 Wonderful. Well, as as everyone is finding their seats and I know people are still enjoying the the refreshments This is an incredibly distinguished a group an awful lot of material to cover and so I think we'll get started and as our Colleagues find their seats. I will take it take it from there as they join us So to introduce myself. I'm Mike Jobbins. I'm the director for global affairs with search for common ground For those of you who don't know us. We're one of the largest and oldest peace-building organizations in the world We've been we were founded in 1982 and we work in places from Myanmar to Congo to Macedonia all in the belief that that Common ground is possible over some of the world's deepest divisions At the beginning of this year, we Established a global religious engagement section led by my colleague a Sharon Rosen in Jerusalem to deepen our engagement with the faith community Everything that we do is informed by a belief that you can find hope in the the most challenging places That together we can can build trust and working together across our dividing lines We can change some of the systems and the relationships that divide us throughout the world and the faith community Religious institutions, but also the deep faith or in the deep beliefs that each of us have are in so many ways The grounding both for that hope But also for that that change as we look to build all of our societies towards the future And so it's a tremendous honor to be here both with the distinguished panel, but also all of us In this room and at this August institution All of us seeking in our own ways in our own traditions to advance the cause of peace But also to advance the cause of religious freedom two things That almost everyone I think can acknowledge are a good thing But things that don't always seem to go hand in hand and so as we begin this second Conversation, I will look to really focus on how interfaith efforts how the work Across divisions across differences can lead to sort of a shared understanding and a shared humanity And so it's my tremendous honor to introduce first of all his holiness the Karmapa the leader of one of the four largest schools of Tibetan Buddhism a poet and a writer and an esteemed thinker who's been Incredibly inspirational in his leadership both on environmental as well as social activism Next to him we have his eminence Cardinal Anayak in a friend in a longtime champion of Interfaith efforts both in Nigeria in the world. He's the Cardinal of Abuja But also a leader within religions for peace He sits on the board of Pax Christi and is not only a thinker in Nigeria But also at a global level in terms of the way that our world comes together finally Not not finally but a next to next to Cardinal Anayak and we have a Sadvi Baguati Saraswati who is one of a Lead thinkers and doers. Let's say She's the leader of the interfaith wash alliance. She's also the leader of The divine Shakti Foundation and a teacher at the the Parnath Nikatan Ashram one of the largest in Rishikesh in India And so we're very pleased to have her so far with us today and finally Reverend Susan Hayward who's the senior advisor on religious affairs here at USIP also Reverend and a pastor with the Universal Church of Christ and a deep thinker on the role of both of religion How religion can shape peacemaking on the ground, but also how it intersects with policymaking through her work here at at USIP And as I was thinking about what what unites sort of all of these these diverse Leaders from so many diverse From so many of these diverse backgrounds It's really that not only are these four exceptional thinkers for exceptional teachers Before exceptional doers as well in that all of you have worked At great tremendous cost a great personal sacrifice, but also with tremendous courage To change not only how people think but to change the reality that people live And so with that in mind I might look to each of you to share perhaps a reflection You know we talk about sort of it's accepted in in some ways is a truism that a freer society is a more peaceful society that religious freedom correlates with correlates with peace and security, but Maybe you can share some some insight from your experience with us the sort of the chicken and the egg problem Certainly, some people would say you know in fact, it's security. It's order that enables religious freedom to flourish But others you know would say that that it's only through peace that we can can achieve The flourishment of everyone's freedom and so there is a there's a bit of attention in one that we've heard throughout this ministerial Over these past weeks and so I was wondering perhaps beginning with you your holiness If you may be able to share with us some of your own reflection Perhaps I'll begin with with your eminence then To share your own reflection through your work in Nigeria How you've seen these these two go hand-in-hand Thank you very much. I think everybody else. I'm sure it's going to say thank you to use it for bringing us here So I'm glad to be the first to say so My general my general reflection is this despite all appearances to the contrary in the light of how I have traveled far and wide in our modern world I still believe that humanity is making progress We may not have reached where we should be There are still wars all over our planet in my country Nigeria. We are not at peace but globally Things are happening now that didn't happen before I still believe the world is better now than it was 50 years ago not to talk of 200 years ago and in terms of the key concepts of our discussion Namely Religious freedom peace Minority rights We are now familiar with these terminologies and we take them for granted which is why we are angry when we don't see it in reality But I like to believe that This is this distance. We continue to be walking progress For a long time we will have to face it Religious freedom was not normally accepted The history of most of our religions has shown that there is a tendency for every religion to consider that they alone are The the will of God. I'm a Catholic a Christian and for many centuries we took that position Islam took the same position Maybe we're able to continue with those positions because everybody lived in their own little worlds now We are all in one village and the person like me I'm a Catholic at Bishop, but I'm from Nigeria I'm neither Muslim nor West I am a Nigerian and I'm a Christian and I live with Muslims in my family and in my environment Therefore by the very nature of things. I just have to find a way of living in peace with my brothers And I think that very often there is a gap between the ideals and the realities The ideals are quite clear For example in my country our laws are very clear about religious freedom But the reality on the ground is not always so And sometimes the law says one thing but social pressures might determine another thing And very often laws cannot catch up with social pressures And My country our laws gives us freedom of religion not just freedom to practice your religion But freedom to change your religion and freedom to have no religion if decide not to have That's what our laws says But that doesn't mean that any young man who is a good Muslim can just decide that I won't be Muslim anymore And he would not suffer consequences and I must say a good Christian boy From a good Christian family if he suddenly decides I want to become a Muslim he may have to pay for his stubborn decision This is the reality we have but I think when I say we are making progress at least we have admitted that there should be freedom of Religion it took my church quite some time to accept freedom of religion as a fundamental human rights But reason for a long time. We thought that error has no rights Today we know And we hope we know a bit better. I think others should talk now. I think this holiness can now talk now that simple Malak me helps finish speaking So with the Obvious and yet nonetheless still crucial thanks to all of our hosts and the organizers for Bringing us together here The question is a theoretical one and I'll I'll speak for a moment Theoretically, but I think it's also important to bring it into Practice and to actually what we see as you said so frequently the ideal and the real it tend to be on other sides of a chasm and So on a theoretical level, I think that religious freedom and Interfaith harmony love peace of course go hand-in-hand and Each leads to the other you could absolutely make very compelling arguments for how religious freedom leads to Interfaith Harmony leads to peace as well as discussing ways that interfaith harmony and peace Leads to fostering religious freedom. I think that what's most important is that the work of Interfaith Gives a human face to the other that we are only able to Deprive others of their rights whether it is their right to practice their religion Whether it is their right to live whether it's their right to be with Whomever they want to be with whether it's the right to have water whether it's the right to have education Whatever right we are talking about We can only really deprive others of those rights when we allow ourselves to forget That they are us when we are able to dehumanize the other and create these very thick and impenetrable walls of us Versus them and what interfaith work does so beautifully is Reminds us re-reminds us How the other is actually our our family our sister our brother and yes They may believe differently. They may dress differently. They may pray differently. They may eat differently but that happens in a family as well and The work of interfaith really brings that home and what I have seen in India with our work specifically is that as we bring leaders of all of the different religions together on a stage and Bringing them together for specific purpose. It's water. It's women's rights. It's sanitation. It's hygiene It's peace what it does is those images become the new normal an earlier speaker in the earlier panel spoke about the importance of social media and Whether it's TV media news media or social media Like or not like it. It's here to stay. We might as well use it as a tool rather than figure out how we can Rewind time and go back to the pre social media age And so those those images become the new Normal and when that happens what you find is that people are much less likely to deprive each other of freedom of life of safety of food of land of education because there's this beautiful loving Relationship and so as we're able to bring people more and more together the Crucial and Necessary byproduct of that what I have seen is that religious freedom and the other just very last point that I wanted to mention on this if it's okay is that it's Bringing leaders together on stages in working together, but also in education and this felt very important to me because on the earlier panel My colleague was speaking about Why people turn to violent extremism of what they're looking for inside that identity? And I think that when the only place that we're able to find our identity is in the us Versus them where there has to be an other Against whom we can identify the self that becomes very very dangerous and When we are able to work in our own institutions and in interfaith institutions For education of the self of who are we in our religion that's not pushing against others Who are we as human beings because of course we're all humans before we're Muslims or Christians or Hindus or Buddhists or Jews and that identity is Something that fills people that typically comes of course from religion and spirituality through the education that fills people With a sense of fullness and wholeness and positive identity that they don't need to draw lines Against others in order to feel like there is a me or an us My English is not that great. That's why I want to use translator Will be more comfortable for me. That's my translator sitting behind Hiding somewhere, okay You have The US IP Yeah, I'm not as easy. I'm pretty young guy. You want to do the co-op too much. Yeah Mm-hmm, I wish I chose to add on as soon as I'm back So she I'm not getting so rare. I don't see they don't come over. Yeah, I'm just trying I've had the opportunity to visit us up before and so I'm especially Delighted to have this opportunity to come back and I want to thank everyone And the body of USIP itself for giving me this chance to do a lot of sadi Yes, I'm gonna run some day. No, no, no to get cut for a One of the fundamental rights summary under Do I meet you? She's a good top-down. Okay, she should listen to you. Got a son that the to do a lot of sadi She can get jibble catch him for my mba. She'll have to buy me again, so I don't She'll never meet you again. It's okay. I'm sorry. I'm sorry She'll have to buy chair around to buy me. Yeah, I don't want some of that. She'll never know what it is to you. Yes, sir she's a dick You'll tell dinner that the gosh would I catch him but he didn't catch him because I didn't want something Well, first of all, I think that religious freedom is one of our most fundamental human rights and one of the most important because the presence or absence of religious freedom does not only affect those who are religious, it is a matter of choice and therefore equally gives those who choose to be religious and those who choose not to be religious the right to live according to their choice. I think that religious freedom is a matter of choice and one of the most important and one of the most important things is the establishment of a religious freedom. Then the example was that I was able to be a good student. By the time I got my degree, I had to go to school. When I had to go to school, I had to go to school because I was not able to do anything. However, the question remains of how to practically implement or practically ensure a religious freedom. To give an example, I meet many people for whom this can become an issue even within a family, where, for example, the parents might be Buddhist and a child or the children have great faith in Christianity. And the situation can become uncomfortable because the parents want the children to share their faith. In the past, there were a lot of religious people who were very spiritual and very personal. They were very, very personal. They were very well-mannered and well-mannered. However, in the past, there were a lot of traditional custom-driven students who went to the university and founded a new school. What is more, they were very well-mannered and very well-mannered. The students who were very well-mannered and well-mannered, they were very well-mannered. But the fact remains that spirituality, including religious spirituality, is an extremely personal thing. It is a matter of each person's own mind as an individual and the choices and feelings of that mind. Religion is often presented as a matter of custom or tradition, something that we must follow. For example, when we feel we must follow the religious custom of our parents. But nevertheless, it's important to respect the feelings of one's own mind. And it seems that sometimes this is under-emphasized. The Christian religion is not a religious religion. We have to put the faith on the cross and to follow the religious custom. That's what we call the religion of the living. But the religion of the living and the religion of the family is not an important thing. We have to follow the religion of the living and the religion of the living. the meaning of life, some of the data. That is so-so key. Not some key. That's it. Missy, they let go of them down. Didn't take a tonne. That's just a bunch of other things. They need to be in the city to do something. I don't need to do that. Didn't take a tonne to do something. I don't. I'm just going to go up there. I'm just going to go up there. I'm just going to go up there. I'm just going to go up there. So I'm just going to go up there. That's kind of the other thing. That's going to be release, leader, and then my son wants to go home, so I'm going to leave with him for a few more. But he doesn't want me to leave. What I wanted to say was, we should release freedom. That's the condition of freedom. That's the constitution of freedom. That's the condition. There's still a lot left to do. So I'm going to leave with him for a few more days. That's the freedom to go out to catch me. They have a lot of catch me. They have a shame. Therefore, when we practice a religion, we can't do it or treat it simply as copying others or following some kind of custom. It has to be a way for us within each of our own minds as an individual to give meaning to our life and to generate an understanding of the fundamental meaning and value of life. We have to view the situation we experience with access to religious traditions as a source of opportunity, an opportunity for spiritual growth and exploration, rather than something that is somehow imposed upon us. And it's therefore necessary, or an actual responsibility, of religious leaders to present this fact and to present the fact that religious freedom is an innate right rather than a right that is sometimes given and sometimes withheld. That's excellent. Maybe I can ask. I think one thing that I've, this struck me with each of the panelists is the degree to which religion can be a source of strength and the degree to which openness to others' religion can improve understanding. But I wanted to ask Reverend Hayward, you've traveled with USIP to many of the most fragile states on earth. You've been leading work in supporting interfaith efforts. And I was wondering what have you been seeing practically in terms of interfaith collaboration and what does that look like and feel like in some of the fragile places where you lead your missions? Thank you. It feels tentative. You know, Mike, you asked in the first instance about the chicken and the egg, right? So what comes first? Religious freedom leads to peaceful religious coexistence or religious coexistence leads to religious freedom. And with a great deal of trepidation and humility in the presence of his holiness, I want to draw on a Buddhist concept here, if I teach a Samapada or dependent origination, which is the Buddhist philosophical idea that all things in our world mutually, that they mutually determine each other, that they mutually arise together. And I think that's the case with religious freedom and with peaceful coexistence. It's not linear. It's not that you have religious freedom in the sense of non-government restrictions based on one's religious identity or lack of religious identity and in the sense of lack of social hostilities or violence treated on people because of their religious identity. And then you're gonna have peaceful religious coexistence. And it's not the case that if we have religious coexistence, we have a stage with people in different robes and representing different traditions, able to sit together and not come to fisticuffs, that then we're gonna have religious freedom. But it's that they arise together and they need to be advanced together. So interfaith peace building, I think provides a great opportunity to advance both religious freedom and peaceful religious coexistence when it's done well. I think a lot of what I see in the places that I travel around the world is the incredible transformation that interfaith peace building can do, especially with respect to social hostilities, with social relationships, with addressing issues of prejudice within communities, particularly in very violent divided societies where people are disconnected from each other in psychological ways and spiritual ways, but also in very real physical ways, right? So we see communities become segregated from one another, schools become segregated, markets become segregated. And in the midst of that kind of separation from one another, that's where we see prejudice flourish that makes violence between faiths even more realizable. And so in those spaces, it's tentative, the interfaith peace building that it's done and it's incredibly transformative in both connecting, as Sarviju was saying, at the human level and finding places of commonality and connection, particularly in those contexts, connections over suffering, over the ways in which violence has affected all communities. But it also provides a really good space to talk about issues of difference too, because particularly in conflict contexts, where conflict divides are across religious divides, you're going to have issues of disagreement about the role of the states, about the causes of the violence and so on. And so interfaith peace building is done well. It allows for that kind of connection to reaffirm similarities and to discuss in a safe space and to find some ways to work together and to advance on issues of disagreement. One other thing I just wanna add though is that I think interfaith peace building is also, so if we think of the term in the wonk world, which is the other hat I wear when I'm not wearing the clergy hat, is social cohesion, right? And in order to create social cohesion, yes, we have to address those prejudices and social relationships, but social cohesion is also about how the state treats different communities in discriminatory or non-discriminatory ways. I see interfaith peace building do a lot of work at the social level, the horizontal line of relationship and building relationships between communities. I don't always see interfaith peace building doing a sufficient job and then connecting that to the state and how the state treats different communities. So some of the most impactful interfaith peace building work that I've seen in certain circumstances is where that kind of relationship building between faiths translates into, for example, the majority or empowered religious group advocating for the rights of minorities when they're being discriminated against by the state, pushing in peace processes or in constitutional reform to ensure that there's minority rights, there's non-discrimination, there's religious freedom for all groups. And I think when you can find that the connection between both building the social relationships, reducing the social hostilities and the prejudices and the advocacy that ensures that the state is treating all communities in equal ways and in ways that respect their freedom to practice or not practice or believe or not believe in without repercussions that that's when you see the real power of interfaith peace building. Yeah, I mean that's a really good point Reverend Haywood. And I was wondering if I might ask his eminence. Nigeria obviously is one of the largest democracies on earth, a very free society, but also one with very serious challenges from Boko Haram, from violence throughout the middle belt. And I was wondering if you might take up Reverend Haywood's point that it's not only about how faiths coexist with one another at a human level, but what's the role of interfaith peace building in structural violence, interfaith peace building and some of the political and security dynamics that you've seen in your own work and how have you struggled to change that? Well, before I come to my country, Nigeria, this for some general remarks, first problems of the world, even though religion is very important in the life of each and every one of us, religion is not the only factor that is creating problem in the world. Therefore, we do not put the fault for every problem in the world on religion and therefore offload to religious leaders, burdens that don't belong to them. I think religious leaders know the limits of their powers and it's up to them to know what to do with it. The other major point I want to raise is this. We can't even talk of interfaith peace building without talking about interfaith harmonious living. If religious groups cannot live in peace with each other and within each other, they certainly cannot become an agency for building peace in the society at large. Therefore, like the Latin says, nemo dat, called non-habit, you cannot give what you don't have. So when you find a country where religious communities are at each other's throats, it becomes impossible to expect the same group, to be the ones to champion anything. And this is where every effort we make as religious leaders to stretch hands across our difference barriers is very, very important. Now, religious freedom presupposes that we acknowledge the rights of religious pluralism. This, in the previous panel, Sheikh Mbaya talked about this briefly. Namely, there has to be a theology of religious pluralism, namely that theologically it is legitimate that there be more than one religion, namely religion different from my own. It is easy to say this, but we must remember that very often, this is not really what people believe. And especially when you go to the grassroots level, at the level of the local pastor and Imam. The rhetoric or the language you are getting in the sermons are quite different. And this is why we have to target that level of low level leadership of our religion and admit that we really have a lot of ground to cover. Once we are able to acknowledge that every religion has a right to exist, then it is possible to sincerely work together. What I have discovered also with my experience in Nigeria is that the moment you begin to look for common grounds, you easily will discover them. And as you discover the common grounds you have, you begin to realize how much more important our common grounds are than the differences that so often pit us one against the other. I'm not saying that our differences are not significant. I will be the last to say so. But what I am saying is that the things we have in common far outweigh the things that divide us. If we're able to admit that, then it is possible for us to sit together at the same table, plan to tackle common concerns, whether it be poverty, whether it be disease, whether it be indeed good governance or corruption like in the case of Nigeria. But if you are not able to sit together honestly, and you just sit there in different garments and different colors for a good photograph on the television, then we're just wasting time. It has to be sincere. And you can know when there's sincerity in the house very easily. It's not difficult to know when there is sincerity. My experience, as you say in Nigeria, is that we have made a lot of progress in this regard. Although, of recent, because of the negative impact of the activities of groups like Boko Haram, a lot of trust has been destroyed. Almost to the extent that we can say that we have been pushed some years behind, but we continue to believe that we can still regain lost grounds. Here is the importance of the government, the policy makers, because at the end of the day, it is a government that makes the rules and that enforces the laws. And if the government doesn't carry out its duty to maintain the law, then disorder takes control and all kinds of bad things happen. Final remark is not everybody that can get engaged in interfaith activities. There are some people who just cannot stand the heat. And we don't should expect everybody to do it. But those who can't, you please go ahead and do it. And because without it, there have been no peace among religions. And we may be able to say, if religions can't live in peace, the world will not live in peace. Your Holiness, maybe I can put the same question that I put to Cardinal and I can to you, but perhaps from the other angle, apart from what religious freedom can do for peace and efforts towards stability, I might ask, in your work and in what you've seen, how have you seen the role of government efforts to limit religious freedom, to restrict freedom? How has that impacted interfaith relations? How has that impacted faith expressions through your own work and through what you've seen? That's the two of the interesting questions one of the other. My name is Dr. Danga, and now I'm going to start speaking. I'm speaking directly to you. I am very concerned about how it impacts the way the religion and religion. So, I'm gonna start. The same is true for me. I'm going to do something for sure. I'm going to do something for you. So, I'm going to support you and then I'm going to come to Butch. I'm going to be there for you. I'm going to be there for you and then I'm going to support you. We've been able to create a major network of online and online games. We've been looking at each series of games. We've been able to come up with new technologies and train our players to play online, and we've been able to create new technologies to play online. So our goal is to create a new network of online games to play online, and develop our games and business as a whole. Leading to the end of the COVID-19 pandemic, we will still have to work hard to help the country move forward. But, in the future, we will be able to make a good contribution to our country's future and to the further development of our country. But, in the future, we will be able to help the people in the future and to the government in the future. This is the understanding of the message. So, it's a chulma. It's about Tibetan Buddhism. And it says there are many people in this world that doesn't know the language. So, in this world, there are three types of things. First, there are three types of people. For example, there are two types of people. The first is in the world, there are three types of people and the second is in the world. There are three types of people. So, the first type of person It's an interesting question. To answer it, I should probably use the obvious example of Tibet, which as everyone knows is now part of China. And as everyone knows, the government of China has what we could tactfully call a fairly critical view of religion. And their critical view of religion has affected not just Tibet but everyone throughout all of China. And not just Tibetan Buddhism, but really all religions throughout China have suffered under many, many restrictions. In Tibet, for example, there have been things like restrictions on the number of monks and nuns that a monastery can have and so forth. I don't want to go on about the details, but the point is that the restrictiveness toward religion has caused problems for everybody, regardless of sect, regardless of tradition. One of the consequences of that is because everybody has suffered under the same restrictions, there's a lot of mutual understanding because we share the same plight. And so there is a greater, a kind of sense of we're all us. We're all under the same situation. And a greater ecumenism and empathy, which is therefore more market in the Tibetans within Tibet, within China than it is among practitioners of Tibetan Buddhism in foreign nations who haven't suffered the same restrictions. Thank you. And maybe I could take a different perspective and ask you, you know, you've led interfaith efforts from a Hindu perspective in India, a Hindu majority society for many years. And it's quite easy to see why religious minorities or those who would be at the mercy of the state would want to be engaged in interfaith efforts. But through your work, how have you gone about engaging not only other communities, but engaging your own community in interfaith efforts? Wonderful. So in so many ways, and I'll come back to it in one moment, I wanted just to take the concept of the state and speak about that for a moment because what we see very frequently with religious violence, with lack of peaceful societies with oppression is that it's not always. Yes, in many cases, we can certainly point to cases where it really is top down from the top. But in nations like India and in other parts of the world, the impact of local leaders, whether they are actually elected officials or they just are self-appointed leaders because they're loud, maybe because they're violent, maybe because they have some money, whatever it may be that turns them into a local leader, they actually end up with a lot more control over the local people than the central government or even than the government of that state or region. And a lot of times what we see is that particularly local leaders, although it's also of course true for higher level leaders, is religion gets co-opted for their own motivations that actually have nothing to do with how people pray. They're not really concerned about how you're praying, which language you're using, which name you're using, really what they're concerned about is their own power. And they're able to co-opt local people of faith for their agenda through using the semantics of faith. And so I simply wanted before I address this to expand that that we're not always talking about a central or federal government top down imposed situation on people, but really locally in villages and small towns and tribes, what we're seeing so frequently is people simply with an agenda to be a local leader who happen to be of a certain religion, being able to use that to catalyze and motivate armies of people to work for them in a way that typically people aren't so ready to work for somebody else's political agenda or power agenda or financial agenda, but already when you're able to bring it in the name of God or the name of religion. Very specifically in terms of our work from a Hindu majority, first of all, we actually never think like that. One of the most fundamental tenants of the Hindu tradition is the belief in an infinite number of names, forms of God, ways of worship. The scriptures are full of teachings that are recited over and over again about let all the noble thoughts come from all directions. The truth is one, but the sages call it by different names. Vasudev Kutumbakam, the world is a family and so our work really comes, yes, we happen to be practicing Hindus, the institution happens to be a Hindu based institution, but our work isn't really work so much as Hindus, it's work as humans and our faith connects us to humanity regardless of how they worship. And so when we do that, what we have found is that people want to come in not because they're subjugated in some way by the state, but because they are drawn by the heart of humanity. They're drawn into a movement and of course, as I mentioned earlier, a lot of the work that we're doing while working for peace and working for interfaith harmony is using peace and interfaith harmony to actually come together and work for clean water, to work for education, to work for women's rights, to work for access to toilets, particularly for women. And these are things that impact people of every community. As His Holiness the Karmapa mentioned, when people have suffered the same things, there's a sense of camaraderie and diarrhea doesn't discriminate, hunger doesn't discriminate, malaria doesn't discriminate, bad water doesn't discriminate. And so when we're able to bring people together for those platforms and get them working together, planting trees together, cleaning rivers together, building toilets together, there is a sense in which that otherness dissipates and then of course, sitting for meals together. And we actually just recently, very specifically with regard to your question, organized a large event in Delhi in which we had the vice president come and then we took the main leaders to the president house of tribal leaders from all across the country and brought them into Delhi for a program on upliftment. How can we help you uplift your societies? But tribal leaders of every religion, of every sect within the religion, of every caste, and how can we help you uplift your society? And as I said, brought in the vice president, took them to see the president to really help them, A, uplift their societies and B, feel much more embraced by the common thread. And the very last point I wanted to mention, as you said, how do we inspire other Hindus to also just want to give one very quick example. When we were working in the tsunami affected areas after the really, really terrible tsunami, one of the projects that we did was helping to get all of the boats fixed because it was primarily a fisherman's community that was decimated in India, the people who live on the coast or fishermen. And as we were walking up along the beach where all of the boats that were broken had been laid for our inspection, we brought in the army, we brought in CII, which is the industries to help repair the boats and give new engines. As we're surveying them, somebody whispers in my Guru's ear, they say, this is a Christian boat. And Swami Ji says, ah, make this number one in terms of the order in which they're going to get repaired. And a little while later, somebody whispers, this is a Muslim boat. And he says, ah, make this number two. And even though the teams that we had working with us were, of course, primarily Hindu, the message was clear. We are going to start with the boats of the Christians. We're going to start with the boats of the Muslims, not because it's about boats, but because it's about hearts. And when we're all going to work together and the Christian community needs to know, we're here for you as much as we are for the Hindus. And the Muslim community needs to know we're here for you as much as we are for the Hindus. And the Hindus need to be re-reminded that we're all one. And what we found then was that not only was there harmony in terms of just general love and good feelings, but there was an ability to work together in the wake of the tsunami that otherwise never would have been able to happen. Wonderful. And we've been getting some fantastic questions. It's clear that we have a very both expert and engaged audience. And I'd love to ask a few in just a second. But I did want to ask before we, before we move to some of the audience's questions, I love Reverend Hayward, if you could pick up on the question of gender. You spoke to it and so many of these conversations and interfaith work is inherently a very male space, very male dominated. And what have you seen? I know you've written a lot on the topic. But as you think about how we build more inclusive societies from a religious perspective, how have you seen efforts that really involve women leaders of all faiths? Yeah, we need to be careful that our interfaith peace building doesn't reinforce inequality in unintended ways. And I think interfaith peace building, when it's done unskillfully, it can unintentionally reinforce generational, majority minority, and gender divides within society. I just want to quickly, before I turn to that, a plus one on what Saad Viji was saying in terms of the outsider, political, economic, social, instrumentalization of religious divides for selfish purposes that are often used. And I think that's one of the things interfaith peace building too. If we think of one of its secondary effects, it creates these ties of resilience between people and communities so that they're less likely to be manipulated by that. They're more critical. They see it when it happens. So it's not necessarily that we're going to ever stop that. We're probably never going to stop that because that's human behavior and particularly within situations where you have electoral campaigning and so on. It's a very powerful way to mobilize constituencies. But what we can do is help to ensure that communities develop the kinds of connections with one another and resiliances with one another so that they're less vulnerable to being manipulated in that way against each other for the purposes of some other entity or actor. Around the world, women of faith and women religious leaders, by which I mean clerical authorities within religious traditions, Buddhists nuns, Catholic nuns, pastors, Malavya women, women who have studied the Quran and who have Islamic education scholars, the heads of religious institutions who are women. There's many women who we can consider as religious leaders who do incredible work on interfaith peace building. I think there's a number of reasons why women of faith seem to be so drawn to inter-religious peace building. One of it is particularly in zones of violent conflict. There's a shared sense of suffering or of loss that women share in divided societies where conflict divides or across religious identities. There's a shared sense of suffering, a loss that bring women together in solidarity. I think there's also very pragmatic reasons that women tend to form these interfaith coalitions. Quite frankly, I mean it's because when women don't have as much social or political or economic influence, they need to build inclusive coalitions in order to be able to exert change. A great example of this is in Liberia with the Christian and Muslim women who mobilized in order to end a civil war. They came together because of the shared experience, particularly of sexual and gender-based violence and domestic forms of violence, the kinds of violences that affect women in particularly acute ways in these violent conflict situations. They came together over frustration and trauma and a desire to change to try to end those forms of violence, but they also came together because if they were going to end a civil war, they needed to form a strong coalition and through that strong coalition, they were able to end a civil war. We see the same kind of in Myanmar or Burma right now, some of the only groups domestically that have really put out a clarion call in defense of the Rohingya and the Rohingya women and and the rights of the Rohingya have been the women's groups, interfaith women's groups. They've made strong statements on an interfaith basis in defense of Rohingya women in particular and Rohingya women generally. There is both a great opportunity for supporting interfaith peace building that is led by women. I think it also when we come back to this issue of how do we ensure that interfaith peace building is addressing both social hostilities, social prejudice, but also the ways in which the state is acting in ways that are non-discriminatory. I think there's a great potential for or a reality right now of interfaith peace building that's led by women to address that. Now that's not to say that there shouldn't also be co-ed interfaith peace building that brings together all genders, that there is an important roles that male clergy play in interfaith peace building as well, but just to say that there's a wonderful opportunity there and that oftentimes too that the freedom of religion is critical for the work of women religious leaders who are involved in peace building generally, interfaith peace building in particular, because they are sometimes articulating religious ideas to defend their leadership and their authority, including on issues of political issues in ways that might go against the religious orthodoxy. So if you have freedom of religion then the women scholars and the women clergy and others can be defending their agency and their own religious authority and their ability to operate in political and social spaces and so on with reference to the religious teachings that affirm that without fear of persecution by the government or by other religious authorities. Wonderful. I think that that's a really profound point and the cross-cutting alliances and commonalities is absolutely critical to this work. And mindful of time, we do have a bit and I did want to answer, it may be a testament cardinal both to your prominence and to how much this audience holds Nigeria very dear to its heart. We've gotten a number of questions specifically about Nigeria. One and I'm going to ask sort of three of them in sort of quick succession. One is the role that the Catholic Bishops conferences is playing in advocating for stability in Nigeria. Particularly another questioner is wondering how you see the driving the drivers of violence involving killings by herdsmen in the country which has killed you know thousands and been been quite attracted quite a lot of international attention and concern. And lastly as you look at Nigeria today what's the role of sort of religious based government representation in seeking solutions to these crisis. I think the questioner had in mind sort of the traditional north-south rotation of the presidency. And so what's the role of political structures in inclusion in perhaps solving some of these thorny questions? I don't know if I can tie all these together. Because the north side, north-south divide are never rotation. It's not in the constitution but it's in practice. You have southern, they talk of southern president, northern president. It is generally taking for granted that it is Christian versus Muslim but the reality is different actually. For the simple reason that there are Muslims in the south and Christians in the north. There's nothing stopping a northern president to be a Christian from being a Christian. We have very strong Christian politicians in the north. And there's nothing stopping a southern president from being a Muslim. In fact, we almost had one in AMQ Biola. He's a Yoruba Muslim. So I'm just saying generally people have this general idea northern Muslims and southern Christians. The reality is quite different. The problem of the so-called herdsmen killing methodically and ruthlessly is something that most Nigerians are still trying to understand. For the simple reason that things have been happening that ought not to happen, that we've never experienced before. And so we are still trying to find out what is actually behind it. It is clear now that it is not simply a matter of religion. Even though most herdsmen are supposedly Muslims. But if you meet some good Muslims, they will tell you that the full animal is not a good Muslim. But we call them Muslims. Then we also realize now that even though they are called herdsmen, we are beginning to see now that there are many who are said to be herdsmen, but actually they are actually terrorists that are armed to the teeth with the most sophisticated weapons. Which means then that it seems that the so-called herdsmen group has been thoroughly infiltrated by bandits. Many of them are even were told non-Nigerians. But when you are dealing with a government that has so badly handled situation and has not done what you expect of a government to do in regard to ensuring the security of life and property, and security agencies going to the root of things. When you have that sort of situation, then anything actually goes. Our hope is that we have reached the end of the cliff. The dancing should be over. Otherwise, we fall over. I think we are beginning to dance back now from the cliff. Nigerians are well known to be very good at dancing on the cliff of chaos. That's part of our Nigerian dance. We dance two feet forward and three steps back. I think we have almost the latest news from my country shows that something is moving. That's very encouraging. But can I want to say something about women? Everybody here, and I'm sure Susan knows very well that I'm a Catholic and a Cardinal, and our church is often accused of not making room for women to have a leadership role. But the Catholic nuns are some of the most incredible peace builders in the world. I'm about to say that very often, apparently, appearances often are delusive. Any bishop who does not take seriously the Catholic women organization of his diocese is not serious. He will not succeed without them. And they are organized. They are organized, and they have their leadership structure. And similarly, the group of religious nuns. We have our Nigerian Women National Council of Women Religious in Nigeria, a powerful organization which has given space. They are not ordained ministers, but you don't have to be ordained to be a leader in the Church of God. And that is the system we have approved. But the interesting thing is that I joined a group which is well known to many of you, World Conference on Religions for Peace. And the Religions for Peace wanted to gather together religious leaders to work for peace. But in the process, it ended up having not just only men, because most religions have men leaders, but also old men, because most religions don't, you don't become a leader in most religions until you are of a certain age. Which means the WC European Funds itself are unable to draw in women and youth. And what happened? We then created the Women of Faith Network, which brings together leadership of women of whatever form, and they have been doing very well. And also the Youth Network, so that the youth gather themselves and organize themselves, both on the national level, on the continental level and on the international level. These are all necessary, especially when you want to start dealing with interfaith action for peace building. It's useless talking about peace building if you do not include the women. And we now know that women are important in peace building, not only because they are often at the receiving end of most of the results of violence, but for other reasons too. And also the youths who are mostly the ones carrying the guns and throwing the bombs. And how are you going to have an interfaith work for peace building if you do not have a way of integrating the youth and the women in the effort? This, I'm talking about this now because we have been discussing that this past week in Berlin. That's fantastic. And we're coming towards the end of time, but I wanted to direct the last question from the audience towards His Holiness. And the questioner asks, many of us craft our identities vis-a-vis others. And the questioner asks, what's your recommendation for how to create a positive identity for oneself without othering others? We talk about, it's easy to say humans are united, but how tactically do you create that sense of positive identity without juxtaposing against another or an outsider? Of course, Lord. And then, my family would always be affected by war. So I stayed there. But when I would go to war, my father would be there, and he would society when the war was over. He would also consider war. He used to say that war was not a thing. In my mind, my parents would follow war, And that we are ready to fight, to be ready to fight. We have done a lot of work. A lot of work we have done and we have been working for many years. And I try to give you the intelligence that we can do. We have done a lot of work, a lot of work and we have been working for many years. Go back to the ground. You know, it's very interesting. When we look at the United States, I think we have to look at the situation with respect to the people, and with respect to the people. We have to accept it. And in the past, there were many people who were not interested in the subject of information. In the past, we had a lot of information, such as the information about the subject, and the information about the subject. So in the past, there were many people who were not interested in the subject. Well, that is kind of a slightly philosophical question, but if I can answer it in a context that is relevant to our topic here today, the problem seems to come from what we identify as the fixation or fixated identification of one's own view or outlook as the best. And of course, as has been mentioned, at different times it's possible for an inherent of any religion to make that identification, to think that, well, my religion is the best one or is the true one. But if you analyze the labels that are involved in such a fixated identification, for example, if you analyze, well, is my outlook really that of my religion or is it my own particular outlook? If you ask yourself that question and scrutinize your own thinking, you'll see that really your own outlook is your own individual outlook. You have chosen for whatever reason to identify with a given religion and to therefore label your outlook or your view of the world, the view of that religion. But that's your choice. Really your own outlook, your own perspective, your own view is entirely individual. And I think therefore that what we need to do is always return to basics. We use labels such as the label we adopt of adherents to one or another religion and thereby we label ourselves and those whom we identify with as us and others as others or them. But if we return to basics, if we return to our true fundamental feelings and needs, it will very much lessen the sense of division that really is augmented or increased by all of the labels that we affix to our thinking and feelings. Particularly with regard to the notion of self and others. Self and other are not opponents. Self and other are not adversaries. Self and other are interdependent. As is more and more obvious, as is becoming clearer and clearer in this information age, each of us as individuals can only survive, can only live independence upon others. Only independence upon all others. Both the environment and the other inhabitants of that environment. If we understand that not only are others not our adversaries, but they are necessary for our very survival, that should help lessen our sense of opposition or enmity. Thank you so much and thanks for what's been an extremely rich conversation. That's no word on that. Yeah, I'm very, what you have just said, your holiness, is something that really has struck me and we have discussed it. This question of non-this, non-that, namely to describe the other as a non-this. A Christian, everybody else is a non-Christian. When you describe others by what they are not, then you lose the sight of what they are. And when somebody calls me a non-Muslim, then all of us here on the panel are all non-Muslim. So I reply, sorry, I'm not a non-Muslim, I'm just a Christian. But this non-thing keeps happening all around us, non-indigents, non-nationals. Once you put none, you have categorized us as nobody. Thanks a lot for that, your eminence. And it's a powerful thought to leave. I think I'd leave this group also with the image that you evoked earlier that of Nigeria sort of dancing at the brink and looking for a few steps back. I think that's one that characterizes many of our societies. I think as an American, it feels in many days that our society is on the brink. I'm sure it feels the same in many places around the world. And I can't think of a better conversation to start that dance and start setting a tone that takes us not two, but perhaps three steps away. So please join me in thanking our panelists. A speedy and safe trip for those who are traveling and for those else. We welcome continuing this conversation. Thank you.