Peace, in the current historical moment in Asia also, has become precarious, fragile and threatened more than ever. Deep longing for peace is expressed by the central teachings of every religion in the world; however, religion itself is instrumentalized and abused to create conflicts, spread violence and wage wars. Not only have we not given peace a chance, but apparently efforts are intentionally and systematically multiplied to create terror of piecemeal wars with the help of religions. On the one hand, the whole human family is becoming more conscious of its oneness but on the other hand, walls are being built by ethnic, racial, religious, nationalist and elite groups.
Peace is an enterprise of justice and results from that harmony built into human society. Peace is never attained once and for all, but must be built up ceaselessly. Indiscriminate piling up of destructive weapons invite warmongers to continue wars or war like situations. Religions need to be ever more together to face this predicament, not in the spirit of conspiracy, but as integral part of society. (Unfortunately, it is observed that religions seem to be one against the other; e.g., where a religion enjoys a majority population there the other religions are oppressed).
Peace is the fruit of many factors as pointed out by themes which Pontiffs have chosen for their messages on the occasion of the World Day of Peace: e.g., justice, forgiveness, truth, selfless service, respect for freedom, transformation of heart, development and solidarity, respect for minorities, care for common home (protecting creation), respect for the conscience of every person, strengthening the family as the cell of society and of the human family, rightful place of women in society, attention to the rights of children, respect for human rights, respect for cultures for a civilization of love and peace, a permanent commitment to peace, respect for the dignity of every human person, fighting poverty, religious freedom, human fraternity as path to peace, overcoming indifference and mediocrity, nonviolence: a style of politics for peace, etc.
“Religion is increasingly at the fore in our world today, though at times in opposite ways. While many religious believers are committed to promoting peace, there are those who exploit religion to justify their acts of violence and hatred. We see healing and reconciliation offered to victims of violence, but also attempts to erase every trace of memory of the ‘other’; there is the emergence of global religious cooperation, but also politicization of religion; and there is an awareness of endemic poverty and world hunger, yet the deplorable arms race continues. This situation also in Asia requires a call to non-violence, a rejection of violence in all its forms” (as quoted in article by Archbishop Felix Machado in Building a Culture of Compassion, by Cardinal Miguel Angelo Ayuso, Urbaniana University Press, Rome, 2020).
Reflecting on communal violence which takes place in many Asian countries I would single out the lop-sided emphasis placed on one’s religious identity as its main cause. I begin with a question Amartya Sen asks because, perplexed by his own experience, he questions: “why should people who have lived together peaceably, suddenly turn on one another in violence that cost hundreds of thousands of lives? Do religious believers have only one identity that of his religious community? Do not religious believers live multiple identities at the same time that he or she continues to live in his or her religious community? Can we be divided up simplistically with a single identity, namely, that of our belonging to a religious community? Dr Sen concludes that this kind of division is leading humanity to a miniaturization where each one is locked up in tight little boxes from which they emerge only to attack one another.
Pope Francis clarifies the meaning of keeping balance between ‘rooted in one’s own identity and open to others in order to avoid the heresy of relativism and fundamentalism’. Asia is known for encountering one another across religious boundaries. In our days, is Asia losing its characteristic? If the answer is yes, then dialogue among religions will be reduced only to words, when it is action that reveals the true practice of dialogue. Religious identity, according to Pope Francis, has to be properly formed identity lest interreligious dialogue becomes, not just fruitless but harmful exercise. So, culture of encounter or culture of friendship needs to be promoted keeping before us the goal of peaceful society and world.
The Challenge of Changing Identities in Asia: With an epochal change taking place on Asian continent, mainly because of the competitive race for economic supremacy, one cannot overlook that religious beliefs are affected. This epochal change also affects beliefs people hold, behaviour they exhibit and their membership within multiple intersecting communities. Isn’t it a historical fact that every religion is open to pluralism, dialogue and assimilation? But I submit that isolation of any religion in a multi-religious society is a dangerous turn. Isn’t the “goal of dialogue to establish friendship, peace and harmony, and to share spiritual and moral values and experiences in a spirit of truth and love?” (Fratelli Tutti, n. 271).
Asians enter into interreligious relations knowing that each religion is a world in and of itself. Inter-religious relations are best developed in a context of openness to other believers, a willingness to listen and the desire to respect and understand others in their differences” (Ecclesia in Asia, n. 31). “In a world so torn apart by rivalry, anger, and hatred, we have the privileged vocation to be living signs of a love that can bridge all divisions and heal all wounds” (Henri Nouwen). Dialogue among religions imposes itself as a necessity for peace. Religions of themselves cannot be the cause of conflicts, as it has been emphasized in XX century, because religions intrinsically carry a message of peace. In fact, religions have been always advocating in Asia that conflicts are born in the hearts of men and women and religions have inspired believers to aspire for peace. However, the phenomenon of globalization, having often become neocolonialism and craze for consumerism, has been tempting believers to withdraw into individualism.
Believers in Asia have become aware that dialogue among religions cannot become a pretext to proselytise because dialogue is not undertaken for tactical reasons; honesty is reclaimed and freedom of all is demanded. Dialogue has been a trustworthy exercise where an interlocutor in dialogue awaits response from the partner. The belief of the of the other is respected because faith is accepted as gift of God. Truth centred dialogue invites conversion (metanoia) but conversion is not the aim of dialogue, misunderstood in the sense that one’s religion is changed. In fact, no one converts to any religion; we all convert to God alone. In dialogue all are invited to turn to God alone according to one’s own religious tradition. Let us not forget St Paul VI, who during the time of his visit to Bombay, India, declared: the conducive environment for dialogue is mutual friendship. Truth sought after in dialogue is deepened in each dialoguing partner. No one can claim to possess it as his or her private property.
Yet throughout Asian societies and the world we sadly see increasing polarization and division as a result of hatred. It is urgent to seek meaningful dialogue in view of solutions that prioritize the well-being and future of all the citizens, especially those who are suffering and feel abandoned due to conflicts, sentiments of hatred, and acts of violence. We, especially the religious leaders gathered here, pray for this audacity of peace!