Berkley Center

Background: This discussion between Katherine Marshall, Brady Walkinshaw, and Elías Szczytnicki took place as part of preparatory work for a January 30-31, 2009 consultation in Antigua, Guatemala on the role played by faith-based organizations in development work. In the interview, Mr. Szczytnicki shares how he developed a keen interest and expertise in interfaith dynamics. He offers his opinion on how religious organizations and governments across Latin America work together, dwelling on the importance of interreligious collaboration.

Can you tell us about your journey to your present position? What has inspired you along the way?

I was a precocious child as far as interreligious relations are concerned, and have been interested in these issues ever since I was 13 years old. I remember well that it was at age 13 that I became interested, because in 1974 the Holy See issued a document, known as “Orientations and Suggestions," that was dedicated to giving a framework for better dialogue and relations between Jews and Christians. This was a decade after the Vatican Council II approved Nostra Aetate. I spent a lot of time reading what academics and writers, mostly Jewish, had to say about the consequences of the new Vatican document. Ever since, I have always felt a very strong call to work towards better interreligious relations.

Somewhat later, at the age of 16, I began to relate to the topic through engagement with institutions. I worked up the courage to visit a Catholic nun who was in charge of the Jewish-Catholic relations at Argentina's Catholic Bishops' Conference. Her name was Sister Alda and she belonged to the order of Our Lady of Zion. She had come to Argentina from Brazil to work on these issues, because in Brazil the Catholic Church did not have the resources to pay attention to them. Jewish-Catholic relations in Argentina were very important, not only because of the size of the Jewish community, but also because of the very deep history of anti-Semitism of the Church in Argentina.

In 1976, on the day of my fifteenth birthday, there was a coup d' état that ushered in one of the most painful moments in the history of Argentina. The new régime was dedicated to the defense of the Christian and Western order and because of that it was very difficult to be a Jew living in harmony with the Catholic majority. This was especially true in light of the fact that being Jewish was a significant reason to be on the list of missing people under the military regime. Nevertheless, it was during those years, amidst very serious doubts about my status as a Jew trying to understand Christianity, that my calling concerning interreligious relations became complete.

And then I migrated to Israel, which we call Aliyah. There, I got involved with various interreligious groups, which not only promoted reconciliation between Jews and Christians, but also emphasized the importance of the Jewish link to the land of Israel and the importance of achieving harmony between Jewish and Arab people. This opened up for me other journeys of dialogue and reconciliation. At that time, I met some of the mentors that have stayed with me to the present.

After living in Israel, my life's journey took me to Peru. There, some years after my arrival, I became part of a Peruvian Interfaith Committee, the only group there that was at that time working on ecumenism and interreligious dialogue.

At the time of the transitional government that succeeded the régime of Alberto Fujimori, different spaces were opening for participation in civil society. This opening meant that civil society, in contrast with the past, now involved religious communities other than the Catholic Church. As a result, new areas of action opened up for the Interfaith Committee, in its role as a convener of different religious groups. Among the most meaningful were the Truth and Reconciliation Commission (TRC) and the Cooperation Body for the Fight against Poverty (CBFAP), which included an interdenominational range of churches and faith-inspired institutions such as Caritas and the Lutheran Church.

As these new outlets for civil society matured, I came to appreciate the importance of generating synergy among them, as well as the importance of providing them with more public visibility. I began to look for an international partner that could help us to achieve these ends. With this in mind, I got involved with the World Conference of Religions for Peace, which I visited in New York in 2002. They agreed to give us support to organize a national interreligious council in Peru. With this backing, we sponsored a consultation in Lima in 2003. During the preparation for this consultation, Religions for Peace asked us to add to the schedule the first-ever meeting of the Latin American and Caribbean Women of Faith Network (LACWFN).

The success of both the consultation and the LACWFN meeting motivated Religions for Peace to establish an institutional base in Latin America and the Caribbean. They asked me to collaborate in the development of other national interreligious councils in the region. As a first step, we held the first Latin American Religious Leaders Consultation in 2004, which was the widest and most representative consultation convened up to that time. Representatives of the main Catholic, Protestant, Jewish, Islamic, and indigenous coordination organizations throughout the Latin American and Caribbean region participated. That same year, we opened the Latin American and Caribbean Religions for Peace Regional Office in Lima, which I have been running ever since. In 2006, the process that we had been promoting was consolidated with the formation of the Latin American and Caribbean Religious Leaders Council, whose moderator is Cardinal Julio Terrazas from Bolivia; I serve as secretary general.

How did the Commission for Truth and Reconciliation promote interreligious dialogue in Peru?

The TRC, and the consultative group that preceded it, represented important breakthroughs in Peru's history. They also represented important examples of interreligious dialogue, given the shared presence of Catholic and Evangelical representatives in both events which, as I mentioned earlier, was the product of the broader process of opening to civil society that was initiated by the transitional government.

Religions for Peace Peru was formed in 2003, not long before the TRC delivered its final report. The prevailing spirit of those days was strongly present during the meeting, just as in the conclusions that emerged from it. The consultation that gave birth to Religions for Peace in Peru also involved a reflection on the common journey that the religious communities had taken together in the preceding years, in their common work for justice, peace, and solidarity. Thus human rights issues were also on the agenda.

Human rights issues also featured prominently on the interreligious agendas in other countries of the region, mainly because Catholic voices on human rights did not wish to stand alone in their opposition to the military régimes of the 1970s and 1980s. The most significant examples were the Committee for Peace in Chile, the joint fight of Cardinal Paulo Arns and Rabbi Henry Sobel in Brazil, and the participation of Catholic, Protestant, and Jewish leaders in the Standing Human Rights Assembly of Argentina (APDH). Thus human rights advocacy has been deeply linked, for nearly forty years, to interfaith relations in Latin America.

What path did interfaith cooperation take in Peru?

Peru's interfaith process has passed through some difficulties that stem above all from economic and political forces, and are not strictly linked to interfaith dialogue per se. In Peru there is a persisting tension between economy and democracy. The government has tended to focus more on the immediate economic demands of the 40 percent of the population living in poverty rather than in equality. The system is not interested in an equitable income distribution, but rather has focused solely on the fight against poverty.

Because of this general orientation, the government does not seem to be very interested in the process of consultation about its social policies. It is the ruling party which in effect serves as the state apparatus. Because the government is not interested in promoting meaningful social change in the country, the participation process is very weak. Any criticism of social policies is not tolerated, because such criticism is equated with the questioning democracy promotion. The cost to the country will be very high if the valuable contributions that civil society and religious communities can make to public policy formation are ignored.

The process of consultation needs to be focused not only within different countries. It also should be supported within the international system, in order to assure the full validity of economic and social rights for everyone. The recent constitutional reform in Bolivia recognizes access to water as a human right. This topic was discussed in 2007 at a meeting where the international financial institutions, including the World Bank, participated. For religious communities this topic has profound ethical underpinnings and it is because of this that they promote cooperation on this topic.

However, World Bank officials tend to see assertions about water as a human rights issue as an aberration, because they do not understand, or do not want to understand, the ethical dimensions of the topic. There is clearly a need to deepen the consultation process at all levels so that the religious groups' ethical points of view are taken into account.

If the countries of Latin America are seen to be religious societies, then the logical implications of that fact need to be taken into account. One implication, which can be termed a responsibility, is the need to promote just and harmonious societies where everyone has equal access to opportunities and to a future free of poverty. However, not all religious leaders see the challenge and need for changes in unjust economic and social structures in the same way. Some are conservative and are not interested in denouncing oppressive structures or in demanding the construction of more just societies. In the Peruvian Catholic Church, this conservative faction is very strong, as was demonstrated in the recent elections at the Bishop's Conference, where conservatives came very close to winning the elections.

How do you see the fact that conservative interests are part of the interreligious dialogue?

I think that this is a question that cannot be answered easily because very frequently we find “surprises” that demonstrate that ideologies sometimes bend in the face of reality. You can see this in the way that religious leaders in Latin America, who were initially skeptical about social transformation, have changed their ideas and behaviors in light of the injustices that so much of the population lives with. These religious leaders have changed because of the crude reality that many of their parishioners face. For example, San Salvador's new Catholic Archbishop has, in spite of his being a known conservative, made public declarations against exploitation of workers in mining operations, just as his predecessor (also a conservative) did.

If we examine the position of the evangelical churches, we find similar situations, because it is very difficult for them to remain neutral when their parishioners live in situations where they are malnourished and have no access to health and education services or opportunities that would help them break the cycle of poverty. I found it very interesting that the evangelical alliances of Latin America issued a highly critical document on poverty in the region when they held their second meeting. Even when they describe themselves as conservatives yet take significant positions against the causes of poverty; this clearly shows that no religious leader can remain ignorant of the reality of those they must look after. No pastor can remain silent if his parishioners are hungry when they come to church.

That is the reason why the conservative segments of the Catholic Church get involved with issues that deal with poverty, although they might express it differently. Even though local churches might be led by conservatives, they still belong to the universal church, which historically, currently, and consistently has denounced social injustice and has promoted peace through development. The difference between conservatives and so-called progressives can be seen much more clearly in action and deeds than in speeches. In their discourse, the conservatives may not go far in advocating for social justice, but when you look at their actions the picture is quite different and there are many examples of areas where they have moved quite far.

Could you expand on the link between dialogue, theory, and action?

Our promotion of dialogue, within a culture that many times disparages it, or even rejects it, allows us to be seen as examples for our societies. Because we are inclusive, bringing in different religious tendencies, in societies that are not used to religious pluralism, our dialogues can serve as an inspiration for other areas of life in our countries. I believe that in Latin America we must continue to build mechanisms and opportunities for dialogue, as a means towards social integration. For these reasons, the contribution of the religious communities can be very significant. How does dialogue lead us to action? It is my belief that it should be done by focusing it around smaller areas where the role of the religious communities, the way they interact with governments, international organizations that work in development, and the other sectors of the civil society can be seen more clearly. This will make it possible to see and envisage important potential and actual roles that interfaith groups can play in identifying and articulating action involving widely different groups.

What roles do you think that faith-based communities can play in promoting behavior change?

I think that this is an area that we, as religious communities, have not discussed sufficiently. Nevertheless, I believe that this is where our greatest potential tool in the fight against poverty can be found. In Peru, I collaborate with Juntos, the conditional cash transfer program, in my capacity as representative of the religious communities. I belong to the Supervision and Transparency Committee that was created at the inception of the program to keep it free of political-party interests. Our work also involves making sure that the original purposes of the program are maintained. These purposes are primarily focused on improving education, health, and nutrition of children in the poorest rural areas of the country.

Questions about what changes are taking place in these poor populations as a result of the program's intervention are thus highly relevant. And because we see that these changes are occurring on a very limited scale, we believe that the health education component is not being well implemented. This is where we believe that the religious communities can provide a distinctive contribution, which goes beyond those that government and other civil society organizations can provide.

That's why I am convinced that religious communities are not being fully “taken advantage of” by the governments in the common fight against poverty. I think that governments still have the foolish wish to always appear as the ones that are improving the lives of the needy. I think that this is the reason why they are still using selfish criteria to carry out their work, which limits the numerous collaborative possibilities offered by religious communities. This situation gets even worse when we see it through the lens of the impressive economic growth that many of the countries of the region have experienced in the last few years, but which has not reduced the large numbers of people living below the poverty line.

How do you see the relationship between faith-based communities and the governments of the region?

Many governments of the region find it difficult to fully integrate religious communities into the design of public policies in the social field. As I mentioned before, there are governments that are scared that religious communities could “take away” some of their roles as leaders. We live in extremely strange democracies in which some of our governments behave in a very selfish manner. The poor, who at the same time are the citizens who lack most resources, do not have access to many benefits that could be gained by forming or encouraging public-private partnerships between governments and religious communities aimed at dealing with extreme poverty.

Another issue that often concerns me is the problem that many NGOs, mainly those working with women or sexual minorities, face very aggressive opposition from different religious communities, who even regard them as enemies. Likewise, these NGOs criticize the absence of separation between church and state in many countries of the region, citing it as the reason why public policies diverge from their agenda. However, they don't understand that in various European countries where there is no separation between church and state, much legislation has been adopted that is opposed by established religious communities.

What is your agenda for this year? What important events does it include?

This year, I believe, our main meeting will be dedicated to launching a dialogue within our regional network of Religions for Peace, about what it means to be a man or a woman of faith in our region. This question is transcendent in the world of today, given the changes that the identities of the faithful of different religious groups are going through. This dialogue also needs to help enhance links to the spiritual world of the Mayas in Latin America.

Each day, we appreciate more and more, the importance of identifying the faithful of the indigenous spiritualities as separate entities from the other religious groups. Throughout the region, mainly for Christians, it has become urgent to understand the fusion of traditions that is present in many indigenous people. It is my belief that Religions for Peace must reconsider that dimension of dialogue. Last week, in Paris, we held a meeting between young people from Palestine and Israel, which in great part was dedicated to listening to each other. With such initiatives we are recovering the place that dialogue has within our sphere of action.

Furthermore, we will continue to work, harder still, on the initiatives that we have been developing for many years to articulate the response of religious communities to different issues where they can work together. We will also continue developing various national interreligious councils in the Southern Cone, which we rejuvenated last year.

How do you perceive the effects of the economic crisis?

At this point, the crisis is largely seen as a reflection of the broader world problems. It has not seriously affected Peru yet, despite the increasing numbers of layoffs and the demands for help from the businessmen. The most worrying concern in Peru is the fall of financial remittances. The religious communities see the economic crisis as an issue that it tightly linked to justice and ethics. It is difficult to understand how earlier, resources to fight hunger could not be found but now far larger sums are being mobilized to save the international financial system. Thus some countries of the region are demanding a change in the international financial system in order to democratize it so it can provide far more generous help to poor countries.

What are your next steps regarding UNFPA's interfaith network? What do you think of the results of the consultation meeting (in Argentina last year)?

I believe that the consultation made substantial contributions to enhancing faith community responses in areas such as HIV/AIDS and violence against women. With the support of Religions for Peace, UNFPA will be able to bring in new religious communities and faith-based organizations. The process that we are working on together with UNFPA can also contribute to empowering women of faith. The religious communities are showing that they are becoming far more mature in addressing the areas that I mentioned earlier. Therefore, I believe that the partnership we are strengthening together with UNFPA is appropriate and timely.

Would you like to add any other thoughts to this interview?

It is important to let the people in Washington, who from their positions within the United States government, international organizations, and think tanks, have a profound influence on forming public policies for our countries, know the opinions of the region's religious leaders. Often what is decided in Washington about policies undertaken in our countries is the product of small groups of experts, but they have a very deep impact in our countries. Thus the messages received in Washington from our religious leaders are very important. That is why we have been working on this matter.

Concerning themes on religion and cooperation for development, what is the one that concerns you the most in the region?

For the past two years, we have worked very hard to foster dialogue among governments, United Nations agencies, academic institutions, and religious leaders so they can identify better ways to collaborate among themselves to contribute to achieving the Millennium Development Goals (MDGs). This work arises from our belief that it is the duty of the religious communities to foster these synergies, placing the well-being of the needy as the priority goal to which all efforts must be directed.

Besides the seminar, what aspects would you like to be followed up? Which other themes triggered your interest?

A fundamental aspect that we can see in Latin America all the time is the notorious separation between the religious leadership and the faithful. For this reason, I think that it is very important to review once again convening capacity of the religious communities in light of this change. It is also necessary to review the crisis of religious education in our region, particularly regarding those aspects that refer to transmission of values, with an emphasis on those concerning justice and solidarity.

Another point that calls my attention is evaluating Georgetown University's possible collaboration to a renewed Latin American and Caribbean Interreligious University Network, in order to provide high quality resources to religious leaders for their advocacy endeavors. My idea includes a network of eight to 10 faith-based Latin American Universities that belong to the Catholic and Protestant churches as well as the Jewish community, which together with Georgetown University could elaborate the studies that will be required for understanding the situation of the region.