Interfaith Dialogue: Assessing Theories of Change

Abstract

Interfaith dialogue garnered considerable positive attention and derision after September 11, 2001. This article critically examines expectations of interfaith dialogue by clarifying explicit and implicit suppositions of how and why things will change because of dialogue. Three broad approaches to dialogue are identified: theological, political, and peacebuilding. Hypotheses about change within each approach are identified and explored through case examples. The article argues that while interfaith dialogue can contribute to personal, relational, and structural change, each of the three approaches does not do so equally. The article concludes that proactive reflection on theories of change within dialogue is necessary for interfaith dialogue to achieve its potential to build peace.

“This Is a Head, Hearts, and Hands Enterprise”: Adult Learning in Interfaith Dialogue

“…Theoretical literature on interfaith dialogue considers the value and necessity of interfaith dialogue (Patel, 2013; Pons-de Wit, Versteeg, & Roeland, 2015; Swidler, 2013, 2014), the purposes of interfaith dialogue (Edelmayer, 2013; Gopin, 2002; Neufeldt, 2011), guidelines for interfaith engagement (Avakian, 2015; Gabriel, 2010; Swidler, 2006), factors that affect the process and outcomes of interfaith dialogue (Brown, 2013; Driskill & Gribas, 2013; Properzi, 2011), desired outcomes of interfaith dialogue (Charaniya & Walsh, 2004; Fisher, 2014; Fletcher, 2007), approaches to interfaith learning (Garber, 2015; Keaten & Soukup, 2009; Swidler, 2006; Takim, 2004), and challenges facing interfaith dialogue (Brown, 2013; Lee, 1991; Neufeldt, 2011; Siddiqui, 1998; Zia-ul-Haq, 2014). Empirical literature examining the process and effects of interfaith dialogue, either from the perspective of the participant(s) or of the facilitator(s), is less common.…”

Islam and Muslims as Elephants in the Interfaith Room: <i>Frame governance of dialogue and de-radicalisation</i>

“…Importantly, through these processes, group as well as individual subjectivities become securitised (ibid.). Thus, 'banal securitization of Islam' refers to the way in which Muslim citizens, in Norway and beyond, are, on a daily basis, rendered as potentially suspicious by being demarcated and stigmatised (Morey & Yaqin 2011). As I shall return to in the following, the media and policy framings play a significant part in these presumptions crosscutting the seminar.…”

Religious Peacemakers on the International Scene: Hopes and Motivations

“…This kind of dialogue may serve as a preparatory stage before more pragmatic and political talks can take place. Here we are concerned with interreligious dialogues in peace processes, and what Neufeldt (2011) refers to as 'political dialogue,' which is built on the underlying assumption that these dialogues will enhance mutual understanding, increase respect and improve relations among religious leaders, and translate into better interreligious relations on the ground. This is also why Muhammad Khatami, former president of Iran, as well as Kjell Magne Bondevik, former Norwegian prime minister, prefer dialogues, which also include politicians.…”