Religions for Peace or Religions of Peace? Some Reflections on the Trends in the Development of Interreligious Dialogue

Today, in the increasingly entangled, interdependent, and digital world, religion is still of utmost importance, and for some societies around the world its role is critical. The new reality poses novel challenges: issues we face today call for the investigation into current trends in the dialogue of religions. In this way, followers of various religions that would be willing to cooperate to solve major problems of religious diversity would have reference points to compare themselves with. Concerning the goals and objectives of social development, scientific analysis needs to study conceptual foundations and the most effective strategies for interreligious dialogue and communication. To that end, a case study of interreligious contacts and the newest trends serves this objective best. The article is devoted to studying the experience of a global interreligious dialogue, precisely the so-called religion of peace phenomenon with an emphasis on peace and prosperity. One of the most common practices of the religion of peace is joint prayers of members of different religions has entered the agenda of international forums on religion. An important source of information for the study was the author's first-hand experience of participating in interreligious events, including the 10th Assembly of the largest interreligious organization Religions for Peace (Lindau, Germany, 2019). Four main types of interreligious dialogue are described — polemical, cognitive, peacemaking, and partnership. It is noted that partnership and peace-making types dominate modern intercultural dialogue: helping the underprivileged, maintaining moral values and justice, integrating migrants, protecting the environment, etc. At the same time, the significance of polemical and cognitive (theological) types fades. Thus, the author concludes that intercultural dialogue is becoming a tool for increasingly peaceful coexistence of religions as social institutions, and therefore increases their positive social influence. 

1. Appleby, R. S. (2015) ‘Religious Violence: The Strong, the Weak, and the Pathological’, in The Oxford Handbook of Religion, Conflict, and Peacebuilding. Oxford: Oxford University Press, pp. 32–58. https://doi.org/10.1093/oxfordhb/9780199731640.013.0002

2. Avdeyeva, I. A. (2013) ‘Prospects of Global Ethos’, Social-economic phenomena and processes, (7), pp. 164–167. (In Russian).

3. Barua, A. (2015) ‘Hick and Radhakrishnan on Religious Diversity: Back to the Kantian Noumenon’, Sophia, 54(2), pp. 181–200. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11841-015-0459-z

4. de Béthune OSB, P. (2013) ‘Monastic Inter-Religious Dialogue’, in The Wiley‐Blackwell Companion to Inter-Religious Dialogue. Chichester: Wiley Blackwell, pp. 34–50. https://doi.org/10.1002/9781118529911.ch3

5. Çatalbaş, R. and Çetinkaya, K. (2015) ‘Interreligious dialogue in the views of Turkish historians of religions’, HTS Teologiese Studies / Theological Studies, 71(3), p. a2896. https://doi.org/10.4102/hts.v71i3.2896

6. Chaturvedi, V. (2016) ‘Philosophical Implications of Religious Pluralism’, Journal of Indian Council of Philosophical Research, 33(1), pp. 43–59. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40961-015-0040-8

7. Clooney, F. X. S. J. (2013) ‘Comparative Theology and Inter-Religious Dialogue’, in The Wiley-Blackwell Companion to Inter-Religious Dialogue. Chichester: Wiley Blackwell, pp. 51–63. https://doi.org/10.1002/9781118529911.ch4

8. Guinovart-Pedescoll, J.-O. (2021) ‘When Fear becomes Peace’, in Talking Dialogue. Berlin; Boston: De Gruyter, pp. 203–230. https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110529173-008

9. Hartman, L. (2018) That All May Flourish: Comparative Religious Environmental Ethics. Vol. 1. New York: Oxford University Press. https://doi.org/10.1093/oso/9780190456023.001.0001

10. Kim, S. C. (2014) ‘How could we get over the monotheistic paradigm for the interreligious dialogue?’, Journal of Interreligious Studies, (13), pp. 20–33.

11. Knitter, P. F. (1995) One earth many religions: multifaith dialogue and global responsibility. Maryknoll, N.Y.: Orbis Books.

12. Knitter, P. F. (2013) ‘Inter-Religious Dialogue and Social Action’, in The Wiley‐Blackwell Companion to Inter-Religious Dialogue. Chichester: Wiley Blackwell, pp. 133–148. https://doi.org/10.1002/9781118529911.ch9

13. Ladouceur, P. (2017) ‘Religious Diversity in Modern Orthodox Thought’, Religions, 8(5), p. 77. https://doi.org/10.3390/rel8050077

14. Melnik, S. (2018) ‘A Typology of Interreligious Dialogue: Analysis of Existing Approaches’, State Religion and Church in Russia and Worldwide, 36(4), pp. 87–118. (In Russian). https://doi.org/10.22394/2073-7203-2018-36-4-87-118

15. Melnik, S. (2021) ‘Periodization of the history of interreligious dialogue at the modern stage’, St.Tikhons’ University Review, 96, pp. 95–118. (In Russian). https://doi.org/10.15382/sturI202196.95-118

16. Melnik, S. V. (2020) ‘Classification of Types of Interreligious Dialogue’, Communicology, 8(2), pp. 25–51. (In Russian). https://doi.org/10.21453/2311-3065-2020-8-2-25-51

17. Moyaert, M. (2013) ‘Interreligious Dialogue’, in Understanding Inter-religious Relations. Oxford: Oxford University press, pp. 193–217.

18. Olyan, S. M. (2019) Violent Rituals of the Hebrew Bible. Oxford: Oxford University Press. https://doi.org/10.1093/oso/9780190681906.001.0001

19. Orton, A. (2016) ‘Interfaith dialogue: seven key questions for theory, policy and practice’, Religion, State and Society, 44(4), pp. 349–365. https://doi.org/10.1080/09637494.2016.1242886

20. Palmer, C., McShane, K. and Sandler, R. (2014) ‘Environmental Ethics’, Annual Review of Environment and Resources, 39(1), pp. 419–442. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-environ-121112-094434

21. Rodionov, M. A. (2003) Islam klassicheskiy [Islam Classical]. Saint Petersburg: Azbuka-klassika Publ.; Peterburgskoye Vostokovedeniye. (In Russian).

22. Schalkwyk, A. van (2013) ‘A place where we all stand together: The new creation story as opportunity and imperative for interreligious dialogue’, Theology, 116(1), pp. 43–46. https://doi.org/10.1177/0040571X12461230

23. Schweitzer, A. (1992) Blagogoveniye pered zhizn’yu [Ehrfurcht vor dem Leben]. Moscow: Progress Publ. (In Russian).

24. Shokhin, V. K. (2004) ‘Hans Kung and Global Ethos’, Voprosy Filosofii, (10), pp. 65–73. (In Russian).

25. Swamy, M. (2019) ‘Revisiting the Antecedents of Interreligious Dialogue’, The Ecumenical Review, 71(5), pp. 719–738. https://doi.org/10.1111/erev.12475

26. Swidler, L. (2015) ‘The “Dialogue of Civilizations” at the Tipping Point: The “Dialogosphere”’, Journal of Ecumenical Studies, 50(1), pp. 3–17. https://doi.org/10.1353/ecu.2015.0004

27. Swidler, L. and Küng, H. (2021) ‘How the Idea of a “Global Ethic” Arose—And a Catholic Christian’s Reading of the Qur’ānic Basis for It’, Journal of Ecumenical Studies, 56(2), pp. 275–299. https://doi.org/10.1353/ecu.2021.0018