Response paper to Interfaith Peacebuilding (Peace and Violence in Religion )

Interfaith peacebuilding is possible everywhere, but it will be effective only with making a link between religious teaching about peace and locality such as value, history and culture for reaching the core aim: free from physical and psychological oppression.

Making a link between religious teaching and locality is tricky. The basic need of this effort is how to dig our depth understanding about peace not exclusively only for their adherent, but also inclusively for broader community from different religion, culture or tribe. After that, we can make a bridge to connect every religion for committing peace as their daily activity. The locality plays important role in this phase because the goal peacebuilding always depends on the situation and problem there. The locality drives how interfaith peacebuilding should be directed, what are the areas they can solve and finally how to make better life in that area.

Interfaith peacebuilding in Papua and Kaduna, Nigeria gives the clear explanation about it. The first effort is how religious teaching can be seen as peace teaching not only for their followers but also for whole people in the world with different religion, races or tribe. In Papua, Christian defines peace as divine call; Islam gives the concept of Islam rahmatan lil ‘alamien, which embraces all of people with same or different religion; Hindu believes that peace is a root of every human life of happiness. In Kaduna, both of Muslim and Christian leader finally recognized that they have a call for making peace on their own land after meeting together at State House.

After making one understanding about peace, the real challenge has existed in front of them from locality side. This locality challenge contains theological, economical and socio-political treatments. The first, theological treatments arose because actors who concern for interfaith peacebuilding must face the reality that not all of their adherents are ready for interfaith peacebuilding. It is an internal effort how to convince their brother and sister by theological reason to support and be active in peacebuilding together with others from different religion.

The second, economical challenge exists when their institution has no money or support for their effort. Peacebuilding needs many supporting system such as money and facilities for funding and running their daily activities. The problem in Kaduna, Nigeria is so clear that they need many supports from others, including from state or overseas institutions. There is no doubt that the save condition from this treatments will guarantee and increase the power of their effort.

The third, socio and political treatments rise as rational consequences for every peacebuilding’s effort. The aim for interfaith peacebuilding is not only a condition which is absence from violence, but also free from physical and psychological oppression. It is more political when they have to decide their position vis a vis state. According the problem in Papua, the violence is not only between each religion, but also between people and state. Many policies from state discriminate and marginalize the indigenous Papuan people. It affects many socio and political problems. Those conditions require the alignments of interfaith peacebuilding actor to the society without being trapped into political issue such as the independence of Papua.

 Interfaith peacebuilding has a bright future as a powerful group for making peace wherever and whenever. It will be successful when they can bridge the internal understanding about their religious teaching as one understanding, and also capable to connect their movement with locality sides they have.