| Abstract
|
:
|
Due to the federal structure of Switzerland, interreligious activities are also strongly influenced by cantonal contexts. Based on published material as well as on semi-directive interviews with key protagonists, the article analyses three cases of interreligious dialogue – two cantonal cases from the German-, or respectively French-speaking part of the country and the more general case of a women’s network. In the cantonal cases, interreligious dialogue is strongly linked to state-religion relation and serves as a tool for inclusion of new religious communities and for social cohesion. In each of the two cases, there are specific forms and organisational structures of dialogue. In contrast to these examples, the third case is more independent of political interests and often adopts a critical stance. Thus two types of interreligious discourse and relationship with the state can be identified which can also be seen as complementary: either a more critical voice keeping distance from power, or a collaboration with political structures strengthening the religious communities’ influence within the system. Due to the federal structure of Switzerland, interreligious activities are also strongly influenced by cantonal contexts. Based on published material as well as on semi-directive interviews with key protagonists, the article analyses three cases of interreligious dialogue – two cantonal cases from the German-, or respectively French-speaking part of the country and the more general case of a women’s network. In the cantonal cases, interreligious dialogue is strongly linked to state-religion relation and serves as a tool for inclusion of new religious communities and for social cohesion. In each of the two cases, there are specific forms and organisational structures of dialogue. In contrast to these examples, the third case is more independent of political interests and often adopts a critical stance. Thus two types of interreligious discourse and relationship with the state can be identified which can also be seen as complementary: either a more critical voice keeping distance from power, or a collaboration with political structures strengthening the religious communities’ influence within the system. Due to the federal structure of Switzerland, interreligious activities are also strongly influenced by cantonal contexts. Based on published material as well as on semi-directive interviews with key protagonists, the article analyses three cases of interreligious dialogue – two cantonal cases from the German-, or respectively French-speaking part of the country and the more general case of a women’s network. In the cantonal cases, interreligious dialogue is strongly linked to state-religion relation and serves as a tool for inclusion of new religious communities and for social cohesion. In each of the two cases, there are specific forms and organisational structures of dialogue. In contrast to these examples, the third case is more independent of political interests and often adopts a critical stance. Thus two types of interreligious discourse and relationship with the state can be identified which can also be seen as complementary: either a more critical voice keeping distance from power, or a collaboration with political structures strengthening the religious communities’ influence within the system. Due to the federal structure of Switzerland, interreligious activities are also strongly influenced by cantonal contexts. Based on published material as well as on semi-directive interviews with key protagonists, the article analyses three cases of interreligious dialogue – two cantonal cases from the German-, or respectively French-speaking part of the country and the more general case of a women’s network. In the cantonal cases, interreligious dialogue is strongly linked to state-religion relation and serves as a tool for inclusion of new religious communities and for social cohesion. In each of the two cases, there are specific forms and organisational structures of dialogue. In contrast to these examples, the third case is more independent of political interests and often adopts a critical stance. Thus two types of interreligious discourse and relationship with the state can be identified which can also be seen as complementary: either a more critical voice keeping distance from power, or a collaboration with political structures strengthening the religious communities’ influence within the system.
|