interreligious

Featured J.E.S. Author: Marianne Moyaert on the Role of Race in Interreligious Dialogue

Issue 60.2 of the Journal of Ecumenical Studies is now available via Project Muse. For this issue, we highlight Marianne Moyaert’s essay “Interreligious Dialogue, the Religiosecular, and the Race-Religion Divide: Musing from an Interfaith Scholar (and a Catholic Theologian),” which can be accessed HERE.

What is the central argument of your J.E.S. essay?

In this essay, I explore how, in Christian and, more specifically, Roman Catholic calls for interreligious dialogue, the acceptance of the so-called religiosecular divide goes hand-in-hand with the projection of the distinction between race and religion. I hypothesize that the dialogical turn in the Roman Catholic Church contributes to what Anya Topolski has called the masking of the religioracial constellation and what Geraldine Heng has called the refusal of race. Ironically, this becomes especially clear in the document We Remember, in which the Roman Catholic Church dedicated itself to exploring the extent to which it was co-responsible for the Shoah.

How did you become interested in this topic?

As a theologian of religions and interfaith educator, I was trained—like many—to treat religion and race as distinct domains. But over time, I became increasingly aware of how this separation restricted the critical scope of my work. Engaging with scholarship in critical race and secularism studies helped me see how deeply entangled these categories are, and how theology has often functioned to obscure that entanglement.

As a theologian of religions and interfaith educator, I was trained—like many—to treat religion and race as distinct domains. But over time, I became increasingly aware of how this separation restricted the critical scope of my work. This insight deepened while writing my recent book, Christian Imaginations of the Religious Other: A History of Religionization (Wiley-Blackwell, 2024), in which I trace how Christians throughout history have imagined religious others—Jews, Muslims, heretics, and pagans—and examine how these processes of religionization intersect with racialization. Engaging with critical race and secularism studies alongside this historical work made it increasingly clear how theology has often contributed to obscuring these entanglements, rather than confronting them.

You call attention to the corpus christianum and how excluding the religio-racial other was presented as a matter of societal health in the Middle Ages—an argument that draws comparisons to xenophobic violence in both the 20th and 21st centuries. If modern racism is not, in fact, modern, how do you think it has changed in the last hundred years?

What’s changed is not the logic of exclusion but the terms in which it is justified. In the Middle Ages, Christian authorities framed Jews, Muslims, and others as bodily threats to the purity of the Christian social body. Today, that same logic resurfaces in secularized language—invoking security, civility, or integration—but continues to mark certain bodies and beliefs as out of place. Understanding these continuities is essential for meaningful theological engagement with race.

What is your next project?

My next project, co-authored with Michelle Voss Roberts, is titled Multiple Voices, Multiple Salvations: Entangling Theologies of Religions. This comparative theological project reimagines salvation by engaging voices long excluded from dominant Christian theology, foregrounding race, gender, coloniality, and ecology. Each chapter brings Christian traditions into conversation with other theological perspectives, reworking central themes through embodied and entangled approaches to explore what multiple, liberative visions of salvation might look like today.


Marianne Moyaert, Ph.D., is a Professor at KU Leuven in Belgium, where she joined the Research Unit for Systematic Theology and the Study of Religions in 2023. Previously, she was Chair of Comparative Theology and Hermeneutics of Interreligious Dialogue at VU Amsterdam, where she led the master’s program in Interreligious Studies and the Emoena interfaith leadership program. Her research encompasses comparative theology, interreligious hermeneutics, and Jewish-Christian relations, with a particular interest in the ritual and material aspects of interfaith encounters. Since 2020, Dr. Moyaert has directed the VIDI research project Unequal Partners? a comparative ethnographic study examining how Christian-Jewish and Christian-Islamic couples in the Netherlands navigate their daily lives. She is also the editor-in-chief of Currents of Encounter, a Brill series at the intersection of theology, intercultural studies, and interfaith dialogue. A long-standing leader in the field, she serves on the steering committee for the Interreligious/Interfaith Studies group and has co-chaired the Comparative Theology group at the American Academy of Religion. Her magisterial new book, Christian Imaginations of the Religious Other: A History of Religionization (Wiley, 2024), crafts a Western European mosaic of religionization's turbulent history by unveiling how religious identities are constructed, hierarchies function, and how they are relevant for engaging diverse societies today worldwide.

Copy-of-Copy-of-The-Diablogue

Diablogue Home

Featured JES Author: Zulunungsang Lemtur's "Ao (Naga) Tribal People’s Practice of Aksü as Friendship"

Issue 60.1 of the Journal of Ecumenical Studies is now available via Penn Press. This issue features several articles on interreligious and ecumenical themes and multiple book reviews.

For each issue, the Diablogue features one author and makes a full-text PDF version of their article available on Project Muse. In this issue, we feature Zulunungsang Lemtur’s "Ao (Naga) Tribal People’s Practice of Aksü as Friendship: Relevance for Peace and Interreligious Friendship" which can be accessed HERE

Author Zulunungsang Lemtur

Zulunungsang Lemtur belongs to the Ao (Naga) tribe from Nagaland, India, and he currently teaches at Oikos University, Oakland. He received his PhD from the Graduate Theological Union, Berkeley, CA, and he is the author of Climate Refugees: Towards a Tribal Theology of Restoration and Tribal Cultural Imagination and Theological Conversation. Zulu participated in a Dialogue Institute interfaith leadership training conducted with the Graduate Theological Union in 2021.


In your article, you assert that the Ao concept of friendship could inspire the creation of interreligious dialogical models. What specific actions from the practice of aksü could lend themselves to religious dialogue aside from the general concept of Ao friendship?

For generations, aksü has helped Ao tribal society maintain peaceful relationships, and till today, aksü continues to be a means of peacebuilding and conflict management model for the Aos. Hence, community and mutual flourishing become vital for the Ao people’s approach to peace and friendship. The practice of aksü among the Ao tribe offers several specific actions that could be beneficial for religious dialogue beyond the general concept of Ao friendship. The practice of aksü emphasizes mutual respect and cooperation in their interactions. This approach can be applied to religious dialogue by encouraging participants to approach discussions with a genuine respect for each other's beliefs and a willingness to cooperate in finding common ground and mutual flourishing. Aksü fosters inter-tribal friendships that transcend mere power dynamics. This practice can inspire religious dialogue by promoting relationships that go beyond doctrinal differences and focus on establishing sincere relations based on shared values and mutual understanding. Also, aksü prioritizes harmony and social cohesion over individual or state dominance. In religious dialogue, this could mean prioritizing the community's well-being and fostering a sense of unity and harmony among different religious groups. I believe these actions from the practice of aksü can serve as valuable principles for creating meaningful and productive religious dialogues.

Though political realism is concerned mainly with the activity of states, it asserts that political bodies act for the growth of power and that the international sphere is a self-help system. How does the Ao tribe, in its concept of friendship and using aksü, challenge these notions?

I guess the Ao tribal people’s understanding of friendship and their practice of aksü might present a unique challenge to the notions of political realism. Unlike the self-help and power-centric approaches of political realism enacted through the state agency that gives primacy to power and self-interest, the Ao tribal people accentuate mutual respect, cooperation, and relationships. Through aksü, the Ao people foster friendships that transcend mere power dynamics by encouraging a communal ethos that gives importance to mutual flourishing and well-being of the community over individualism or state dominance. This practice through aksü showcases an alternative model where relational harmony and social cohesion take precedence over political power and self-interest. For the Aos, to have friendship is to make peace with the community, and this is the crux of aksü. This serves as the moral principle and virtue that connects people to a path of friendship and wellbeing that is just, inclusive, and one that respects the rights and dignity of fellow beings. This idea of friendship moves beyond political compromise and seeks the good of common well-being, even when it warrants personal sacrifice.

 

What specific innovations do tribal cultures bring to peacebuilding, and how might new models of interfaith dialogue emerge from this practice?

In my PhD research, using the Naga tribal practice of peacebuilding (aksü and prukeila), I developed a model for interreligious dialogue called “Peaceable Dialogue,” This model addresses three forms of dialogue: restorative justice praxis that focuses on the restoration of communities, cultural-spiritual dialogue that promotes cultural competencies and spiritualities, and social justice forums that seek to analyze issues pertaining to the society. The “Peaceable Dialogue” model emphasizes the personal, relational, and structural transformation of the community through the nonviolent process and envisages a society based on the shared social vision of all communities, irrespective of race, gender, religion, ethnicity, or social affiliation. Such concepts are essential for peacebuilding and interreligious dialogue because they offer windows into the working of process structure, which is vital for sustaining peace and community. My proposed model recognizes that promoting justice and positive peace requires personal and social transformation. Such transformation happens through developing strong community relations. This is why the model draws from the tribal philosophy of friendship, and cultivating and exercising virtue as a community of friends is an essential element in peacebuilding and dialogue.

How did you get interested in the topic?

Too often, the missing element in peacebuilding and interfaith dialogue is the tribal people's voices. My work seeks to correct this weakness by offering a model and rationale for fuller engagement with all people in this context. Moreover, I feel that it is vital that tribal voices are heard so that their approach to peace and friendship can contribute to the ongoing climate of interreligious dialogue.

What is your next project? 

I am currently completing an essay on “Beyond Colonial Shadows: Decolonizing Indigenous Narratives.” I am also working towards publishing my PhD dissertation, “Reclaiming Community-Reclaiming Democracy: Tribal Explorations in Indian Interfaith Dialogue and Peacebuilding.” This will be followed by something close to my heart, “Ecology and the Future of Interreligious Dialogue.”

Copy-of-Copy-of-The-Diablogue

Diablogue Home