By Fr. Louison Emerick Bissila Mbila, C.S.Sp., AU Chaplain and SECAM Liaison Officer to the African Union · 24 March 2026 · Originally published on Substack
Introduction
History shows that certain religions have not hesitated to resort to physical violence against peaceful populations in order to impose their beliefs and practices. When political authorities have sought to control religious affairs, religious leaders have often found themselves participating in or fuelling conflicts that have sometimes been bloody. It is also known that certain religious doctrines and practices continue to perpetuate violence around the world.
At the same time, believers of various religious denominations are often called upon by public authorities and international organisations to help resolve the conflicts causing bloodshed in various African countries. In Africa, interfaith associations are working to address the challenges facing contemporary society. Bringing together men and women from different religious traditions, these associations condemn violence perpetrated against others in the name of God and advocate for reconciliation and peace.
While in some cases religion appears to be part of the problem, in others it seems to be part of the solution. Faced with this “ambivalence of the sacred”[1], what role are religious leaders and interfaith associations called upon to play so that religion leans more towards the solution and even becomes a genuine force for progress and peace in Africa? It is this question that we seek to address in this paper entitled: “Preventing interreligious conflicts in Africa? The role of religious leaders and inter-religious associations.”
This article is divided into four sections. In the first section, we shall clarify the terminology in order to better define what is meant by ‘interreligious conflicts’. We will then address the role of religious leaders, discussing in turn their personal conversion (section 2), the democratisation of interreligious dialogue (section 3), and interreligious cooperation (section 4). In conclusion, we will draw some implications for interreligious associations working for peace and the integral development of Africa.
- Clarification of Terms: What is Meant by ‘Interreligious Conflicts’?
First and foremost, it is essential to agree on the meaning of the expression “interreligious conflicts.” Although this expression is commonly used, it is crucial to distinguish between religious conflicts and religiously motivated violence[2] . Religiously motivated violence is not limited to physical acts; it also encompasses verbal acts, such as hate speech and the teaching of contempt for others. However, not all religious conflicts are necessarily violent.
A conflict arises when something is contested. For a conflict to be classified as religious, religion must be involved. We then speak of a religious conflict, a complex phenomenon involving contested areas such as ideology, territory, power, or a specific group of people. Religious conflicts occur within every religion. For example, tensions between traditionalists and progressives, or between so-called left-wing and right-wing Catholics, constitute concrete religious conflicts within the Catholic Church. These tensions can sometimes lead to job losses, ecclesiastical sanctions, or even excommunications. Interreligious conflict, on the other hand, involves at least two religions disputing the same issue. For it to be classified as such, the following conditions must be met:
1) Two or more religious communities are involved;
2) One or more areas are contested: ideology, morality, power, geographical territory, human groups, etc.;
3) Conducive conditions exist, which may be political, social, economic, cultural, or psychological;
4) Two or more religions are involved.
Strictly speaking, interreligious conflicts are inevitable. Religions, seeking to convert and save a given group of people, for example within the same town, find themselves in a situation of conflict, as they are competing over two areas: the group of people in question and the town itself. Each aspires to “win souls.” We cannot blame them for this, as without followers, a religion cannot survive. The real challenge is to ensure that conflicts involving several religions do not escalate into religiously motivated violence. Thus, although this article deals with the prevention of interreligious conflicts, it is important to understand it as a means of preventing violence motivated in the name of religion between believers of different faiths. This is why the title includes a question mark, calling into question the very idea of preventing interreligious conflicts. Interreligious conflicts have existed, exist, and will continue to exist until the end of time: ‘There is nothing new under the sun’ (Eccl 1:9), as the Preacher would say. However, it is possible to control, mitigate, or even prevent violence committed in the name of religion or God. Religious leaders and interfaith organisations can play a significant role in preventing attacks on the physical and moral integrity of individuals on account of their adherence to a religious belief or faith. How? This is what we shall explore in the following paragraphs.
- The Personal Conversion of the Religious Leader
The essence of leadership is to guide others. Yet, we are familiar with the saying: “Can a blind man lead another blind man? Will they not both fall into a pit?” (Luke 6:39). A leader must therefore first be able to see, be a visionary, and emerge from the darkness of the mind in order to fully assume their role. This is what constitutes true conversion, which the Greek language refers to as metanoia, meaning a radical transformation of the mind. For the religious leader, this involves aligning the mind with God’s vision and action. Any true conversion entails turning away from a particular way of seeing and acting to enter a new state of mind in accordance with the will of God, who conceived humanity as a single family.
In the present case, the religious leader must turn away from a dualistic view of history or of things. Dualism consists of maintaining that the evils of the world are the result of an evil power independent of God himself and capable of competing with him. It is but a short step from this metaphysical dualism to the effective identification of a specific religious community with the axis of evil. The members of that community then constitute nothing more and nothing less than a “flock herded to the underworld, which death leads to pasture” (Psalm 48:15), to borrow a phrase from the Psalter. Dualism makes us the innocent victims of their diabolical actions; they are the guilty ones. Consequently, when we hate, slander, attack, or murder these agents of the devil, we are innocent, and they are guilty. Such is the syndrome of what Jonathan Sacks calls “altruistic evil”[3] , that is to say, evil undertaken for a noble cause. Jesus of Nazareth had already spoken of this phenomenon to his disciples: “Indeed, the hour is coming when all who kill you will imagine that they are offering service to God” (John 16:2).
Every religious leader must reject dualism in all its forms and embrace the mindset and ethos of dialogue. The true religious leader is a person of dialogue. Dialogue, as Albert Guigui, the Chief Rabbi of Brussels, writes, is first and foremost a spiritual attitude:
It is a spirituality that leads us from rejection to acceptance, from categorisation to understanding, from the denigration of others to respect, from condemnation to mercy, from isolation to harmony, from competition to complementarity, from antipathy to encounter, and from hostility to brotherhood.[4]
By embracing the spirituality of dialogue, religious leaders will be able to contribute to the reduction, or even the elimination, of religiously motivated violence. Dialogue makes us realise that we are not alone in our encounters with other human beings and with God.
The spirituality of dialogue encourages religious leaders to foster encounters with other religious leaders. Indeed, dialogue always involves real people, in the flesh. Encountering the other, like dialogue, is always an interpersonal experience. In reality, it is not religions that engage in dialogue, but believers—free individuals, each belonging to a particular tradition and history. When religious leaders speak, engage in dialogue, pray together, and cooperate for the common good, they send a powerful message to their followers: if we are able to do this, you too can do the same!
- Democratising Interfaith Dialogue
All too often, interfaith dialogue is seen as the preserve of religious leaders or a closed circle of experts. However, dialogue must not become the exclusive domain of an elite. It must reach the faithful and raise their awareness. Imams, priests, pastors, bishops, and rabbis— in short, religious leaders—take part in numerous interfaith meetings. What efforts are they making to discuss this with their congregations within their respective communities?
If we truly wish to confront the threat of hatred hanging over our peoples, and are determined to overcome religiously motivated violence, we must support dialogue through ongoing, daily education of the masses. Without renouncing our own religious identity, we must help our congregations develop a correct and objective understanding of the religious traditions of others. Contrary to the secularist agenda that seeks to banish religion from the public sphere, it is important for religious leaders to work with governments and parliamentarians to ensure that, from school onwards—whether public or private—pupils and students are introduced to the religious traditions of their country and the world, and learn to respect them—indeed, to value them for the additional wisdom they bring to humanity. This will help break down barriers between people and nations, encourage encounters and discussions, and enable us to seek solutions together to the problems that undermine society.
- Interfaith Cooperation
We must move from coexistence and tolerance to cooperation, that is to say, working together. Mere coexistence is not enough. It implies that there is no direct interaction between the different religious communities present within the same territory. It is, quite simply, a physical juxtaposition of religious communities sharing the same space.
Tolerance is not the solution either. It implies accepting the other with reluctance. As Albert Guigui so aptly puts it:
“I tolerate him” means: “I have decided to allow him to live and be by my side.” Others are not there to be tolerated, but to be accepted as they are, and to have the same rights as me, without any distinction of race or religion.[5]
Genuine dialogue must lead to cooperation between members of different religious traditions in order to address the common challenges they face. Among the major challenges facing Africa are those of peace and sustainable development. The contribution of religious leaders and interfaith organisations in these two areas is essential.
The African landscape today is characterised by several interfaith networks. One of the major problems with such networks is that they are marked by a kind of “verbal pollution”; that is to say, there is a great deal of talk, speeches, and prayers, but very little concrete action. To meet the challenges of our time, an interfaith methodology geared towards tangible results is urgently needed. An effective way to prevent violent conflict is to find solutions to the ongoing conflicts that are ravaging Africa. Religious leaders and interfaith organisations, on their own, cannot prevent the conflicts affecting our continent. They need the expertise of those working in the fields of peacekeeping and security. They must maintain constant contact with political, economic, military, and diplomatic figures in their own countries and across the continent. It is vital for interfaith organisations to establish a task force that would serve as a body for analysis and mediation. This task force would work to identify potential conflicts, understand those currently underway, and propose concrete solutions to resolve them.
Finally, many deadly conflicts with religious overtones stem from the issues of underdevelopment and poverty. “Development is the new name for peace,” said Pope Saint Paul VI. Religious leaders must not merely organise fundraisers to build their places of worship or to support the running of their religious communities. They will make a lasting contribution to peace by working together to help their brothers and sisters find concrete solutions to the problem of integral human development. When religious denominations collaborate to build hospitals to care for the sick in their communities, interfaith dialogue will bear abundant fruit. When religious communities pool their efforts to ensure free education, support agricultural cooperatives, or help young people overcome alcohol and drug addiction, the purpose of interfaith dialogue will be better understood. Thus, unhealthy tensions will give way to philadelphia, that is, love for one’s brother and sister, regardless of religion or culture.
Conclusion
As long as there are people and religions on earth, interreligious conflicts will exist. However, this does not mean that they must be deadly or violent. Everything depends on the choices made by members of different religious traditions. They can opt for coexistence in mutual ignorance, perhaps with a little tolerance, or choose the path of dialogue. Religious leaders and interfaith organisations bear a huge responsibility for peace and harmony in Africa and across the world. They will only become true peacemakers if they turn away from the dualism that sees in the other, who believes differently, the embodiment of the devil. The spirituality of encounter that opens the way to dialogue, the education of the masses in the culture of dialogue, and interfaith cooperation are essential pathways to preventing religiously motivated violence and building lasting peace.
Interfaith associations are a blessing for the world in general and for Africa in particular. By bringing together leaders from various religious and spiritual traditions, they demonstrate that hope is not a mirage and that terrorism claiming to act in the name of religion is a true moral and religious corruption founded on falsehood. Admittedly, these associations do not have an army equipped with the latest technological advances to “impose” peace through strength; one might always criticise their inability to control all forms of violence committed in the name of God. However, it is undeniable that the interpersonal contacts they establish between leaders, who would otherwise carry out their religious ministry in mutual ignorance or even contempt, prove that with God, we can together build a civilisation of love.
As the motto of the now-defunct airline Air Afrique put it, “we do a little more everyday,” interfaith associations must strive for further progress. In this great crossroads of interfaith networks that our era has become, they must distinguish themselves through an approach focused on concrete results.
Sudan is currently embroiled in a fratricidal war, largely ignored by the so-called international community. For three decades, the Democratic Republic of the Congo has been the scene of a forgotten holocaust in its eastern region, met with the complicit silence of the world’s major powers. In Libya, sub-Saharan Africans are being sold as slaves in broad daylight, in the 21st century! The countries of the Sahel are living a daily nightmare caused by fanatics and militants claiming to act in the name of religion, who, for this very reason, do not hesitate to kill Muslims, Christians, and followers of traditional religions in the name of God. This list could go on indefinitely. Is it not to help the continent walk the path of peace and sustainable development that interfaith organisations exist? Now more than ever, it is time for them to roll up their sleeves and mobilise all their intellectual, spiritual, and material resources for the cause of Africa and all our brothers and sisters in humanity. They must engage in active diplomacy for peace and integral human development to build the Africa we want, in line with Agenda 2063: “an integrated, prosperous, and peaceful Africa, led by its own citizens, which represents a dynamic force on the world stage.”
[1] R. Scott Appleby, The Ambivalence of the Sacred: Religion, Violence, and Reconciliation, New York: Rowman & Littlefield Publishers, 2000.
[2] Wendy Mayer, “Religious Conflict: Definitions, Problems and Theoretical Approaches”, in Wendy Mayer and Bronwen Neil (eds), Religious Conflict from Early Christianity to the Rise of Islam, Berlin/Boston, Walter de Gruyter GmbH, 2013, pp. 1–5.
[3] Jonathan Sacks, “The Stories We Tell”, in Richard A. Burridge and Jonathan Sacks (eds), Confronting Religious Violence. A Counternarrative, Waco, Baylor University Press, 2018, pp. 31–32.
[4] Albert Guigui, Le judaïsme vécu et mémoire, Brussels, Racine, 2004, p. 207.
[5] Albert Guigui, Le judaïsme vécu et mémoire, p. 211.
Leave a comment