Back to Supporting Peacemaking

Lion and Lamb
The Role of U.S. Regional and Local Religious Bodies in Supporting Peacemaking Efforts in Other Countries

Kathleen S. Hurty

Table of Contents

A vision without a task is but a dream, a task without a vision is drudgery, a vision with a task is the hope of the world. --Church Inscription, Sussex, England, 1730

I have to cast my lot with those who age after age, perversely, with no extraordinary power, reconstitute the world. --Adrienne Rich

While much has been made of religion as a source of international conflict, considerably less attention has been given to religion as a source of international peacemaking. --David Smock

Introduction
 The first draft of this paper was prepared for the Consultation “The Role of U.S. Regional and Local Religious Bodies in Supporting Peacemaking Efforts in Particular Countries” that was held at the Washington Retreat House in Washington, DC on June 16, 2004, sponsored by the Churches’ Center for Theology and Public Policy and the United State Institute of Peace. The current edition of this paper was greatly influenced by the 65 people who attended that Consultation.

Faith-based efforts at peacemaking are, for the most part, untold stories. The peacemakers draw inspiration from religious visions of the peaceable kingdom and engage themselves in tasks of reconciliation and the fostering of hope. The unheralded commitment of religious people to reconstitute the world in peaceful non-violent ways is quite astounding, yet these stories do not make headlines in the international media or local press. The United States, involved with others in global warfare, often chooses to focus on military approaches to resolution of conflict, giving short shrift to nonviolent efforts. As David Smock of the United States Institute of Peace (USIP) suggests in an article in the Harvard International Review:

While the religious causes of conflict receive plenty of public attention, the role of religious peacemakers tends to be neglected. Most faiths call on their members to be peacemakers, and increasing numbers of religious organizations are identifying opportunities to promote peace, even in situations where religion contributes to conflict. Hopefully, through increased public recognition and support and through the development of more effective peacemaking strategies, religious organizations can start to reach their full potential as international peacemakers.(1)

Though efforts by U.S. local, regional and national faith-based bodies to support peacemaking in particular countries are often hidden, faith-stimulated visions to be peacemakers in a violence prone world exist—and imaginative work is being done. This paper and the other publications that have been produced in this second stage of the “Supporting Peacemaking” process seek to redress, in a modest way, such lack of attention.

The links between poetry and peacemaking may seem thin, fragile. Yet much can be said in favor of the graceful beauty and imaginative style of poetic language and poetic actions of peacemakers. As I have worked on the research for this paper I have been struck by the commitment, passion and emotional energy of those from faith-based communities throughout the United States and elsewhere engaged in international efforts to transform conflict, bring healing in the face of trauma, teach reconciliation, and work for peace with justice. I have been amazed by the delight of developing relationships through children’s concrete exchanges. I have been horrified by the horrendous reliance on war by nations and tribes and the dark stories of hopelessness in the face of abusive power. Yet, the poetry of engagement for peaceful solutions shelters emotional sincerity, portrays intensity of feeling, and often leads to new and profound insights and concrete actions.

In an artistic theological treatise Walter Brueggemann argues for “poetry in a prose-flattened world.” He asks his readers to consider preaching as “a poetic construal of an alternative world.” Poetry is powerful, he believes, because it is “shattering, evocative speech that breaks fixed conclusions and presses us always toward new, dangerous, imaginative possibilities.”(2)

We did not gather to this Consultation as preachers (though some are) but as peacemakers, yet Brueggemann catches us in his grasp. We often speak and write in gray and somber prose – a necessary effort in our over-rationalized public world of policy, politics and persuasion. But, to be honest, as religious leaders we also yearn for a way to give powerful scripturally authentic poetic speech to the work of peacemaking – whether the basis is Hebrew scripture, Christian gospel, and/or Qur’an.

Storytelling is one form of the poetry we are looking for—in the visionary narratives of faith-based peacemaking collected here, and the tasks they challenge us to consider, we will find, as Brueggemann suggests, “new, dangerous, imaginative possibilities” that may, in fact, begin to change the world. Faith-based peacemakers are a creative risk-taking lot. They are motivated by religious belief, by shared commitments, by relationships built over time, by crisis and the need for caring, and/or by a myriad of imaginative God-inspired visions of peace. They seek alternative ways of reducing conflict, creative ways of building just and peaceable communities, strategic ways of shaping policy towards peace in collaboration with others, effective ways of teaching peacemaking to children and adults. They listen, work, pray, envision, plan, share, trust, build, write, cajole, persuade, laugh, cry – and make a difference! Peacemaking is not for the unimaginative – it calls on the best each has to offer if we are going to construct an alternative world. It is, in actuality, the social construction of that alternative world that is the common task of faith-based peacemakers—and the stories need to be told, analyzed, and where possible, replicated.

In this work we have been influenced by John Paul Lederach’s definition of peacebuilding:
A comprehensive concept that encompasses, generates, and sustains the full array of processes, approaches and stages needed to transform conflict toward more sustainable, peaceful relationships. The term thus involves a wide range of activities and functions that both precede and follow formal peace accords.

Metaphorically, peace is seen not merely as a stage in time or a condition. It is a dynamic social construct. Such a conceptualization requires a process of building, involving investment and materials, architectural design and coordination of labor, laying of a foundation, and detailed finish work, as well as continuing maintenance. It focuses on the restoration and rebuilding of relationships.

The framework must address and engage the relational aspects of reconciliation as the central component of peacemaking. Reconciliation is the place where truth, justice, mercy, and peace come together.(3)

Our collaborative work at this Consultation was an opportunity to draw together the stories, poems, insights, worries, conflicts, visions, tasks and creativity that describe and illustrate reconciliation work being done through regional and local faith-based support for international peacemaking. Some of the work is generated from locally based groups; other work grows out of individual or group responses to national efforts or crying needs overseas, often motivated from their faith perspective, and frequently by an invitation from those who are caught in conflict in other countries. These are the hidden narratives we seek.

The research methods employed in preparation of this paper included innumerable phone calls, e-mail exchanges and conversations with persons in the United States engaged in peacemaking from a faith perspective. Beginning with a list of contacts from the planning committee, each contact led to more. I scanned the collected notes for emergent themes of support. In addition, web research offered detailed information on many of these projects as well as links to other peacemaking work. A brief and selective review of peacemaking literature also provided excellent resource material.

Working with the planning committee for this Consultation, we developed an initial list of Categories of Support and together revised this list as we learned more about the work being done by local and regional religious groups throughout the United States. The Consultation itself further revised the list. Individuals or small groups out of a faith perspective initiated some projects, and some became linked with larger religious efforts, regionally or nationally, over time. There was noticeable support of national level denominational projects by local entities – i.e., individuals, congregations, college level or judicatory-based efforts that connected to international partners through national efforts. The work of U.S. based local and regional ecumenical organizations in relation to peacemaking was more directly focused on the development of ecumenical theological resources to counter war and violence as well as the development of deeper and more effective interreligious understandings with the practical results of shaping conversations and policy in the U.S. about conflictive global affairs.

In this paper I will draw on the research and collaborative efforts with the planning committee for this Consultation to:

  • identify categories of faith-based support
  • share a range of illustrative stories from the articulated experiences of local and regional faith-based peacemakers in particular geographic areas, along with brief analyses
  • offer a summary analysis of the work being done, some of the obstacles faced and possibilities for further engagement in faith-based peacemaking for local groups, judicatories, and local and regional ecumenical and interreligious organizations

Categories of Support by Regional and Local Religious Bodies in the United States for International Peacemaking

The purpose of drawing up a list we call Categories of Support is 1) to identify best practices, naming the rich panoply of work that is currently being done by local and regional faith-based entities, and 2) to provide entry points to enlarge the work of peacemaking within the broader interreligious community. Many projects overlap, and most projects included any number of categories. The list should be considered open-ended.

Providing human and financial resources for training and support of peacemaking efforts in other countries

  1. Sending people to a particular country to work with people from that nation in peacemaking efforts
  2. Equipping international students through courses and events in the U.S. to provide leadership to peacemaking in their own or another country
  3. Providing training, curriculum, and other assistance to indigenous peacemaking efforts abroad
  4. Participating in established accompaniment projects
  5. Monitoring elections at the request of indigenous groups
  6. Raising money for particular indigenous peacemaking projects
  7. Encouraging coalition building among groups within a country through meetings, trainings events and relationship building efforts
  8. Opening doors for peacemaking efforts in particular countries with agencies of the U.S. government, media, faith-based organizations, the NGO community and funders
  9. Convening peacemaking leadership from various countries so that they can learn from each other and perhaps find ways to work together
  10. Providing training in fund raising to peacemaking efforts especially enabling these groups to find sustainable funding
  11. Providing information about resource materials that will help peacemaking efforts
  12. Building relationships between organizations in the U.S. and those same kind of organizations in particular countries (e.g., indigenous people organizations, those affected by U.S. drug policy, land use organizations, environmental justice groups, and those working on trade agreements)

Relationship building among people who are in conflict with each other

  1. Bringing people together in the U.S. whose ethnic group or related communities are in conflict in a particular country (e.g., Catholics and Protestants who are from or whose families were from Northern Ireland)
  2. Engaging in interfaith dialogue with people whose religions are in conflict in a particular country (e.g., Christian, Muslims and/or Jews in Israel/Palestine, the Balkans, etc.)

Educating people in the U.S. about the need for support of peacemaking in particular countries and developing relationships between those engaged in peacemaking in particular countries and people of faith in the U.S.

  1. Establishing partnerships between judicatories and religious bodies in the U.S. and peacemaking efforts in particular countries
  2. Sending people to a specific country to learn about the conflict in that nation so that, returning, they can make presentations in the U.S. and enlarge support for peacemaking in that country
  3. Sponsoring events, including worship experiences, on the conflict in a particular country
  4. Assuring press coverage on both the challenges and on the peacemaking efforts to respond to those challenges in particular countries
  5. Be a voice in the U.S. for those engaged in peacemaking in particular countries by preparing opinion pieces and letters-to-the-editor
  6. Crafting denominational, ecumenical and interfaith theological statements about the importance of peacemaking in a particular nation and/or the importance of peacemaking around the world
  7. Creating an e-mail network to provide information to regional and local faith-based groups on peacemaking activities in other countries
  8. Developing curriculum and other educational tools to educate adults in the U.S. about the conflict in a particular nation
  9. Educating children on the conflicts in a particular country by sponsoring events on these topics, preparing curriculum, and offering hands-on projects like preparing school kits
  10. Educating U.S. college and seminary students on the need for peacemaking in particular countries, including educational experiences in that country
  11. Educating people of faith about how U.S. policies contribute to conflict, injustice and brokenness in other countries and how U.S. policies can be influenced or changed
  12. Educating people of faith about how policies on environmental justice, land use, globalization, trade agreements, and our own lifestyle choices affect the peacemaking efforts of people in particular countries

Public education, including public policy advocacy in the U.S. about conflicts and peacemaking opportunities that arise from faith-based peacemaking work in particular countries

  1. Developing and implementing strategies for public education (outside of the religious community) and action on the conflicts in particular countries, including public policy advocacy
  2. Providing information and opportunities to those in the faith community concerned about conflicts in a particular country to share their concerns with their congresspersons and other policy-makers
  3. Arranging for people engaged in peacemaking in other countries to visit congresspersons, editorial boards and other leadership

Laying the Spiritual Foundations for Peacemaking

  1. Praying for those engaged in peacemaking in the U.S. and in countries around the world
  2. Studying the scriptures to learn about the connection between faith and peacemaking and why supporting the peacemaking work of others is so important
  3. Preaching and including in worship the importance of peacemaking to our faiths and the need to support the peacemaking of others
  4. Including the theological basis for peacemaking in seminary curricula as well as skill training in conflict transformation
  5. Educating people of faith on the commitment to peacemaking of other religions
  6. Enabling people of faith to deal with stereotypes they may have of other religions

The following geographic examples illustrate a number of these categories and provide clues to further work that can be done in specific countries.

Regional and Local Faith-Based Support in the United States for Collaborative Peacemaking in Ireland

(In this section, I am deeply indebted to Doug Baker for his generously complete information on the context, history, and religious efforts in Ireland. Debby Vial, Ron Kraybill, and Gerald Powers were very helpful as well.)

The setting is Ireland. The conflict—with roots dating back at least eight hundred years—is a sectarian one in which a mixture of politics and faith distinguishes two main groups of different geographic origins, cultural background, religious heritage, and political allegiances and aspirations. The current period of violent conflict, commonly referred to as “the Troubles,” erupted in the late 1960s. From the outset of “the Troubles” various Christian churches in the United States have looked for ways to contribute positively to their resolution, both because of the gospel imperative of peacemaking and reconciliation they affirm and because of the affinity they feel for Ireland. This is particularly true of Roman Catholic and Presbyterian churches in the U.S., both of which have been significantly shaped by those whose roots were in Ireland.

From the late 1960s U.S. churches sent individuals and small teams of young adults to serve as part of various work camps and schemes to address the impact of sectarian division in low-income districts of Belfast. Also, from that early date many U.S. individuals and churches contributed in various ways (financial and short-term volunteers) to the ministry of the Corrymeela Community and its reconciliation center outside Ballycastle, County Antrim. Although Corrymeela is one of the best-known reconciliation groups in Northern Ireland – and remains active to this day – other reconciliation projects have received very important support from U.S. churches.

In the early 1970s a network of people from churches in the U.S. organized a study trip to Northern Ireland and then both recruited and sent short and long-term volunteers, as well as raised funds for reconciliation work in Ireland. This included PC (U.S.A.) congregations and Roman Catholic parishes in Allentown, PA, and Pittsburgh, PA, among others. In the late 1980s partner congregations in Long Island linked up with neighboring Presbyterian and Catholic churches in Kilrea, Northern Ireland for a joint encounter program, among others.

In the mid-late 1980s there was pressure on various U.S. denominations, religious orders, and ecumenical bodies to endorse the “MacBride Principles,” which sought to address issues around discrimination in employment in Northern Ireland. These actually called for disinvestment in Northern Ireland as a way of exerting pressure for change. Most of the pressure to endorse them came from Irish-American groups in the U.S. – not from any groups in Ireland. While various city and state governments in the U.S. did adopt them, to their credit several U.S. denominations, religious orders, and the National Council of Churches did not endorse them. Instead, they sent small delegations to Northern Ireland to meet with church and civic leaders and listen to local opinion about how helpful or unhelpful they would be. As a result, they discovered that the issues were much more complex than proponents of “MacBride” in the U.S. were conveying. Virtually across the board, people in Northern Ireland believed that Irish equal opportunity legislation was either adequate or being enacted, that the “MacBride Principles” were not feasible for employers (they called among other things for employees to be guaranteed safety traveling to and from work), and that what was actually needed was inward investment and jobs created in areas where Nationalists would feel safe seeking work.

This issue stayed around for quite a few years and eventually the four largest denominations in Ireland and their U.S. counterparts issued a “Call For Fair Employment and Investment,” which did not have some of the negative aspects of “MacBride” and did encourage investment. Episcopalians and United Methodists in the U.S. joined the Roman Catholics and Presbyterians in working on fair employment and investment in Northern Ireland according to these standards, and raised two million dollars for economic development in order to alleviate heavy unemployment and reduce discrimination in the deeply divided society. The patient persistence of people working together for peace and justice from a faith perspective and by listening to each other has begun to pay off.

Gerald Powers tells of the work of the Interchurch Committee on Northern Ireland which met yearly, bringing together leaders from the Roman Catholic Church in Ireland, the U.S. Catholic Bishops Conference, the Presbyterian Church in Ireland, and the Presbyterian Church (U.S.A.). This forum, along with other efforts throughout the years, brought church leaders together across the religious divide. An outcome of such denominational partnerships was the development of speaking tours to the United States that usually paired a Catholic priest and a Presbyterian minister from Northern Ireland. One of the challenges the Irish churches faced was coming to the U.S. and having to explain the issues and their work. They sought access to United States public opinion and policy makers in order to correct what they believed to be misperceptions of the conflict and lift up peacemaking processes from this multiple perspective, but they could not do that alone. Their request for assistance in providing access to U.S. audiences stimulated a group of churches—Presbyterian, United Methodist, Episcopal and Roman Catholic—to utilize these ecumenical tours in local and regional areas in order to foster the development of a shared voice and international friendship and support for transformation of the conflict. According to Doug Baker, this whole phase of involvement culminated in senior Irish church leaders attending a White House conference on economic development in Northern Ireland and being able to address concerns directly to key officials in the U.S. administration.

Mennonites, working in Northern Ireland for over a quarter of a century, started with two committed U.S. couples who took their cues from people on the ground in Ireland. According to Ron Kraybill, the Mennonites have worked in partnership with local people in Ireland developing conferences on peace, encouraging Protestant-Roman Catholic dialogue groups, providing workshops, training police to deal with community conflict, offering encouragement and serving as a catalyst for transformation. Mennonite involvement has concentrated on sending individuals with particular skills to support Irish initiatives in peacemaking. Dr. Joe Liechty, a historian, came to Ireland in the early 1980s and eventually worked with the Irish School of Ecumenics on the Moving Beyond Sectarianism Research Project, which produced a major research book with the same title and has generated various tools for understanding and moving beyond sectarianism.

John and Naomi Lederach made a significant contribution to the development of Mediation Northern Ireland from 1994-1997. In addition Dr. John Paul Lederach, their son, has made numerous short visits to Northern Ireland to deliver training in Conflict Transformation – and is widely recognized as a valuable voice in understanding how societies move out of conflict and how various groups may contribute to that process.

Since 1993 the Presbyterian Church (U.S.A.) has placed over 50 young adult volunteers in Northern Ireland for one year each to work with congregations and community ministries in support of long-term peacemaking. The Mennonites, as well, have placed a number of medium term (6 months-2 years) volunteers in Ireland to work with various reconciliation efforts. The Brethren Volunteer Service has a significant history of supplying trained volunteers to work with reconciliation groups in Ireland over the past 20 years.

Illustrating the partnership necessary for long term peacemaking efforts in other countries the Presbyterian Church (U.S.A.) – at the request of the Corrymeela Community in 1979 - appointed Rev. Doug Baker as a Mission Coworker in Northern Ireland and subsequently asked him to work with Mediation Northern Ireland and, currently, the Partners in Transformation Project, co-sponsored by the Irish School of Ecumenics and Mediation Northern Ireland.

Another key support role that U.S. churches, church-related educational institutions, and other groups have taken is to bring leaders and potential leaders from Northern Ireland to the U.S. for course work and other experiences through which they can gain new skills and perspectives useful for peacemaking activities back in Ireland. Two examples of this are:

  • The Business Education Initiative, which brings university students and others involved in third-level education in Northern Ireland and the border counties of the Republic of Ireland to study for one year at church related colleges in the United States (Roman Catholic, Episcopal, United Methodist and Presbyterian).
  • The Summer Peacebuilding Institute at Eastern Mennonite University – training in Conflict Transformation, Dynamics of Reconciliation, and Trauma and Healing. This has been particularly useful because there are also students from many other conflict settings around the world, and the exchange of experience and ideas is excellent.

Analysis

In an analysis of grassroots peacemaking in Northern Ireland, John Brewer offers a typology of the work being done, providing an overview of involvement:

  1. Ecumenical activity – breaking down barriers and stereotypes and developing contact in a religious context, such as church-to-church efforts, public events, joint declarations
  2. Mediation – conflict resolution, such as formal mediation organizations with local input, informal involvement in local mediation and dialogue with protagonists to the conflict
  3. Cross-community activities – breaking down barriers in a secular setting, such as large-scale integrated education, integrated vacation programs, etc.
  4. Self-identified peace groups and initiatives – espousing peace and monitoring the conflict, such as formal peace organizations, and populist peace activities (marches, rallies, etc.)
  5. Anti-sectarianism – challenging the conflict and redefining it: church and faith-based organizations and secular organizations
  6. Dealing with the problems of post violence, such as working with victims and victim support groups, dealing with memory and narratives of atrocity, dealing with issues of forgiveness, reintegration of protagonists, and citizenship education(4)

This typology is useful, not only to understand the work in Northern Ireland, but is typical of the work being done in many other areas. As illustrated by the Categories of Support identified earlier in this paper, the typology concurs with the work others are doing in regional and local religious groups in support of international peacemaking in other countries.

Conflict develops over time and is often complex. Work must be done on many levels. Foundations of peace may be religious, but are also political, social, economic and educational. One of the significant strengths of Presbyterian, Roman Catholic and Mennonite peacemaking efforts in Ireland is their shared insight into the necessity of pursuing a long-term trajectory and thus making sustained commitments to peacemaking in a region. Short-term efforts may be beneficial in certain circumstances, but progress in resolving conflict is made slowly, carefully and collaboratively, over time. When this work is well-coordinated and done in partnership with religious bodies in Ireland and in the United States, it can offer a number of entry points for local and regional support. Examples of such entry points would be financial support for specific projects, advocacy with key decision-makers in the United States, provision of trained volunteers, and, in general, openness to requests from the troubled areas. It would appear that more effort could be put into sharing what various groups are doing, so that others could utilize the most effective approaches to peacemaking in specific areas.

Motivation to be engaged in peacemaking, in Ireland as elsewhere, often derives from a faith perspective. The Mennonites, for example, give voice to their belief that pacifism and peacemaking are a part of what it means to be Christian. Many religious bodies have a stated commitment to peacemaking or to non-violent approaches to conflict resolution, or on living responsibly and respectfully in a pluralistic human community. For many religious activists, motivation for peacemaking draws on a faith-based sense of the oneness of the human family and on the values that are shared between and among the religious persuasions of their friends
and neighbors. While narrow and legalistic religious perspectives can and do often lead to violence, most religiously oriented peacemakers draw on the generosity of a faith perspective that respects those of different faiths and opens one up to listening to and learning from the other.

In Ireland, as in all the places of conflict that are tearing people apart within the global human family, the conflict is not necessarily between nations, but within nations – intranational rather than international. Yet, at the same time, partnerships within the international community are significant because policies of one country or another often have considerable affect on the intranational tensions. Shared voices for peacemaking from an international perspective can bring considerable attention to the construction of alternative solutions, particularly when there is recognition of cultural and religious differences by those from the United States along with the acknowledgement that direction and ownership of peacemaking projects in a region ultimately comes from those who live in, or are indigenous to, the region.

It is difficult to assess both how important a part US policy has had in moving forward the political peace process in Northern Ireland and how much U.S. churches have helped to inform that process by enabling contact between Irish church leaders and U.S. audiences. However, such interventions have definitely been useful. There is no question that various kinds of support from U.S. churches has helped to sustain and extend peacemaking activity with and by the churches in Ireland –and by a number of other groups/agencies contributing to the wider peace process.

Among the learnings about support of U.S. faith-based local and regional religious bodies for peacemaking in Ireland, the following insights from Doug Baker are offered:

  • U.S. churches have at times been able to act as catalysts encouraging stronger relationships between and cooperative action by Irish churches
  • Intervention by U.S. churches has worked best when it arises out of discussion with and respects the priorities and concerns of Irish churches – rather than schemes conceived outside of Ireland
  • The most important initiatives have helped to enhance the capacity of Irish churches and groups to engage themselves in long-term peacemaking
  • Those groups from the U.S. who have been upfront about serious issues of race and other divisions they face in the U.S. - and their need to learn from Northern Ireland as much as having anything to offer to Northern Ireland – have been much better received by groups in Northern Ireland
  • Maintaining personnel in Northern Ireland over a long period has enabled those workers to fulfill roles and make contributions that would not have been appropriate or possible for those dipping in and out or committed only for shorter terms
  • Whereas it has been significant when U.S. Catholic and Protestant groups have acted together on initiatives regarding the conflict in Ireland, those in Ireland are very aware that their bigger difficulties are relating as Unionist and Nationalist and that joint U.S. Catholic and Protestant groups are not actually crossing similar barriers to the ones they are encouraging those in Ireland to cross. (Race would be a better equivalent in the U.S.)

U.S. Regional and Local Faith-Based Support for Healing Conflict and its Aftermath in the Heartlands of Africa

Rwanda and Burundi

The tragedy of genocide in Rwanda and Burundi struck swiftly, and the graying bones stacked in the modest church gave evidence of pain and sorrow beyond belief. It takes years to heal from the trauma of seeing loved ones hacked by machete, women and girls raped, children killed without cause. But the ones who survived knew that life must go on and sought help to move beyond the trauma.

Mary Lord and David Zarembka describe the work of the Friends Peace Teams who partnered with African Quakers (there are more Quakers in Africa than anywhere else in the world) to do trauma healing in order to move beyond it to forgiveness and healing. The Burundi and Rwanda Friends Meetings were faced with the tragedy that 10% of the Quaker population had been murdered in the genocide, including a massacre in which eight (including 2 Tutsi) out of eleven seminary students in Burundi’s Kwibuka Friends Seminary were killed in 1993 by the Tutsi army. The Quaker leader, Samson Gahungu, Clerk of Burundi Yearly Meeting, was jailed for 28 months and international attention forced his case to come to trial where he was found innocent of the charges. The Head of the Kwibuka Seminary was David Niyonzima who, while getting a masters in Counseling at George Fox University in Oregon wrote, with Lon Fendall, the book Unlocking Horns: Forgiveness and Reconciliation in Burundi. He is now Director of the Trauma Healing and Reconciliation Services in Burundi, which the Quakers helped initiate with him. This book serves as a basis for a curriculum through which to understand conflict and move forward to reconciliation under the cross. The Friends Peace Team, composed of 16 Quaker Yearly Meetings in the U.S., is a partner in the process of enlarging the use of the Alternatives to Violence curriculum using traditional gacaca methodology. They also assist in work-camping projects, in “healing and rebuilding workshops” developed by the Rwandan Quakers, in an HIV/AIDS program in Burundi with the Friends Women’s Association, and in the development of a peace school for genocide orphans initiated by Burundi Quakers.

Support for the rebuilding of trust in the face of trauma has also engaged local Lutherans in Rwanda, along with other partners throughout the region and with the support of local sister congregations in the United States. The Rev. John Rutsindintwarane, a graduate in Conflict Resolution from Eastern Mennonite University and now General Secretary of the Lutheran Church in Rwanda, spent a month in Oakland, California, visiting supporting sister congregations in the area. His assistance to the Oakland Community Organization as they counter violence in this diverse west coast U.S. community is also an illustration of reciprocal partnership. Resurrection Lutheran Church in Oakland, which has a sister parish relationship in Kigali, Rwanda, sees this partnership as not only giving but receiving—and its members are learning from Rev. Rutsindintwarane about ways in which peacemaking and advocacy for justice can be a mutual process. Currently a graduate student at Wartburg Lutheran Seminary, Rev. Rutsindintwarane is heavily involved in sharing the stories of the Rwandan people’s struggles for a new, just and peaceful existence following the conflict and genocide and in enlarging commitment for active support as he visits congregations in the U.S.

In Rwanda, in consultation with local government authorities, the church, youth, women leaders and Inyangamugayo (men/women of integrity), Rev. Rutsindintwarane cooperatively developed a peacemaking curriculum for use at the village grassroots level. With a traveling blackboard he and his colleagues organize “working groups for peacemaking” in villages of repatriated refugees, genocide survivors, and relatives of genocide suspects. Because of long-standing interethnic animosities – fueled by the vagaries of colonialization, which divided, rather than united the people of Rwanda, and because of fears for safety, frustration with corruption, and the trauma of genocide – the road to peace will require trust-building, community development activities, cooperation and truth-telling, attention to non-violent ways of resolving conflict, and certainly financial support for these efforts from overseas partners. (A current need, for example, is for a four-wheel drive vehicle to go from village to village to establish more “working groups for peacemaking.”) Along with the adaptation of Lederach’s pyramid in the Rwandan environment, Rev. Rutsindintwarane points to Rwandan’s desire to return to the use of gacaca, a traditional mode of community-based settlement of conflicts and restorative justice used in villages before colonial times that offers an African way to build mutual trust, unity, and the reconciliation of Rwandan people.(5) Clearly an interreligious attempt to build peaceful communities, these processes could go a long way to establish peace in a region healing from genocide and war.

Uganda

Pete Truax, a member of a Minnetonka, MN, Roman Catholic parish sold his business in 1995 and dedicated himself to peacemaking, along with Dan Vaughn, a retired CPA from a neighboring parish. They came in touch with Monsignor Matthew Odon, rector of Sacred Heart Seminary in Uganda and Vicar General for the Archbishop, who had been speaking in a number of parishes in the St. Paul Diocese. Through friendship with Monsignor Odong, Vaughn and Truax became involved in supporting a seminary in Northern Uganda and because appeals to the people in their parishes and to other congregations were successful they were able to do other projects within the Gulu Diocese. They drilled wells, assisted in financing building projects and developed a newsletter. At the request of Monsignor Odong, Truax and his colleague set about trying to raise broader awareness, within the religious community, of the nearly two-decade war and turmoil in Northern Uganda within the U.S. religious community and to try to get the U.S. government to put pressure on the Ugandan government to stop the war. Working with the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops (USCCB) to carry out this request, the retired businessmen became acquainted with Father Mike Perry, the USCCB Africa Policy advisor. In September of 2001 Bishop Wilton Gregory, Fr. Perry, and several representatives from the USCCB made a trip to Uganda. They met with Ugandan Roman Catholic leaders to establish an advocacy role that the U.S. Bishops were willing to take on behalf of the Church in Uganda. On their return the statement A Call to Solidarity with Africa was developed by the USCCB, dealing with the whole of Africa.

Persistence in keeping the relationship focused on peacemaking support began to pay off. His Grace John Baptist Odama, Archbishop of the Gulu Diocese, was invited to a major conference at Notre Dame in September to tell the story of the hidden war in Uganda, the conflict, the struggles to find nonviolent solutions, and the need for international support. While the Archbishop was in the country, key meetings in Washington were arranged with high-ranking officials in the U.S. State Department and the National Security Council. Included in the meetings, along with the Archbishop of Gulu, were Monsignor Odong, Don Vaughn, and Pete Truax. In learning that it was possible, with the support of local religious partners in the United States, to bring the parties together at a high government level in order to focus attention on the Ugandan conflict and to seek ways to address it, the people took new hope. The work in Northern Uganda by indigenous religious leaders has been underway for some years. The supportive partnership efforts in Minnesota were clearly enhanced by the African insights as well as offering global linkages of benefit to peacemaking efforts in Uganda.

An educational process of support for peacemaking began in those Minnesota towns where the partnership work in Uganda was progressing. For example:

  • The Immaculate Heart of Mary School Children began letter exchanges with children in Uganda
  • Advocacy work began in congregations and the community - a major “Africa Day” high school event was held with training in policy advocacy and encouragement for letters and visits to Senators as central strategies
  • The University of Minnesota Newman Center, the University of St. Thomas, and Luther Seminary in Minneapolis all held meetings in the spring of 2003 with Fr. Mike Perry to discuss the Bishop’s Solidarity with Africa Statement and enlarge community support for peacemaking concerns
  • Twinning relationships have been reinvigorated
  • The ecumenical program Stand with Africa has been given impetus and support in the region

Work continues in raising awareness through electronic media in the United States by distributing a newsletter with stories from Uganda, and the local and regional support for peacemaking in Uganda is noticeably growing. The power of shared information is important to the people of Uganda as elsewhere. Newsletters to local and regional partners in the U.S. tell the stories and keep the interest and partnership alive.

The story of the Acholi Religious Leaders – Christian and Muslim – from Northern Uganda who came together to bridge the religious divide is a story of persistence in peacemaking. “[Bishop McLeod Baker Ochola II] and his fellow Anglican, Roman Catholic and Muslim religious leaders have been anything but cowards in their seven-year long struggle to bring a peaceful solution to the 18-year old war that has devastated the people and many of the villages of the Acholi region of Northern Uganda. Chiefly, the Acholi Religious Leaders’ Peace Initiative (ARLPI) has served as a link between the Lord’s Resistance Army (LRA) Rebels and the Ugandan Government, a position that has, at times, made them a target of both groups.”(6) Recognizing their bravery and their multi-faith efforts to forge peace, the Board of Trustees of the Council for a Parliament of the World’s Religions, based in Chicago, IL, announced on May 27, 2004, that Bishop Ochola II and the ARLPI are the recipients of the Paul Carus Award for Outstanding Contributions to the Interreligious Movement. Often in danger, “the religious leaders group, with widespread popular support, has kept at their peacemaking task. The Bishop is emphatic that the role of ARLPI is not to mediate peace talks. There are others in the international community to do that task. According to the Bishop, religious leaders should be a bridge that builds the level of trust and confidence on both sides, and their strategy is to put pressure on the rebels and the government to stop fighting and talk peace.” The work is multi-faceted and dangerous, but Ochola insists, “I have tried to change the game from confrontation to cooperation; I have attempted to encourage both sides to aim for mutual satisfaction, not victory, because it is more rewarding to turn enemies into friends.” U.S. faith-based support for these and other efforts of the Acholi Religious Leaders illustrates the value of visible religious partnerships across borders.

Under the umbrella of the larger Inter-Religious Council of Uganda, religious leaders came together in December of 2003 to urge the Ugandan Government to extend the Amnesty for the rebels without restrictions. According to the Kacoke Madit (KM) website (KM means ‘big meeting’) the Amnesty Act of 2000 gives recognition to traditional conflict management mechanisms such as the Acholi traditional practice of mato oput, a tried and tested reconciliation method. (Kacoke Madit is a non-profit organization working for peace in Northern Uganda and relates to the religious communities in Gulu, Pader, and Kitgum, both Christian and Muslim. The religious leaders represent Catholic, Anglican, Mennonite, and Muslim constituencies among others.) As U.S. supporters of peacemaking in Uganda develop plans for advocacy within the U.S., such shared information is essential. There is much to be learned from the contextualization of conflict transformation, and the values of local partnerships both in Uganda and in the United States, which lead to deepening friendships, to greater awareness and understanding, to political advocacy and to peacemaking.

Sudan

The heart-wrenching stories of long-time war in Sudan have been often hidden in the back pages of U.S. newspapers. But at the time of this writing, there is good news: negotiations for peace in Sudan’s north-south conflict appear to be successful (peace accord signed in January 2005), ending long years of tragic torment and war in that region (though violence continues in the Darfur region.) According to Ecumenical News International:

Nairobi (ENI). Songs, ululation and drums marked the signing of key agreements on Wednesday between the government of Sudan and the main rebel group, the Sudan People's Liberation Movement/Army, that paves the way for a comprehensive peace accord to end a 21-year-long civil war. "This is superb. We have been waiting for the agreement for a long time. We are really tired of war," Sudanese Roman Catholic Bishop Joseph Abangite Gasi told Ecumenical News International after the signing ceremony in Naivasha, about 80 kilometers west of Nairobi. (May 28, 2004) (7)

U.S. local and regional faith-based groups have long supported peacemaking in Sudan in solidarity with religious groups there. For example, Church World Service and agencies of the Roman Catholic Church, Lutheran World Relief, and Mennonites, along with others, have been partnering with the New Sudan Council of Churches (NSCC) in the People-to-People Peace Process. This grassroots effort creates a platform for community and traditional leaders to give voice to their desires for justice and peace, define the conditions that will sustain peace, and seek a consensus on strategies to achieve this peace. During recent years, through these efforts, agreements and covenants have been reached and signed, which stop the fighting, end the destruction and bring about peace and stability. It has been a long slow process, focused primarily in the areas of Southern Sudan that have been affected by war, conflict, aggression and hostility. U.S. support has been geared toward strengthening the effectiveness and productivity of the NSCC’s well-respected grassroots peace initiative through the training of peace mobilizers, researchers, and ‘training of trainers’ and to assist in improving the documentation process.(8)

In its call for the warring parties to cease hostilities and negotiate in good faith, the New Sudan Council of Churches has spoken on behalf of the Sudanese people who “have been consumed by the debilitating culture of war. They badly want peace. They want peace in order to rebuild and rehabilitate their broken lives. They want peace that guarantees stability and development. They want peace with justice.” The NCSS has also appealed to the international community, “especially the facilitators of the Sudanese peace talks to commit the negotiators to serious discussion that will culminate in a just and durable peaceful settlement to the twenty-year-old conflict.”(9) These appeals are backed by long years of struggle in villages of Sudan to build constituencies of peace. Though it is not possible to tell just how, specifically, this work has effected the current breakthrough in peace negotiations, it is clear that the efforts of the New Sudan Council of Churches and its international supporters has been of help in the total picture. Yet, while the news in southern Sudan is encouraging, another crisis is looming in western Sudan. The United States Conference of Catholic Bishops, through its Office of Social Development & World Peace, issued a statement on May 5, 2004, telling of the urgency:

The Darfur region of Sudan is rapidly becoming the newest symbol of human depravity and ethnic cleansing. Without greater attention and action by the international community, the world risks being a passive witness to yet another humanitarian catastrophe.

Since 2003, tens of thousands have died, and more than a million have been displaced. Together with the Sudanese military, government-backed militias are attacking innocent civilians, raping women and young girls, destroying homes and fields, and preventing humanitarian aid from reaching millions of people in desperate need in what appears to be an ethnic cleansing of the region. Janjaweed militias and similar groups are reportedly attacking refugee camps and committing other atrocities in Sudan and neighboring Chad. Meanwhile, an April 8, 2004 ceasefire agreement between the Khartoum government and the two main rebel groups in Darfur, the Sudan Liberation Army (SLA) and the Justice and Equality Movement (JEM), has not been observed. All parties to the conflict have committed human rights abuses.

Sudanese church leaders have called for an end to attacks on civilians and the government’s support for militias in the region, unconditional humanitarian access, and a commitment by all parties to an immediate cease-fire and a negotiated settlement.(10)

A May 26, 2004 demonstration outside the Sudanese Embassy in Washington, DC, by over 100 members of the Episcopal Church in the U.S., led by the assistant to the Bishop of the Virginia Diocese, Francis Campbell Gray, brings national attention to the trauma in Sudan. Spurred by deep concerns about the humanitarian crisis in Sudan and to the confiscation of church property in Khartoum, the religious group has called for the implementation of human rights in the troubled region. According to Episcopal News Service, “There is a long history of tension between the Sudanese government and the Episcopal Church ... and Sudan military and police have confiscated an Episcopal cathedral in Khartoum and have also tried to demolish church-run schools.”(11)

U.S. local and regional faith-based support for warding off another tragic genocide can, and does, take place through public pressure on governmental decision-makers, through support of Human Rights advocacy, and through financial support of NGO’s working in the region, such as the New Sudan Council of Churches (NSCC). Yet there is an urgent need to enlarge this support with a sense of immediacy. Mechanisms for U.S. engagement in international advocacy for peace in the Darfur region of Sudan need to be employed quickly, and here the religious community can be of immediate help. It remains to be seen if broad-based urgent help will be forth coming.

Analysis

While the Pacific and Baltimore Yearly Meetings and the Friends Peacemaker Teams at work in Rwanda and Burundi, the U.S. Sister Lutheran Congregations with the Lutheran Church of Rwanda, the Northern Uganda – Minnesota networks, the Episcopal Church demonstrators, or the U.S. partnerships with the New Sudan Council of Churches, are not the final arbitrators of peace in those countries, it is obvious that these partnerships are incredibly valuable. Pressure can be put on those whose work is peace negotiation to continue in good faith, and to affirm good progress. Through public policy advocacy by religious groups these issues can be kept in the attention of U.S. lawmakers. Standing with those in the struggle for a just peace gives confidence to the indigenous religious groups. Financial assistance is essential. So are the interactive ways in which peace resources and strategies are shared, assistance with methods of dealing with trauma are provided when requested, networking with publishers facilitates dissemination of locally developed peacemaking curriculum, and opportunities for getting the stories of African peace-building in front of local and regional groups are utilized. Using electronic media to share information and advocacy needs can be useful to enlarge support for international peacemaking. The importance of local and regional ecumenical and interreligious activists in the United States keeping in close contact with and work through their senators and congresspersons is an essential strategy. Local and regional religious bodies in the U.S. are uniquely positioned to lift the conversations to the appropriate policy levels in the United States for pursuing nonviolent action.

Support for traditional African methods of conflict resolution along with the sensitivity to context in any partnership work is also important and can be beneficial to enlarge the learnings of the U.S. partners as well. The ‘unlocking horns’ approach in Burundi, gacaca in Rwanda, and mato oput in Uganda, are all indigenous peacemaking methods that, while unique to these particular regions, may indeed provide important new insights in other African nations and for the global family in search of ways to move beyond violence to community. They should be mined for credible ways to approach peacemaking partnerships in Africa.

Learnings from the work in Africa leading to enlarged support by local and regional religious bodies, not only in Africa, but in other regions as well, have been suggested by Ron Kraybill:

  • Provide significant funding for sister Councils of Churches in various places
  • Provide ‘people power’ through the sending of trained volunteers to work in Africa on a sustained basis
  • Bring qualified young people from Africa and other countries to Eastern Mennonite University for workshops and graduate work in conflict resolution
  • Offer paid vacations for peacemaking staff in African countries for respite from the struggle
  • Bring religious leaders (Muslim and Christian) from Africa to meet with Christian and Muslim leaders in the United States for relationship building and mutual learning
  • Fund the development of peacemaking institutes in Uganda, Rwanda, Burundi, Sudan and other places as needed and requested

Support for Peacemaking in the Middle East by U.S. Regional and Local Religious Bodies: Multi-faith Perspectives

Following a half-century tradition of quiet interfaith dialogue in Israel, the recently organized Interfaith Encounter Association (IEA) now operates in Israel, with the support of partners around the world, to promote peace in the Middle East through interfaith dialogue and cross-cultural study and to create a culture of peace. U.S. support groups include a branch in New York, and supporters throughout the U.S. and in other countries. Partnering with other organizations, IEA includes several “cooperation circles” of United Religions Initiative (URI) and shares in the Partner Cities Network of the Council for the Parliament of World Religions (CPWR). The IEA website indicates that:

In its first circle the IEA focuses on the promotion of respectful relations between the Jews, Muslims, Christians, Druze and Bahais living in Israel. In a second circle of participation - the Israeli-Palestinian natives of the Holy Land - the IEA works in cooperation with 5 Palestinian organizations across the Palestinian National Authority. In the third circle, the inhabitants of the Middle East, [IEA has] been a major founder in establishing the Middle East Abrahamic Forum, along with similar organizations from Egypt, Jordan, The Palestinian National Authority and Cyprus.(12)

One of the strongly held principles is that, rather than being a cause of the problem, religion can and should be a source of the solution for conflicts that exist in the region and beyond. Recognized by UNESCO as an organization contributing to a culture of peace, IEA continues to enlarge its programs and partnerships. The United States Institute of Peace (USIP) also provides support for IEA’s work.(13)

A story from Israel that has stimulated the formation of local U.S. interreligious support groups is that of Open House in Ramle, Israel. This is a project with a storied beginning, illustrating the reciprocity that is possible if there is openness to learn from others. Teenagers from the Middle East, traveling to the United States, have stimulated the formation of U.S. faith-based support groups so that for a number of years there have been Open House chapters in Cincinnati and Boston. Later U.S. visits by the Open House teenagers in 2002 stimulated new local connections and support.

The story of Open House: the house was only a house. Different families called it home across a contentious divide of time and place. Originally owned by a Palestinian family, it fell into the hands of a Jewish family. But one surprising day it became a source of positive peacemaking energy. The poetry of a new vision transformed this house by shared action into a symbol of peacemaking. The story illustrates a “defining moment of cooperation,” a symbol of connectedness, offering hope and motivation for change. Mohammed Abu-Nimer describes how it happened:

[It is the story of] an Israeli woman, Dalia Landau, who inherited a house in Ramle that had originally been built by a Palestinian family. The family was then forcibly evacuated in the 1948 war. With her husband, Yehezkel Landau, she joined with members of the al-Khairy family, the original owners, in dedicating the house to Arab-Jewish peace and educational activities, and they gave it the name “Open House.”(14)

Currently Open House in Ramle, Israel, is home to a number of innovative peacemaking programs that bring together young people who are Israeli Jews and Arabs, both Muslim and Christian. In a time of great violence, Rabbi Dr. Marc Gopin believes that Open House shows “there is no more important work to be done than investing in the future of children of all races and religions in this Land that yearns to be Holy.”(15)

Esther Nelson, an ELCA accompanier through the Ecumenical Accompaniment Program in Palestine and Israel (EAPPI), tells of another multi-religious house of hope:

Built by the Lutheran Church of the Reformation in Beit Jala, the recently dedicated Abraham’s House, serves as a guest house and dialogue center for exploration of the common Abrahamic heritage of Jews, Christians, and Muslims. This project is an act of faith that someday the Israeli military occupation of Palestine will end, allowing Jews, Christians, and Muslims to travel freely in Israeli and Palestinian territory to meet each other. In the same lovely hillside complex, 47 boys without families able to care for them, both Christian and Muslim, have a home...(16)

It was early morning in Hebron, but the sun was warm on their backs as the Palestinian school children started out. At the same time, Ecumenical Accompaniment Program in Palestine and Israel (EAPPI) volunteers started their school patrol, assuring that the children would not face difficulty with soldiers or settlers along the way. In Zababdeh, accompaniers rode the afternoon school bus home with the children through the often-lengthy delays at the checkpoint. It was presence that mattered. Their mission was to keep the peace where possible on behalf of the children and their families, caught in the political hatreds that surround their struggling communities, and to give support to all those who wish to end the occupation peacefully. The faith-based volunteers working through EAPPI monitor human rights violations and protect Israeli and Palestinian advocates for peace.

Another volunteer tells the story of accompanying the Israeli Women’s Coalition for Peace (WCP) as they tried, despite the risks, to plan a peace march with Palestinian women from the Jerusalem Women’s Center (JWC), as part of a larger global event on Human Rights. Discouraged by difficulties of joint planning and participation, one Jewish leader suggested just planning separate marches, one in Israel and one in Palestine, with international women as the go-between on the day of the march. But the accompanier, noting that she went to listen and to “hold these women in the light,” said surprising things happened:

As they made their separate plans, peace broke out between them! Information about good hotels or coach companies was shared. Itineraries were planned that satisfied all. Prices were agreed to. Meetings were arranged at their respective offices instead of neutral venues. Problems were aired and solutions arrived at. It was all most impressive. Nothing derailed them. A common understanding of each other’s positions, needs and interests developed.(17)

To witness such a transformation is a remarkable gift. Such stories of accompaniment can provide insight into elements of nonviolent change. (More stories available on EAPPI's website)

I talked with a number of accompaniers – people who choose, out of their faith perspectives, to offer whatever services are requested by those who seek justice in the conflicted communities in Israel and Palestine through the World Council of Churches’ EAPPI process. They raise their own money, often securing support from local congregations or judicatories. The process of raising money is often difficult. One accompanier explained the challenge this way, “Some people think this is more about politics than mission.” Another convened a local support group to meet and study issues and build trust throughout the summer before leaving for the Middle East. Those who served the three-month stint felt they received more than they gave, working in classrooms, in mobile medical centers, in clinics at refugee centers, with youth, in hospitals and home visits. The accompaniers found their understanding deepened, their commitment to peacemaking and policy advocacy enlarged, their willingness to reframe the sense of what it is to be in mission with those struggling to survive in the midst of turmoil enlivened beyond easy categories. Accompaniers serve at the request of groups in Israel and Palestine.

These narratives illustrate the value of presence in conflictive situations as the accompaniers also learn from the people involved in the struggle and interpret those grounded learnings in the U.S. Their collaborative work can thus contribute to interreligious relationship building over time, both in the Middle East and in the U.S. The accompaniers become grassroots communicators of hope in the difficult journey toward peace with justice in Israel and Palestine.

A remarkable story of an 11-year-old Jewish-Palestinian Dialogue Group in San Mateo, CA, illustrates the power of commitment and persistence over time as it engages local participants in the United States with roots in the Middle East in a concrete method of peacemaking across religious lines. It also illustrates Margaret Mead’s oft quoted dictum stressing that two or three people and a good idea can change the world. In fact, she says, “It’s the only thing that ever has.” The people in San Mateo offer their story. Started in the living room of Len and Libby Traubman by three committed friends, in a quiet community on the San Francisco Peninsula, this group now numbers “30 men and women, young and old, Holocaust survivors and 20th generation Palestinians,” both Christian and Muslim, who have met more than 145 times, “learning to change strangers into friends, ‘enemies’ into partners, while initiating concrete projects that help people and invigorate the public peace process, here and overseas.” Their work has stimulated 10 dialogue groups in the wider San Francisco Bay Area, and in campuses nationwide. Their approach stresses face-to-face relationship building, beginning with compassionate listening. They believe, with Dr. Harold Saunders, Former Assistant Secretary of State, and Negotiator for the Camp David Accords, that “there are some things that only governments can do, such as negotiating binding agreements. But there are some things that only citizens outside government can do, such as changing human relationships.”(18)

In September of 2000, when heartbreaking violence broke out between Israelis and Palestinians, local and national radio and television stations (including CNN) came to these dialogue participants to find new ways of thinking and treating each other, and to bring some measure of hope. They told their stories and shared their struggles about learning to know and understand each other as Jews and Arabs, who have a shared history, a shared homeland and a shared destiny, as Lionel “Len” Traubman explains it. They have become, over the years, more public in their willingness to speak out for peace, holding major reconciliation events in the San Francisco Bay Area, developing spin-off dialogue groups, creating ‘principles and wisdom’ for dialogue guidelines that can foster the change from confrontation to cooperation, building partnerships with other peace-oriented groups. They have co-sponsored major fund-raising events for Neve Shalom/Wahat al-Salam (Oasis of Peace) – a model village where Jews and Palestinians live and learn together, as well as offering financial support to two schools in need in Israel and Palestine, whose faculties are now meeting in their own new face-to-face dialogue process. These stories illustrate the necessity of relationship building, the bonds that tie policy makers together in the U.S. and in the Middle East, and the essential nature of building hope through stories of trust-building and dialogue over time.

Local advocacy tools for peace in the Middle East utilized by many U.S. local and regional ecumenical and interreligious organizations are found at the Churches for Middle East Peace (CMEP) website. Intending to be a balanced approach calling all to accountability in the public policy advocacy community, CMEP, supported by major Christian denominations, ecumenical organizations and religious orders, offers valuable peacemaking resources. Of particular interest here is the March 2004 Policy Analysis Newsletter entitled “Elusive Peacemaking Compels Concrete Action” that looks at a number of peace initiatives, which have called forth support from various religious groups. Offered also is a Guide for Advocacy in the Middle East, utilized by many local and regional religious groups.

The Tikkun Community in the U.S. is a faith-based spiritual movement focused on global and personal transformation that has taken a justice oriented advocacy position for peace in the Middle East and has developed a process of web-based advocacy for the Geneva Accords, along with interactive resources for interreligious conversations. Rabbi Michael Lerner, building on Jewish precepts and the need to include the spiritual dimension in any movement for social change, publishes a provocative magazine, TIKKUN, around which is organized an interreligious cluster of small local face-to-face “circles of support” called “Leadership Havura.” The small groups commit themselves to be involved in some way in “healing and transforming the world” by supporting the activities of the participants, not being that activity. The Leadership Havura helps people do their (e.g., peacemaking) work more effectively and with greater spiritual nourishment. The website offers forums for interreligious dialogue, discussion groups on issues of conflict and reconciliation, and other resources for interactive participation within local communities and in international partnerships.

The Shalom Center in Philadelphia (Rabbi Arthur Waskow), offers a number of liturgical, action oriented and study resources for congregational use that focus on active participation in building peace in the Middle East. Founded in 1983, the Shalom Center brings Jewish wisdom, ancient and contemporary, to bear on seeking peace, justice and ecological healing. It is especially concerned with multi-religious peacemaking against the danger of a looming war between the "West" or the U.S. and Islam; it has worked against the invasion of Iraq and against the destructive effects of top-down corporate globalization and the tendency toward empire.

Of particular note is the support of the Shalom Center for Israeli-Palestinian peace through a wide range of partnerships with peace organizations in the Middle East. In their work with Rabbis for Human Rights in Israel and its partner, Rabbis for Human Rights in North America, they have spoken boldly against the demolitions of Palestinian homes and the destruction of olive trees and have raised dollars to replant and rebuild. Using their broad network of e-mail connections and electronic advocacy, the Shalom Center has partnered for justice and peace in the Israeli/Palestinian conflict with such groups as Americans for Peace Now, Brit Tzedek v’Shalom/the Jewish Alliance for Justice and Peace, and the Tikkun Community.

On the website of Shalom Center is a “Call to Fasting for Americans,” signed by a large number of key leaders from a wide range of religious perspectives. The call is also to reflect, to seek a truer peace, to pray. Grassroots Action opportunities are provided on the website as well as information to stimulate informed action. Along with the Tikkun Community, Waskow and the Shalom Center are urging support of the Geneva Accords and urge local congregations and regional groupings to work with their legislators in active advocacy for support of this process. In partnership with leaders of the National Council of Churches, the Leadership Conference of Women Religious, and the Islamic Society of North America, Waskow and the Shalom Center have prepared a multi-religious call for responsibility, honesty and peace under the banner of the Tents of Abraham – recognizing the misdeeds on all sides of the conflict and the challenges presented by interreligious violence.

The Islamic Community offers peacemaking resources as well, and while these have been utilized predominately in domestic dispute resolution in many countries including the United States, the principles could apply to the Middle East as well. For example, Amr Abdalla’s article in the Journal of Law and Religion (2000), points to three main principles of Islamic Conflict Intervention:

  1. Restoring to Islam its messages of justice, freedom and equality.
  2. Engaging the community in the intervention and resolution processes.
  3. Adjusting the intervention techniques according to the conflict situation, and its stages.(19)

Abdalla suggests specific techniques that could be utilized in implementing these principles and they could be readily adapted in the Middle East.

In a statement entitled “Not In the Name of Islam,” a number of leaders within the American Muslim Community, many local masjids and Muslim individuals have spoken together in order to counter misperceptions of Islam and the Islamic stance on religiously motivated terror. The Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR) is sponsoring this effort and the Islamic Society of North America (ISNA) is collaborating in the project. The statement is being broadly circulated and local and regional efforts are involved to distribute the statement and get signatories to it:

We, the undersigned Muslims, wish to state clearly that those who commit acts of terror, murder and cruelty in the name of Islam are not only destroying innocent lives, but are also betraying the values of the faith they claim to represent. No injustice done to Muslims can ever justify the massacre of innocent people, and no act of terror will ever serve the cause of Islam. We repudiate and dissociate ourselves from any Muslim group or individual who commits such brutal and un-Islamic acts. We refuse to allow our faith to be held hostage by the criminal actions of a tiny minority acting outside the teachings of both the Quran and the Prophet Muhammad, peace be upon him.

As it states in the Quran: ‘Oh you who believe, stand up firmly for justice, as witnesses to God, even if it be against yourselves, or your parents, or your kin, and whether it be against rich or poor; for God can best protect both. Do not follow any passion, lest you not be just. And if you distort or decline to do justice, verily God is well-acquainted with all that you do.’ (Quran 4:135)

Dr. Louay M. Safi of ISNA stresses the need for education within the Islamic community on how to live out the Islamic faith in American society, relating Islamic values and culture to ones life in America and understanding values within the American culture, which may be held in common. Rebuilding of trust in a time when current policies often undercut trust is essential and interreligious dialogue can be very valuable in this process as the search for Middle East peace continues. Dr. Safi rejects the possibility of “importing peace” to other countries through domination, encouraging rather the work of advancing and promoting peace, and changing attitudes to recognize that the people define peace in each context as they give weight to prophetic principles. Education in the United States takes place through an annual Muslim Peacemaking Conference, interfaith dialogue, and partnership with other peacemaking efforts such as the Nuclear Reduction/ Disarmament Initiative of the Churches’ Center for Theology and Public Policy, the Muslim Peace Fellowship and the Center for Global Peace.

The Institute of Ismaili Studies has done thorough work on the historical and Qur’anic and sunna (tradition) sources of conciliation, arbitration and mediation, and it has under girded the efforts of institutions dedicated to the amicable resolution in cases of dispute. In a paper presented at the 4th International Conference of the World Mediation Forum, Mohamed M. Keshavjee, LLM, tells a story of reconciliation and harmony found in the sunna of the Prophet Muhammad:

... in the reconstruction of the Ka’ba, the building in Mecca to which Muslims go for pilgrimage, a dispute arose over the placing of the Black Stone (Hajar al-aswad) into the building. Each of the four tribes of the Quraysh wanted to have the honour of placing the stone to the exclusion of the others. An impasse arose and the matter was referred to the Prophet. He asked each of the contesting tribes to choose a leader. He then spread a full sheet of cloth on the floor and placed the stone in the centre, asking all four leaders to each hold it at one end and raise it together. Thus, a serious conflict was averted by the Prophet’s prudent action in giving all four leaders an equal honour of placing the stone.(20)

In a major effort with broad local and regional support, U.S. Christian, Jewish and Muslim Leaders came together in December 2003 to present a united statement urging U.S. governmental leadership to actively pursue Middle East Peace. They held a press conference and presented two documents: “Twelve Urgent Steps for Peace” and “A Letter to President Bush from the National Interreligious Initiative for Peace in the Middle East.” Click here for the latest letter to the President. Since that time they have been meeting with various governmental leaders, and their message is focused on negotiation:

We are Christian, Jewish and Muslim religious leaders committed to working together for peace between Israel, the Palestinians and the Arab states. We are encouraged by evidence that majorities of Israelis and Palestinians accept that what they need most - real security for Israelis and the end of occupation for Palestinians - cannot be achieved by violence, but only by negotiations. We are encouraged by the civil society initiatives for peace, including the peace agreement signed in Geneva. We believe peace between Israel, the Palestinians and Arab states is possible and that determined U.S. leadership is absolutely essential for pursuing the Road Map, for progress in the global campaign against terrorism and for the future of world peace.(21)

Analysis

The Middle East is perhaps one of the most complex, seemingly intractable areas for peacemaking. Yet the efforts of peacemakers in Israel and Palestine can be enhanced if supporters from local and regional faith-based groups throughout the United States take seriously the need for governmental advocacy within the U.S., representative-by-representative, senator-by-senator. Governmental policies in Israel and the United States, violence perpetrated in the name of policies on all sides bent on destruction or submission of the other, faltering peace negotiations – all hamper the work and contribute to grief and despair. It is important to note that in small efforts toward interreligious understanding and peacemaking, however modest in scope, lay a grassroots foundation for major changes. Their significance cannot be dismissed. The work must proceed on all levels – local, national and global – if peace is to be realized.

The following analysis – powerful because it is multi-religious in content and design – is excerpted from the letter of the National Interreligious Initiative for Peace in the Middle East (to President George W. Bush on Nov 25, 2003):

  • Renewed high level U.S. engagement will be essential to help both sides take the bold steps necessary to rebuild hope that peace is possible
  • Working together for peace reflects a central, shared moral imperative of our Abrahamic religious traditions
  • The vast majority of Americans, as well as majorities of Israelis and Palestinians, will support more active, determined U.S. and international engagement, including consistent, visible presence of the special Presidential envoy and much more vigorous public monitoring of the steps that each side must take
  • The Road Map's goal of a viable, independent and democratic Palestinian state alongside the existing Jewish state of Israel, with enduring peace and security for both peoples is essential to comprehensive, just and lasting peace between Israel, the Palestinians and Arab states based on U.N. Security Council Resolutions, 242, 338, and 1397
  • The Road Map's unequivocal call for an end to all acts of violence is essential to building peace
  • Pursuing peace requires dialogue & other efforts by people on each side seeking to under-stand the real fears, grievances, and legitimate aspirations of people on the other side
  • Support is necessary for the Road Map's call for reciprocal, simultaneous steps to be taken by the Palestinian Authority and by the Israeli Government to help restore hope and make tangible progress toward peace in the areas of Security, Palestinian Institution Building, Humanitarian Response, Civil Society and Settlements(22)

The work of U.S. local and regional religious bodies in supporting peacemaking in the Middle East is multifaceted and has broad support. Many work in consultation with such groups as the National Interreligious Initiative for Peace in the Middle East and other religiously based advocacy groups that acknowledge the roles that religious groups can play in peacemaking in the region. The significance of interreligious dialogue as a peacemaking strategy is not always recognized, but has visible power in contributing to shifts in the course of negotiations. Advocacy from a multi-religious base is beginning to appear more focused and bears particular promise. However, the work is slow, the journey painful, the complexities at times overpowering in the volatile land so many call Holy.

Peacemaking through Partnerships of Presence by U.S. Regional and Local Religious Bodies in Colombia

Jerry Streets, Chaplain at Yale University, describes productive peacemaking in Colombia that draws together Roman Catholics, Mennonites, and members of the United Church of Christ (UCC) in direct peacemaking projects. Working in partnership with Justapaz, the Christian Center for Justice, Peace and Nonviolent Action, a ministry of the Mennonite Church in Colombia, the process involves fact-finding, the building of an on-going relationship with the indigenous churches of Colombia, a sense of solidarity through presence (we are not alone in our struggle), active advocacy for human rights, and, back in the United States, a series of Faith Forums and workshops on Colombia, developing awareness among students and congregants.

The story of the kidnapping and release of Ricardo Esquivia, a Mennonite peace advocate in Colombia illustrates the incredible power of solidarity. In a story entitled “Security through a Strategy of Love,” we learn that hundreds of letters were faxed and e-mailed to government officials in Colombia and to political leaders in the United States from faith-based partners throughout the world. It was a successful campaign, although the tragedy of abductions continues, and there is much work to be done. What becomes clear is that nonviolent approaches to peacemaking require multi-tasking, willingness to advocate for justice, respond to crisis, educate for peace, and continue in solidarity over time.

It is also clear that peace is a product of justice and sometimes it takes a crisis to wake up the religious community. Ricardo Esquivia tells the story of trying to get Protestant Churches - churches that typically had followed a theology of separation - involved in the Colombian peace process through the Council of Protestant Churches of Colombia (CEDECOL). Long hesitant to be involved, “history started to kick the church, causing the church to change its theology.” In the past four years 50 Protestant pastors have been assassinated, thousands of church families displaced, more than 400 churches shut down. “We are now working hard on having our churches be ‘Sanctuaries of Peace.’ We want to connect them directly with sister-church relationships in the United States,” says Esquivia. That is happening, as evidenced by the number of faith-based partnership efforts in Colombian peacemaking succinctly summarized on the Church World Service Global Issues web pages.

The Roman Catholics, under Archbishop Jaramillo of Medellin, published “Ten Principles for the Road toward Peace,” and, following Pope John Paul II, have worked on the development of a ‘pedagogy of peace’ in order to build a ‘culture of peace.’ These principles include the development of social, ecological and political justice. Long committed to justice for the poor and peace as a matter of respect for the inviolable rights of the person, the Roman Catholic religious leaders have been energetic in their efforts to bring peace in this troubled land.

Derrick Duncan of the United Church of Christ told stories of local-global peacemaking efforts in many places, this one from Colombia. As the Colombian Mennonites gathered to lift up the “Pan y Paz (Bread and Peace) Pledge”(23) to celebrate the UN International Day of Peace in the central plaza of Bogota, trucks with armed troops arrived. The music and litanies continued, however, and Charlotte Shristi, a volunteer tells what happened:

Instead of harassing attendees the soldiers slowly clustered around the plaza listening attentively to the soft-spoken but powerful messages of peace achieved through economic security for the country’s citizens instead of through a military solution. Peace will come to Colombia only when its people have food, employment, education, and health care. The ‘Pan Y Paz’ event appropriately ended with church members sharing baskets of bread with the crowd: soldiers, beggars and peace supporters alike.(24)

In a conversation with Kathryn Wolford from Lutheran World Relief, I learned of a two-year grant just funded by the Ford Foundation to “Develop a Framework for Linking Local Peacemaking to National and International Policymakers.” Jointly sponsored by Lutheran World Relief and the Mennonites through Justapaz, this program will engage over 20 local “Sanctuary of Peace” Churches in Colombia that have made significant advances in peacemaking and the prevention of violence. To identify what they have learned from their experience, and to share those learnings with others is an important method of enlarging indigenous efforts and broaden the engagement of overseas partners. The project involves “fostering joint learning among Colombian grassroots peacemakers and U.S. grassroots faith-based organizations that enables them to document knowledge, improve peacemaking practice, and develop a framework to inform policymaking.”(25)

Barbara Gerlach, a Washington, DC, United Church of Christ (UCC) minister and co-chair of the Colombia Human Rights Committee, Colombia liaison with the UCC Justice and Witness Ministries, urges recognition of coalition building both in the U.S. and in particular countries. Such coalitions are currently working to support ecumenical church and civil society efforts for peacemaking and a negotiated political settlement to the 40-year conflict in Colombia. In an e-mail note Gerlach describes these coalitional efforts:

  1. Linking peace building with strong policy advocacy in the U.S. through the Colombia Steering Committee, a coalition of 35 NGO’s and church organizations trying to change U.S. policy toward Colombia and an Ecumenical Group of about 12 church offices based in Washington
  2. Organizing delegations of ecumenical church leaders to Colombia, delegations of African-Americans to meet with Afro-Colombians disproportionately hard-hit by the violence, and catalyzing other denominations and Witness to Peace to take delegations to Colombia
  3. Arranging visits and national tours of church leaders, human rights and peace leaders with the U.S. government-Congress, State Dept, USAID, cities and churches to bring their voices and perspectives into the U.S. policy debate, reduce military spending, increase social aid, stop aerial fumigation of illegal crops, include strong human rights and environment conditions on aid
  4. Accompanying civil society peace initiatives in Colombia, attending large assemblies to show international support
  5. Assisting in coalition-building among civil society peace leaders and organizations, including participating in the planning and funding of coalition-building and consensus-building gatherings in Colombia with international participation
  6. Organizing a week-long training in Washington, DC with 15 key peace leaders from Colombia, including 2 days with George Mason Institute for Conflict Analysis and Resolution and John Paul Lederach on Coalition-Building and Negotiation Skill and 3 days of Advocacy Training meetings with NGO’s, Congress, State Dept., and a planning meeting to craft a peace message and strategy in the U.S.
  7. Encouraging the development of sister church relationships between local churches in Colombia and the U.S.
  8. Encouraging U.S. churches to provide “sanctuary” for Colombians under threat
  9. Catalyzing mission partnerships between UCC Connecticut Conference and UCC Central Atlantic Conference with Justapaz, Mennonite Church in Colombia; using these partnerships to catalyze more attention to Colombia from the staff of Global Ministries of the UCC/DOC and Church World Service
  10. Letter-writing campaigns to the Colombian and U.S. governments when church and peace leaders are under threat; a recent threat to arrest Ricardo Esquivia generated thousands of letters and created space for him to begin a new grassroots peace and development project in the north coast
  11. Providing support for regional and local peace and development projects, technical assistance, funding, open doors of support, emergency alert networks so that the “eyes of the world watching” Colombia increase the security of Colombians working for peace
  12. Working to strengthen ecumenical peace efforts between Catholics and Protestants in Colombia through strong Catholic and Protestant ecumenical work in the U.S., co-sponsoring tours of Catholic and Protestant leaders to the U.S., briefings in Congress, setting up joint meetings with Catholics and Protestants in Colombia
  13. Participating as international observers in meetings in third countries between Colombian church leaders and guerrilla groups to open a path to political negotiations and to improve the safety of citizens, churches, and church leaders on the ground
  14. Providing spiritual support, time away, reflection time for peace leaders who are “burned out” and traumatized by living and working in the midst of conflict
  15. Developing worship services to lift up the courageous peace work of Colombia
  16. Developing educational and advocacy materials on Colombia.
  17. Doing media work, articles, letters to the editor, and developing websites to increase awareness of peace and human rights work by Colombian churches
  18. Developing church e-lists networks to share info and to respond to crisis

Coalition building, according to Gerlach, is key if the work is to be effective and long-lasting.

Analysis

The Church World Service website lists a remarkable number of U.S. based religious groups working as partners with the religious community in Colombia, underscoring the value of coalition-building. These groups work by sending people and financial resources, providing training and encouraging relationship building among people in conflict along with each other, and providing education and advocacy opportunities for U.S. faith-based partners. Colombian religious leaders believe the development of a national consensus on the renewal of Colombia is key. This will take ecumenical efforts and considerable support from the partner communities from around the world that have been involved in Colombia. Advocacy in relation to U.S. policy in Colombia is essential as well, and could productively be increased, especially if the groups currently working in Colombia coordinated advocacy efforts even more fully than is now the case. Getting U.S. policy makers to pay attention to the efforts of peacemakers in Colombia is necessary to sustain the pressures toward peace. The work is long, slow, and painful.

Peter Stucky, President of the Mennonite Church in Colombia, identified three of the major obstacles to peace in Colombia:

First, a lack of will by either political party to seriously negotiate. In four years there has been not a single reform proposed of the many that everyone knows have to occur as a condition for lasting peace. Second, political and government structures are unjust and exclusionary of the majority. Everyone knows this has to change. Third, and perhaps most important, is the simplistic attraction of a violent solution to ending conflict that seduces the powerful into thinking that necessary reforms can be postponed indefinitely. (This quote came from a wide-ranging report to the UCC churches of Connecticut by volunteers Hugh and Kate McLean. Click here to read the report.)

This analysis, sadly similar to that in other countries, requires deeply committed leadership from within the religious community and support from faith-based groups abroad who take their cues from the indigenous peacemakers. It is the stimulation of imagination, of creating alternative futures, of constructing alternative worlds, that is required and the faith community has within it the resources for such effort. Clearly that work is underway – in and through the development of peacemaking partnerships. It will continue down the long slow road to peace.

Partnerships with U.S. Local and Regional Religious Bodies to Strengthen Peace in Nagaland

Baptist work among the Naga peoples of Mongolian ancestry in northeast India illustrates the effect that supportive local congregations in the U.S. and a denominational peace fellowship can have in areas of armed conflict. As a result of colonial decision-making, Naga lands were split between different modern nation-states. Gandhi promised independence to the Naga people, but that agreement was rescinded after his assassination, prompted an on-going state of civil war in the region. The Baptists had been missionizing in the area for many years, and many Naga people were Baptists. Dan Buttry tells of his congregation’s willingness to give him time from full-time parish ministry for four weeks of work teaching conflict resolution overseas each year, which they supported as part of his ministry and theirs. In coordination with the Baptist Peace Fellowship, representing 13 different Baptist Conventions, Buttry and colleagues found ways to support Naga peacemakers. First they brought warring Naga factions together and then provided training in conflict transformation in the wider region. Buttry and colleagues also provided support by accompanying them as the Naga presented their culture and aspirations and explored possibilities for peace. Through participation by Naga students in Eastern Mennonite University’s programs in conflict transformation, the Mennonites have also sent trainer/consultants as catalysts for peace in Northern India. According to Buttry, the Nagas gained confidence to participate in the peace talks with government, rather than to use guerilla tactics to get their message across. The American Baptist Church is now sponsoring a full-time missionary in global conflict resolution.

Nagalim – the whole homeland of the Naga peoples, 48,000 square miles located between India, Burma and China – is now broken by arbitrary boundaries between the occupying states of India and Burma. “Despite brutal setbacks, Nagas are continuing their tradition of nonviolent resistance through grassroots initiatives organized by women, student, and human rights groups, and traditional Naga social institutions,” according to a brochure shared by Akum Longchari, a Naga participant in the June Consultation.

Analysis

The approach taken by the religious partners and indigenous leaders in Nagaland was to develop trust among those caught in conflict, particularly those who were alienated and disenfranchised. This trust, along with training in specific skills of negotiation, led to increased self-confidence among those challenging the government through guerilla tactics who discovered, through this process, that they were capable of participating legitimately in negotiations. The solidarity, training and support throughout the negotiation periods and following are essential if working partnerships are to succeed. There are often setbacks, and perseverance over time is needed.

It would be interesting to explore what relationship, if any, there was between the Baptists and the Mennonites in this region. So often the stories are told from a particular point of view, that entry points for collaborative work are less visible. Here, as in all regions, careful documentation of efforts is useful in order to assess what works and what does not, as well as the strengthening of communication between different religious groups working in partnerships in the same country.

Other Stories of Reciprocal Involvement in Peacemaking and Advocacy

The number of examples of faith-based peacemaking narratives by indigenous peacemakers, local and regional religious bodies in the U.S. and grassroots activists that illustrate a reciprocal manner of working – a profound sharing of power – is encouraging. The following brief list adds only a few of these projects in a range of effort and creativity:

  • The development of an Interfaith Peacebuilding Guide by the United Religions Initiative (Barbara Hartford and Mohammed Abu-Nimer) creates processes for helping people to create a safe place for all voices to be heard, to work together to end religiously motivated violence, and to use faith to build peace. This has been field tested within the constituency of URI, representing people from various cultures and contexts.
  • Paul Jahn’s narrative tells of the partnership between UCC Congregations in Indiana, the UCC Indiana-Kentucky Conference, and peace efforts in Sri Lanka in partnership with the Tamil Church, a project of relationship building that has a 12-year history. Because of working relationships with U.S. legislators from Indiana, the UCC peacemakers were able to develop political space in D.C. for the peace process, working with Senator Lugar to help develop legislation that transformed violent terrorist approaches to the conflict into peaceful processes as a model political process.
  • Presbyterian Church (U.S.A.)’s Interfaith Listening Project involves the church’s partners from ten countries each sending a two-person team (one Christian, one Muslim) to visit congregations, presbyteries, colleges, and local communities to explore the complexities of living in a multi-religious world (Debby Vial).
  • The Plowshares Institute (Bob and Alice Evans) works in establishing long term connections through on-going international immersion projects or traveling seminars, congregation to congregation partnerships, innovative training in conflict resolution, and providing visibility to peacemaking efforts abroad. Plowshares’ “Council Member Churches” are congregations throughout the United States that explicitly support peacemaking activities overseas. Plowshares currently has a three-year initiative with the Ministry of Justice and Human Rights in Indonesia called “Human Rights, Democracy, and Conflict Transformation: Addressing the Roots of Terrorism,” with a spiritual and moral foundation and links between Christians and Muslims in the process.
  • The Companion Synod Program of the Evangelical Lutheran Church in America (ELCA) uses a new model designed as a “circle of relationships’” (e.g., the Milwaukee, Sierra Pacific, and Metropolitan DC Synods, along with congregations in Texas and Michigan and the churches of El Salvador – together brought 40 - 50 delegates for election monitoring at the request of the Council of Churches in El Salvador).
  • David Anderson tells this story from the IL Conference of Churches (ICC) - A call came from the Cuba Council of Churches to the Illinois Conference of Churches following conversations with the Chicago Religious Leadership Network on Latin America. The invitation from the Cuban Council was to help develop a trans-national ecumenical community, to be attentive to the Cuban Council’s social mission, and to be a voice against the wall of ignorance that has been built in the United States. After much discussion, the ICC Board decided to think beyond Illinois, and so a trip to Cuba was organized in 2000, with a second in 2002. These developed into a two-way exchange that proved helpful in both communities as they listened to and learned from each other. There were difficulties. The ICC wanted to bring Pastor Raul Suarez, Pastor of Ebenezer Baptist Church in Cuba and former member of the Cuban Parliament, to the U.S. in 2002, but his visa was denied by the U.S. State Department. (A vice president of the Cuban Council was allowed in 2000). Also, the Chicago Presbytery goes to Cuba every year and there are sister parishes between Cuban and Illinois congregations.
  • Phil Anderson describes the work of Tim Huffman, Professor at Trinity Seminary in Columbus Ohio, who brought a group of students to observe the Peace Accords in Guatemala brokered through an ecumenical team from the Lutheran World Federation and the World and (U.S.) National Councils of Churches, giving on the ground experience as eye-witnesses to those who will become peacemakers within the faith community.
  • Witness for Peace grew from individuals concerned with faith-based peacemaking and now has wide denominational support in reciprocal efforts to build peace in the Americas. Its collaborative work is focused primarily in Nicaragua, El Salvador, Guatemala, and Cuba. Congregation to congregation efforts, peace journeys, and advocacy mechanisms are broadly used.

Reciprocity, mutual empowerment, listening to and learning from each other in the global community is key to effective work. Often grassroots activists take on this responsibility of people to people peacemaking with effectiveness. These “everyday artisans,” says Paul Lederach, become an important part of the story. “Their grounded wisdom and their often inspiring initiatives help to demonstrate that everyone can contribute to peace.”(26)

A Brief Analysis of Current Efforts by U.S. Local and Regional Religious Bodies in International Peacemaking: Obstacles and Possibilities

As many of the stories in this paper illustrate, it is extremely difficult to work against the oppressiveness of war, lack of vision and commitment to peace, structural intransigence, and the draw of violence to hide reform. Yet the peacemaking segments of religious communities labor on in powerful partnerships that will, eventually make a difference—in Colombia, Ireland, Rwanda, Burundi, Sudan, Mozambique, Liberia, El Salvador, Israel and Palestine, Haiti, and many other places--against all odds. Recognition of the many entry points to peacemaking is important.

Among the noticeable elements of effectiveness in peacemaking is the presence of and commitment to reciprocity and mutual empowerment. With the poet Adrienne Rich I am astounded at the way in which, age after age, people with “no extraordinary power” reconstitute the world. That power is the power of collaborative change, not controlled or dictated change – change that draws on the gifts that each partner brings into transformation of the conflictive situation or the dialogue for peace. It is the power of reciprocal talk in places where conflict drives people apart – learning how to listen deeply and speak respectfully with attention to the other. It is the power of pondered mutuality that keeps people thinking together about, and ruminating on, better ways to build lasting relationships. It is the power of emotional energy and persistence that supports compassionate efforts to work together for peace and justice in the face of violence, walls, and weaponry – and stays over the long haul. And it is the power of nurturing mutual relationships through which creative peacemaking begins to take root. The partnerships between and among peoples indigenous to the struggle and people who come from U.S. local and regional religious bodies work best if they are built on a reciprocal model of collaboration and mutual endeavor.

Recognizing and drawing on the diverse gifts that various denominations and interreligious bodies offer is a powerful strategy that could enlarge peacemaking efforts. It is wise stewardship of precious peacemaking dollars to collaborate wherever possible on research, academic training, and development of strategic processes and/or materials. Outstanding resources are available.

As an example, Notre Dame offers the Joan B. Kroc Center for International Peacemaking and its Program on Religion, Conflict and Peacemaking (PRCP):

This interdisciplinary, inter-religious program explores the complex roles of diverse religious traditions in contemporary conflicts. The PRCP encompasses the full spectrum of religious involvement in contemporary conflict, from the religious legitimation of violence to religious peacemaking efforts, such as mediation by religious groups and efforts to promote inter-religious and intra-religious dialogue. Research focuses on the phenomenon of "lived religion" by examining how religious leaders and movements "translate" sacred scriptures and traditional norms into practical principles that shape decisions and behaviors "on the ground." Through deeper understanding of religion's