakest members

of society. Indeed, secularism focuses on

individuals and not communities. Close-knit

religious communities may be a source of

oppression for some of their members, in

particular women, children and LGBT persons.

Greater recognition of groups and communities

often leads to situations where, within the

community, the stronger may oppress the

weaker in application of religious rules

allowing or even prescribing serious breaches

of basic fundamental rights, in particular, the

right to bodily integrity (example of female

genital mutilation), the denial of sexual and

reproductive rights, or of the right to education.

Secularism first recognizes the individual

as a citizen, not as a member of a specific

community. As such, a secular state must fight

breaches of fundamental rights committed

by communities in the name of religion or of

authoritarian doctrines. It ensures freedom

to all members of society, even against their

religious community if needed.

Secularism guarantees the freedom and

equality of all religions and beliefs, within the

limits set by the need to respect the rights of

others. It also ensures authentic equality and

freedom of all citizens, irrespective of their

metaphysical views, in a truly democratic

political debate, clearly separated from

theological influence. It establishes the

framework in which citizens can freely build

their own society, in the here and now.

85


Promoting our Common

Spiritual Values

By Rev. Dr William A. McComish

17 November 2015: Group of people during the interfaith procession against terrorism in the streets of Lugano on

Switzerland.SHUTTERSTOCK

86 2019 | OUR WORLD


During the Autumn of 1999, a number

of lay people and Genevan religious

leaders met in my office at St Pierre

cathedral – I was the Dean at that time. We

had been asked to organize an inter-religious

event for United Nations Day. The request

came because we had already worked together

to create a ceremony in memoriam of the

victims of a Swissair flight that crashed in the

Atlantic during 1998. Inter-religious worship

has become commonplace today, but at that

time it was rare. We combined to create a text

for United Nations Day 1999 – this was the birth

of the Genevan Spiritual Appeal.

The group that wrote this text did not see it

having a permanence, but owing to the frightful

state of the world, it has continued to be

important and an inspiration for many people.

In 1999, we were already concerned at the

politicization of religion at the end of the Cold

War. There was the Northern Ireland situation

(Catholics and protestants), Israel/Palestine,

Kashmir, even Vietnam where the Diem regime

was catholic in a Buddhist country.

Our group comprised members of civil

society, as well as Christians of several

traditions, Muslims, Jews, Buddhists, Hindus

and Baha’is. We became aware of two realities,

the fact that our ethical bases were almost

identical and that we all believed that God,

being universal, listens to all prayers.

To express our concern about the use of

religion as a force in political life we wrote the

Genevan Spiritual Appeal. This is a short and

powerful text.

We called – and call – upon world leaders to:

« A refusal to invoke a religious or spiritual

power to justify violence of any kind,

« A refusal to invoke a religious or spiritual

source to justify discrimination and exclusion,

« A refusal to exploit or dominate others

by means of strength, intellectual capacity or

spiritual persuasion, wealth or social status. »

The state of the world has cried out for

this text for twenty years. We have done our

best to promote it through direct appeals to

world leaders, conferences and inter-religious

celebrations. Our 20th anniversary will be

celebrated in St Pierre Cathedral, Geneva on

16th November.

Why do we feel we have to continue our

work? We are scandalized by the misuse of

religion as a political force. It is the persecution

Rev. Dr

William A.

McComish

Former Dean of

Geneva Cathedral

/ President of the

Association of Geneva

Spiritual Appeal.

Why do we feel we have

to continue our work?

We are scandalized by

the misuse of religion

as a political force.

It is the persecution

of the Oighurs, the

Rohinguas, the Yazidis.

It is the attacks on

places of worship,

in New Zealand, the

USA and Europe.

It is the American

fundamentalists,

attacking abortion

clinics.

of the Uighurs, the Rohingyas, the Yazidis. It

is the attacks on places of worship, in New

Zealand, the USA and Europe. It is the American

fundamentalists, attacking abortion clinics. It is

Salvini with his rosary,

It is Trump praying for victims while he

does nothing to contain gun crime. It is Orban

« defending » Christian Europe while setting

aside Christian values, forgetting that Jesus was

a refugee and also very conveniently forgetting

that the world took in two hundred thousand

Hungarian refugees in 1956.

It is Bolsonaro destroying God’s creation

for profit. This is a long list but it could be

prolonged indefinitely. There is no limit to

humane evil – nor it seems to the capacity of

humanity to use religion hypocritically for what

are anti-religious ends.

We, in the Committee of the Association of

the Genevan Spiritual Appeal, are determined

to continue our struggle for peace and justice,

for dialogue and tolerance. And for the

promotion of common spiritual values.

OUR WORLD | 2019

87


True Religion and

a Truth-full Society

By Rabbi Michael Shevack

88 2019 | OUR WORLD


SHUTTERSTOCK

We often forget that Western Civilization

began as a religion! Western Civilization

was the Western Church of one of

Constantine’s sons: the Catholic or “universal” Church.

Jewish sacred history, Greek philosophy, and

Roman law amalgamated Into the Roman Catholic

World View. This view, over the centuries, through

various “heresies”, became tamed, modified, expanded

and focused into our current global, secular, scientific,

technological, profit-driven societies – expressed with

varying degrees of “democracy” or “authoritarianism”.

It’s still a work in progress.

Western religion, substantially diluted to become

more and more generalized, is what we now call,

loosely, “society”. “Society” tends to be more “general”;

“don’t murder” is now generally agreed-upon. “Religion”

now tends to be more “specific”; “kneel at the altar”,

“meditate in lotus”, only somewhat agreed-upon. So,

to treat “society” as its own entity is a spiritual lie. To

describe religions as now little islands floating in a

secular sea that must have a “role in society” is only

vaguely true. Society arose from religion, and religion

is expressed in and through society. Society and

religion are essentially one! To separate them is false.

Indeed, general “society” arose as a compensation

and correction for the insanity of “religion”, our

wars, cruelties, and psychic-assaults. But, today,

this landscape has changed. Our “society” is now

becoming increasingly perverted by the material

mania for corporate profits, nation-state geo-political

ascendancy, technological supremacy, and voracious

human hungers for comfort and dominance.

Could “religion”, society’s missing self-piece, now

help us find our way back to wholeness? Perhaps.

But, what kind of religion? Truly, with deep respect

and love, I must ask: Are we speaking of Jewish views

that seek to demolish the Dome of the Rock in Israel, and

Rabbi Michael

Shevack

Founder of the

Alliance for

Enlightened Judaism.

Board Member of

Israeli Palestinian

Confederation.

OUR WORLD | 2019

89


institute animal sacrifice, in order to fulfill sacred prophecy?

Messianic Christian campaigns to baptize the entire world and

fire-torch the earth to fulfill the words of Revelation? Islamic

passions attempting to provide an alternative universal view,

based not upon the Roman imperial structure, but upon that

of the Islamic Caliphate?

What is needed is not religion per se. What is needed is

True religion! Religions based upon Truth!

True religion teaches a truth-full way of life. True religion

teaches us how to live in a spiritually-purposed way that

permits the progressive, historical attainment of increased

Unity and Goodness (that spiritual experience, individual

or collective, often called “God”). True religion teaches us

how to express Unity and Goodness throughout 1) all Life

and Creation, especially here on earth. 2) all humankind,

all peoples, societies and religions 3) all future generations.

True religion frames the foundation of all societal progress!

True religion seeks a living alignment of human invention

and Divine Creation in nature and human nature, to fulfill

those prophetic virtues of Peace, justice and Righteousness.

This is the true meaning of covenant –– that ancient Hebrew

notion, taken up by Judaism, Christianity and Islam, and is

now shared, in principle, around the globe, in various dilutedsecular

and still-distorted religious forms.

SHUTTERSTOCK

90 2019 | OUR WORLD

True religion must arise! True religions – lots of them –

must arise strong, powerful, undaunted and unrelenting. True

religions – regardless of their differing cultural heritage – must

be reborn like a phoenix from its ashes. True religions must

begin to fully, unabashedly, co-operate with each other. We

must recognize our humanity first and secondly our formaldifferences.

We must truly form an alliance, a powerful

multi-faceted spiritual vector that can direct and correct

the excesses of society, infected by a now popular but false

religion: secular-ism! Empty-pragmatism!

To accomplish this requires two vanguards:

First, outwardly: The religions of the world must join

together and stop just “licking our wounds”, singing kumbaya,

embarrassed that our past ignorance, cruelties, superstitions

and divisiveness cleared the way for our increasingly vapid

general-secular society, our “truth-competitor”. We must

come together, with pride. We must re-package and re-deliver

a God-based value-system that can be shared, co-promoted

and pragmatically-implemented. We must do this in a way

that is really earthly, not just pie-in-the-sky “theological”.

Society arose from

religion and religion

is expressed in and

though society.

Society and religion

are essentially one!

To separate them is a

false.

Second, inwardly: True religion must initiate and ignite a

powerful spiritual awakening! Only True religion can unveil

the spiritual potential within each and every religious-culture,

within each and every society, secular or spiritual. Only

True religion can bring this spiritual awakening to each and

every human soul, and translate this into truth-full societies,

societies operating according to the Truth.

Current society generally educates people just for labor

and economic advantage. It is up to True religion to educate

people for moral and spiritual advantage. True religion must

culture minds, hearts and spirits.

True religion must supply the soul-force to counterbalance

the secular-force.

Sadly, there is a paucity of clergy who have actually

awakened their spiritual gifts. If they have done so, oftentimes,

they have withdrawn from society, hiding in a cloister of some

kind, perhaps just a nose buried in a book. In their seminaries,

they must learn how to open up the spiritual acumen of their

students. They must learn how to truly satisfy the spiritualhunger

for an authentic, covenantal experience of God.

Spiritual teachers must go forth and pragmatically,

realistically demonstrate how to apply spiritual knowledge

to real human everyday life, i.e. “society”. And, frankly,

those still-remaining religions that remain contaminated

with obsessive-compulsive disorders and fixed-ideational

systems, oftentimes contaminated by malignant narcissism

and violence, must seek psychiatric help.

What I’m calling for here is nothing less than a new Age of

Enlightenment in this world, spearheaded by True religion.

This is the so-called “role of religion in society”, that I’ve been

asked to comment on here.

True Religion and a truth-full society are essentially one

and the same (the same?). Any separation is incomplete, if

not artificial.

Religion and society are two hands. They must come

together. Their fingers were designed to inter-lock.

Together, they form a single prayer!

Rabbi Michael Shevack is the founder of The Alliance for Enlightened Judaism (enlightenedjudaism.org). The author/co-author of 5 books, he has taught Spirituality

and Comparative Religion in the Department of Social Welfare at the State University of New York (Stony Brook), and Business Spirituality at the Iacocca Institute for

Global Entrepreneurship at Lehigh University. Currently, he is Social Responsibility Officer for the Patton Foundation in the U.S. and an advisor to the Patton Alliance

in Europe. A consultant to numerous religions, non-profits and executives, prior to his ordination, he was an award-winning advertising creative director. The winner

of the Cannes Lion for his work on Apple computers, Shevack wrote “Gillette. The Best A Man Can Get”; the campaign is still running in 120 countries around the world.


Three negative Developments endangering

Freedom of Religion and Belief

By Archbishop Thomas Schirrmacher

Destroyed place by bombs thrown during the war in Mosul. Iraq, Ancient Mosul (Nineveh). March 24, 2019SHUTTERSTOCK

I

would like to name three negative developments, which are

increasingly limiting religious freedom around the globe and

even in Europe.

1. Fundamentalism

In what is undisputedly the first place – especially when it

comes to humans killed because of the religion or belief they

belong to - one finds fundamentalism (often also called religious

extremism), in particular violent fundamentalist movements in

Islam, Hinduism (above all in India), and in Buddhism (above

all in Sri Lanka). The term fun-damentalism no longer means a

certain conservative view of the Holy Scriptures and the vague

meaning which is used and propagated in many areas of the

media. The well-established term fundamentalism found in

academic sociology of religion does not refer to any movement

that makes a truth claim. In that case, there would almost only

be fun-damentalists in the world outside the West, and even a

person with a clear atheistic belief would be a fundamentalist.

Instead, fundamentalism means wanting “to push through a

truth claim by force” and in particular has been coined since

1979, when Aya-tollah Khomeini forced his claim to truth upon

all people and has forced that claim to the present day.

An individual who holds something to be absolutely right

or wrong is not dangerous due to that fact. It only becomes a

problem for the society when he developed the idea that he

may force others to believe the same thing and do the same

thing, and that the entire society has to function the way he

considers to be right. And it is this sort of fundamentalism

92 2019 | OUR WORLD


which has appeared in various world religions

and which is responsible for the great number of

religious martyrs and for the victims representing

religions and non-religious world-views.

The main culprits are predominantly not

governments or people groups. Rather, it is

above all violent, fundamentalist movements,

which in most cases fight against the governments

of their countries of origin.

In addition to its direct influence,

fundamentalism has set an additional devastating

development into motion. This is due to the fact

that, precisely in heavily populated countries

such as India, Indonesia, and Nigeria, in which

the great world religions used to live together

reasonably well in peace, fundamentalism stirs

up unrest and fuels violence, as in the case of

Hinduism in India or has often been the case with

Islam in Indonesia. If relevant state authorities

do not uncompromisingly move against it, a

small minority within the religion – the number

of such supporters of fundamentalism mostly

ranges between 1 % and 5 % - can destabilize

entire countries and can replace what has been

a peaceful relationship among many millions of

people with tension.

2. Religious Nationalism

Through globalization and the shifting of

masses of people around the world, there

are more and more countries where it is very

difficult to maintain a sense of nationalism on

common ancestry, common history, common

language, or similar things. There are more and

more countries and parties, which, in order to

salvage nationalism or in order to gather the

population behind them, have reached for the

‘religion’ card. A Turk is a Muslim, an inhabitant

of Sri Lanka is Buddhist, an Indian is Hindu, and

of late a Hungarian is best a Christian.

Religious Nationalism is not the

fundamentalist variation that directly advocates

violence. However, religious nationalism

nevertheless is growing around the world,

and belonging to a country is again often

determined according to the majority religion.

Re-ligious nationalism is also a great danger in

the ‘Arabellion’ occurring in Arab countries. The

diverse Arab societies do not actually coalesce

anything into one anymore. They are completely

disjointed. That is why the following call is not

unheard: “The only future that is possible for the

country is one that is under the religious flag.” In

the process, however, all religious minorities and

OUR WORLD | 2019

Archbishop

Thomas

Schirrmacher

Director of

International

Institute for Religious

Freedom- Associate

Secretary General for

Theological Concerns

of World Evangelical

Alliance. President of

International Society

for Human Rights

Instead, fundamentalism

means wanting “to push

through a truth claim by

force” and in particular

has been coined since

1979, when Ayatollah

Khomeini forced his

claim to truth upon all

people and has forced

that claim to the present

day.

non-Muslims are ostracized or become second

class citizens.

3. Limitations on religious freedom due

to obligatory registration

The third global development to mention

is the limitation on religious freedom due to

obligatory registration. We have experienced

an increasing problem in many coun-tries

around the world due to the fact that there

are increasingly complex registration processes

to deal with. It is above all the small religious

communities which are under perpetual

suspicion of being remotely controlled from

outside the country, of conduct-ing money

laundering, or of being a danger to the internal

peace of the country. In part, laws have been

passed which apply to everyone, and that

leads to a growing of religious communities

around the world suddenly landing in the

realm of illegality. The conse-quences are

frequently that they are not allowed to own or

lease buildings, that they are not able to offer

theological training, that they have difficulty

entering certain professions, are not able to

work for the state, cannot study, and the like.

Fortunately, the last and the present Special

Rapporteurs on freedom of religion or belief

for the United Nations have made the topic of

registration a focal point for his activities.

93


Inter-Religious Dialogue

between challenges and realities

By Albert GUIGUI

94 2019 | OUR WORLD


By way of introduction, let me

quote this verse from Genesis 1 :

Cain talked with Abel his brother:

and it came to pass, when they were

“And

in the field, that Cain rose up against

Abel his brother, and slew him.”

What does Cain say to Abel? The text tells us

nothing about their dialogue. Maybe they didn’t

say anything to each other. And this is precisely

the drama of humankind. This silence harbours

the source of all wars. Lack of communication is

the primary source of every conflict. As long as

the warring parties can engage in talks around a

table, and even if this dialogue is a difficult one,

arms are silent. As soon as dialogue ceases, arms

do the talking.

SHUTTERSTOCK

Is there a way to remedy this situation?

We must talk. Engage in dialogue.

What makes up a true dialogue that can lead to

mutual understanding?

Entering into dialogue with the other means to

get to know and recognize him, to acknowledge

his full responsibility and to welcome him as a

completion of ourselves rather than seeing in him

as an opponent, a competitor or an enemy. In such

circumstances, dialogue becomes a shared richness

without any of the parties having to renounce his

own identity or heritage. There can be no doubt

that fanaticism in all its forms can be applied -in

the name of God- into religion, nation, creed, land,

ethnicity and language as well as inthe name of

social and cultural belonging it can be characterized

as the enemy of dialogue.

Thus, what kills religions is fanaticism, and it

is therefore important to distinguish between a

fanatic and a religious person.

The believer wants to serve God whereas the

fanatic puts God at his own service.

The believer worships God whereas the fanatic

only worships himself under the delusion of

worshiping God.

The believer listens to God’s word whereas the

fanatic alters it.

Rabbi Albert

Guigui

Chief Rabbi of

Brussels. Permanent

representative of

the Conference of

European Rabbis at

the European Union.

OUR WORLD | 2019

95


The believer raises to God’s level and to that

of divine love whereas the fanatic lowers God

down to his own level. Fanaticism is a world of

simultaneous rejection of both God and man.

It is therefore our duty to bring down the

barriers that separate men so that they can meet

and discuss, unite and appreciate each other. This

knowledges implies accepting the divergences that

lead each of us to his own way. We must admit

the Other as he is, not as we wish he were. This

is what Emmanuel Levinas calls « the Epiphany of

the Other ».

Dialogue and commitment

What must we do so that this dialogue will bear

fruit?

This dialogue should not be the preserve of an

elite. It must reach the masses and touch them.

It is the only efficient way for all of us to confront

the threat of hate -as expressed, for example,

through racism and antisemitism- that so many

human groups are facing.

This dialogue must be built on lifelong

education, and on a correct understanding of

other peoples’ religion. As clerics, it is our duty

to build bridges between different creeds and

principles. Through our words, through our acts,

we must bring together and not exclude; we must

show love -and not hate-; we must foster fraternity

between people. Unity in diversity - this must be

the aim of the dialogue. This is the only way that

can lead to a renewed solidarity, as our roots

should be transformed to common roots. We

can all identify with Abraham’s faith. Our religions,

our ethics, our ways of life are established on a

fundamental tenet : the love of our neighbour.

But what do we notice nowadays? An extremely

preoccupying rise of racism and antisemitism

through the development of far-right movements

that are established throughout Europe. This

problem is also not confined to a specific European

region. No, it concerns Europe as a whole.

We must fight together and more efficiently

social injustice and prejudice, we must promote a

more humanitarian and generous world, because

our various religions demand that we practice

community building, respect the autonomy of the

individual and personal responsibility, protect the

weak, condemn all forms of racism and proclaim

This silence harbours the

source of all wars. Lack of

communication is the primary

source of every conflict. As

long as the warring parties

can engage in talks around

a table, and even if this

dialogue is a difficult one,

arms are silent.

the primacy of man who is an image of God.

A pictural masterpiece

The word ‘shalom’ -which means peace- is

derived from the verb ‘lehashlim’, which means

‘to mutually complement’.

According to our sages, true peace can only

be found in mutual complementarity. True peace

means reaching out towards the other so as to

live in harmony.

A pictorial masterpiece consisting of just one

colour represents nothing. What makes a picture

beautiful is the harmony of the colours that

constitute it. Each of us must see himself as the

sketch of a giant painting. Every one of us must

start creating the most beautiful work of art, the

painting in front of which the eyes of all mankind

converge, the very painting where all colours and

all nuances are to be found and exist in harmony.

A long road lies ahead of us. But as it is said in

the Sayings of the Fathers: « It is not your duty to

finish the work, but neither are you free to desist

from it. »

Gn. IV, 8.

96 2019 | OUR WORLD

TACKLING THE GROWING THREAT

OF EXTREMIST IDEOLOGIES

www.counterextremism.com

MEDICAL CARE

WHERE IT’S NEEDED MOST

INDEPENDENT. NEUTRAL. IMPARTIAL.

Niger, 2018. © MSF/Laurence Hoenig

www.msf.org

Fearless

fear·less | ˈfir-ləs

NEW EUROPE

EUR 10

FAITH & FREEDOM OF BELIEF-2019

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?