New Approaches to Interreligious Dialogue
In less than fifty years, the religious landscape in Quebec has changed considerably, with the phenomenal decline of Catholicism, a marked religious disaffiliation, and the extraordinary rise of non-Christian religions. Today, young Catholics are encountering a well-established religious pluralism. What relations do they develop with believers of other denominations?
In Quebec, just as Catholicism was declining in popularity and secularism was taking hold of a modern society—as demonstrated by the split between Church and State during the Quiet Revolution—the number of non-Christian communities was increasing significantly.
Whereas in 1921, the census indicated only 478 people of Muslim faith, the number skyrocketed starting in the 1970s, eight years after the abolition of discriminatory provisions contained in Canada’s Immigration Law. The number of Muslims in Canada was estimated at 40,000 in 1970, 100,000 in 1981 and 250,000 in 1991. Today, it is believed to exceed 600,000. In Quebec, Muslims form the largest non-Christian community. There are an estimated 200,000 Muslims presently living in the province.
The Quebec government’s decision to encourage immigration by speakers of French since the 1980s is not unrelated to this situation. Among francophone immigrants are many Muslims from Algeria, Morocco, Tunisia and Lebanon.
While the case of Muslims is remarkable, others are equally so. As shown by Frédéric Castel in L’Annuaire du Québec 2004, the number of Hindus, Sikhs and Buddhists has also increased considerably.
Coinciding with this reconfiguration of the social context, not only religious but ethnic, has been a drastic reduction in the number of Christian believers. Inevitably, Christians have been compelled to develop reconciliation approaches with persons of faith in the new religions on the Quebec landscape. This has been undertaken by several youth associations.
Humanizing the world
The Centre étudiant Benoît-Lacroix (CEBL) made such efforts official by implementing Islamo-Christian meetings. The centre wants to encourage understanding between Christian and Muslim students at the Université de Montréal. The objectives are quite simple: to share one’s faith; to open oneself to different faith traditions; to develop a climate of peace; and to humanize the world so as to accommodate ourselves and others despite our differences.
Dr. Patrice Brodeur, who is Canada Research Chair on Islam, Pluralism, and Globalization at the Université de Montréal, believes that the September 11 attack generated interest in Islam that has found expression in a desire for understanding. The development of interreligious dialogue would be an example of this. At the same time, he adds, a “certain marginalization” has developed.
While more and more groups are laying the groundwork for such dialogue, there are, of course, others who have different experiences in their encounters with other religions. For example, the Groupe étudiant d’animation biblique et pastorale at Université du Québec à Montréal (UQAM)—known as IKTUS—organizes no interfaith activities.
The need has not really been felt, says Samuel Coulombe, one of the group’s two full-time employees. A student in human resources management, Coulombe indicates that “it could be interesting to establish dialogue,” but that for the moment “no initiative has really been taken” in that direction.
“It should be pointed out that the offices of IKTUS are only a few metres away from two other religious organizations. So there is already a sort of interfaith dialogue.” The two organizations represent Muslims and Jews at UQÀM.
Coulombe notes that it is not unusual for members of these three organizations to talk together. “True, there’s nothing formal about these efforts, but they nonetheless allow us to learn more about certain specific aspects of their beliefs.”
Since its foundation nearly ten years ago, IKTUS has focused on establishing dialogue between the various Christian denominations. “Above all,” notes Coulombe, “it is an ecumenical group.” IKTUS brings together not only Catholics but also people of Evangelist, Anglican, Protestant and Orthodox faith. This intra-religious encounter allows them to “talk about our differences. And obviously, it doesn’t happen without effort because there are differences that we must surmount.”
Father Beaubien, pioneer of reconciliation
Without a doubt, the key figure in the development of this type of initiative remains the now retired Jesuit Father Irénée Beaubien. He was in large part responsible for the emergence of interfaith dialogue involving Catholics in Quebec in the 1950s. At the outset, it was more like a platform for inter-denominational dialogue.
Photo by Gunther Gamper.
**
“Everything started in 1952,” recalls Father Beaubien, “when we organized very discreet meetings between Catholics and Protestants.” The initiative seems straightforward today, but at the time, it was nothing short of revolutionary. In fact, prior to the pontification of Jean XXIII, the Catholic Church was reticent at the very idea of ecumenism, in other words shared actions between Christian denominations. The idea was to return to the teachings of Christ as set down in the Gospels: “Jesus himself had asked for the unity of his disciples when he said, ‘That they should be one so the world may believe,’” notes Father Beaubien.
His initiatives bore fruit. In 1963, the Canadian Centre for Ecumenism was founded. Today, the organization gathers a dozen religious traditions including the Anglican, Baptist, Roman Catholic, Evangelical, Lutheran, Mormon and Orthodox Churches. Dialogue was so successful that at Expo 67, the World’s Fair in Montréal, the seven main Christian denominations in Canada were represented at the same pavilion, the Christian Pavilion. This period was marked by “an enormous effort in education to reconcile the Churches,” recalls Father Beaubien.
Today, Father Beaubien is delighted that young people are continuing the dialogue and have extended it beyond the limited circle of Christian churches to that of all the world’s great religions. “It is the fruit of bonds we forged several decades ago.”
When asked why he laid the groundwork for interreligious dialogue, he answers calmly, “My friend, if we wish to have peace in the world, we must talk to each other. We must be able to seek out the best in all beliefs, otherwise we cannot hope to establish lasting peace.”
Interreligious dialogue today
What can explain the need to move closer to other religions today? To understand the phenomenon, we must first recognize that the dynamics of young people is fundamentally different today than it was in previous generations. As Canada Research Chair Patrice Brodeur puts it, “Most of them—especially those who live in urban environments—are at ease with diversity. They already live in environments where several religious identities co-exist.”
This “tolerantism” towards differences in belief systems is an integral part of the reality of young generations. Inevitably, it leads to a sort of cultural relativism—the indispensable first step to understanding dissimilarities.
“Young people say to themselves, ‘If you are nice and you don’t get on my nerves, I don’t see why there would be a problem,’” summarizes Dr. Brodeur. Young people have a strong propensity to decompartmentalize, he notes. This generation of believers, who experienced neither the period when Catholicism was at its zenith nor the fall of the ecclesiastical powers, finds it hard to understand some people’s phobia with regard to religion in general. It may well be this rejection that drives them to try, in turn, to examine other religions even more openly in order to understand them better. To preach by example, in a sense.
Dr. Brodeur explains that two types of dialogue are put forward today. “There is first of all the daily dialogue between individuals of different religions.” This practice, he notes, tends to coast along superficially because it doesn’t push those involved to explore their fundamental differences—an essential aspect of beneficial dialogue. “Just because people talk to each other doesn’t mean they understand each other,” Dr. Brodeur concludes.
“The other type of dialogue is the official one. With that, you can go much deeper because of the supervision and preparation.” The reasons he gives draw on the very structure that guides interreligious dialogue. “During such meetings, we give ourselves a roadmap on which the parameters to abide by are written down so that all participants feel comfortable.”
Photo by Gunther Gamper.
***
Dr. Brodeur notes that several criteria must be taken into consideration when such initiatives are developed in order to avoid a dialogue of the deaf. “Among other things, we must take into account the need to control the group phenomenon. If one religion in particular is in the majority and starts to promote its own Truth, without taking into account that of others, that has a negative effect. So we must be equipped to ensure that does not happen.”When a group gets out of balance in this way, the minority may tune out or even perceive the exercise as having a hidden agenda of propaganda or religious promotion.
According to Dr. Brodeur, practising young Catholics can be divided into three categories: those who tolerate; those who ghettoize; and those who have developed a spiritual quest that compels them to continually learn more about others.
“Tolerance is not a synonym of understanding”
“In the first category,” he explains, “are those who tolerate. They don’t ask themselves many questions; in fact, they show a certain miseducation. Most young people fall into this category. Second, there are those who ghettoize, who erect barriers between differences.” Dr. Brodeur nonetheless recognizes that this tendency is “much less marked” in Montréal than in the United States—religious ghettos are virtually non-existant in Montréal. Lastly, he indicates, there are those who, as part of a spiritual quest, always try to learn more about other religions.
While young people have clearly accepted the idea of tolerance because they are in such close contact with difference, “tolerance is not a synonym of understanding,” he warns. In fact, interreligious dialogue is only one aspect among many in the sustained efforts that must be undertaken with young people.
“We can speak of interreligious dialogue, meaning dialogue between the major religious traditions, or of intra-religious dialogue, which refers to initiatives like ecumenism that reconcile various factions of the same religion, but we must also speak of dialogue that brings together not only people of religious belief, but also any other person,” he says.
Patrice Brodeur calls this humanist, universalist vision an “intervision of the world. It means establishing dialogue and building bridges between the various visions people have of the world—and not only those that arise from religious traditions.”
In fact, he emphasizes, incomprehension is even greater between believers and non-believers. This is the ground that Dr. Brodeur and the researchers in his chair wish to explore. The stated goal: to establish and make accessible an ever more universal dialogue.
Translated by Christine York.
To learn more:
DAHER, Ali. Les musulmans au Québec. Centre culturel islamique de Québec (CCIQ), 2003.
LAROUCHE, Jean-Marc and Guy Ménard, eds. L’étude de la religion au Québec. Bilan et prospective. Presses de l’Université Laval, 2001.
Profils des principaux groupes religieux du Québec. Quebec: Ministère des Affaires internationales, de l’Immigration et des Communautés culturelles. 1995.
RENAUD, Jean, Linda Pietrantonio, and Guy Bourgeault, Les relations ethniques en question. Ce qui a changé depuis le 11 septembre 2001. Presses de l’Université de Montréal, 2002.
VENNE, Michel, ed. L’annuaire du Québec 2004. Fides, 2004.
* Pope Jean-Paul II with Chief Rabbi Meir Lau (left) and Imam Tayseer al-Tamimi during an interreligious meeting in Jerusalem, in March 2000.
** Father Irénée Beaubien (left) with Dr Stuart E. Brown, director of the Canadian Centre for Ecumenism.
*** Patrice Brodeur, Canada Research Chair on Islam, Pluralism and Globalization at Université de Montréal.
This article is part of a series on the diversity of values and religious beliefs in colleges and universities and is presented with the financial support of:
