The Interfaith Movement in the 20th Century (Marcus Braybrooke)

The Interfaith Movement in the 20th Century

 

By Marcus Braybrooke, Author,

Trustee of he International Interfaith Centre,

World Congress of Faiths, Council for a Parliament of the World’s Religions,

and the Peace Council.

 

I) Shaping the Present Reality

Hans Kung ends his book Global Responsibility with these words:

"No human life together without a world ethic for the nations.

No peace among the nations without peace among the religions."

No peace among the religions without dialogue among the religions."

(--Global Responsibility, Continuum and SCM Press 1991, p.138)

One hundred years ago, Charles Bonney, who presided at the World's Parliament of Religions in Chicago, ended his closing address like this: "Henceforth the religions of the world will make war, not on each other, but on the giant evils that afflict mankind." Sadly, religions have failed to fulfil that hope. Yet this century, for all its catastrophic wars and acts of genocide, has also seen the growth of a worldwide interfaith movement. Before trying to discern the path ahead, it is worth pausing to see what has been achieved.

The World's Parliament of Religions, Chicago, 1893

The World's Parliament of Religions was held as part of the World Fair or Columbian Exposition which marked the four hundredth anniversary of Columbus' "discovery" of America. The word "Parliament" was chosen to emphasize that participants of all religions were equal, but, in fact, the body had no executive or legislative authority. It reflected the optimism and self-confidence characteristic of the USA towards the end of the nineteenth century.

Most of the participants were Christian from a wide spectrum of denominations. Their presuppositions permeated the gathering. Yet the contribution made by those of other faiths, although their number was small, was very significant.

The World's Parliament of Religions gave much attention to the contribution of religion to peace and social issues. Women were encouraged to play quite a part at the Parliament—more so than at most subsequent interfaith gatherings.

The Study of World Religions

The World's Parliament of Religions gave an impetus to the emerging study of world religions. While such study is an academic discipline in its own right, it has greatly increased awareness of the teachings and practices of world religions at every level. This century has seen an enormous increase in knowledge about world religions. Books, films, and videos are widely available. This study has helped to provide accurate information about the religions of the world. Even so, much ignorance and prejudice still exists.

Initially the study was confined to university departments devoted to the Science of Religions or the Comparative Study of Religions—although such departments were very unevenly spread across the world. Slowly, in some countries, the teaching of world religions has spread to schools, although the situation and law in every country is different. For some time many scholars of the subject stood apart from the interfaith movement partly because they felt that their study should be objective or neutral and partly because they concentrated on the study of the texts and the history of religions. Now, in part because there is more interest in the faith and practice of believers, far more scholars take part in interfaith discussions; their participation has enriched the interfaith movement.

Knowledge may not of itself create sympathy. Opportunities for personal meeting and friendship are important to dispel prejudice and to encourage real understanding. Many interfaith groups attach much importance to providing opportunities for young people to meet. Often they discover that they face similar problems and that in every society many young people are questioning all religions. They may also discover how much people of all faiths can do together to work for a better world.

Organizations for Interfaith Understanding

 No continuing organization emerged from the 1893 World's Parliament of Religions. At first slowly and recently more rapidly, interfaith groups have been established in many places. Some are quite small, meeting in a home. Members get to know each other and learn about each other's beliefs and practices. Sometimes members pray together or share in social or peace work. Other interfaith organizations are national bodies and some are international, seeking to coordinate global interfaith concern. By 1993, the established international interfaith organizations were the International Association for Religious Freedom, the World Congress of Faiths, the Temple of Understanding, and the World Conference on Religion and Peace.

     Those who take part in interfaith bodies seek for a bond between religious believers, despite the differences of belief and practice between and within the great religions. The interfaith organizations all reject syncretism, which implies an artificial mixing of religions, and indifferentism, which suggests that it does not matter what you believe. None of these organizations are trying to create one new world religion, although some other groups have that hope.

     The interfaith organizations accept that most of their members will be loyal and committed members of a particular faith community. Respect for the integrity of other peoples' faith commitment and religious practices is essential. A few members of interfaith organizations may have no specific allegiance and describe themselves as seekers. While aware of the distinctiveness of the world religions, members of interfaith organizations hope that some basis of unity exists or may be discovered, although the nature of the relationship of religions to each other is still much debated. For some people the unity rests upon our common humanity; for others there is an essential agreement between religions on moral values; for others there is a mystical unity, by which they mean that religious experience is ultimately the same and that differences are a matter of culture and language; others hope that through dialogue religions will come closer together and grow in their understanding of the Truth; others stress the need of religious people to work together for peace and justice and the relief of human suffering; for some, it is enough that there should be tolerance and respect, without bothering about questions of truth. All these shades of opinion and many more are reflected within interfaith organizations, which have generally avoided trying to define the relationship of religions. For them, the search for understanding and cooperation is urgent in itself.

     In their early years the international interfaith organizations tended to stress what united religious believers. Now, with greater trust and knowledge, equal emphasis is given to appreciating the distinctive contribution each faith—and the various traditions within each faith—make to human awareness of the Divine. Increasingly, those who occupy leadership roles in the various religious communities have begun to take an active part in interfaith organizations, whereas at first the initiative lay with inspired individuals. It has taken a long time to erode the traditional suspicion and competition between religions—and it still persists, especially in the problems created by aggressive missionary work. The main brake on the growth of interfaith understanding has been the conservatism of religious communities. Happily, now, those at the leadership level in many religious traditions recognize the vital importance of inter-religious cooperation.

Peace through Religion

 While all efforts for interfaith understanding promote a climate of peace, some interfaith organizations, especially the World Conference on Religion and Peace, have concentrated on encouraging religious people to be active in peace work. Attempts to bring together people of different religions to promote peace date back to the early part of this century. Even so, the first Assembly of the World Conference on Religion and Peace did not meet until 1970. It is hard to assess the impact that religious people can have on political processes, especially as politicians seldom acknowledge those who have influenced them. Modern communications have given added weight to popular opinion.

     Religious leaders may play an important role in forming public opinion by insisting on the relevance of spiritual and moral considerations. They have helped to maintain public alarm at the enormous stockpile of nuclear weapons and other means of mass destruction. They have voiced public outrage at the starvation of millions of people due to war, injustice, and unfair patterns of international trade. They have upheld human dignity and protested against torture and racism. They have underpinned efforts to develop internationally agreed standards of human rights and have helped to monitor their application. Interreligious conferences have been among the first to warn of threats to the environment. In local areas of conflict, religious people have often maintained contact across boundaries and divisions. Yet often, too, religious people have used religious loyalties to enflame conflict and have allowed particular interests to outweigh common human and religious moral values. Some extremists stir up religious passions to gain support for their own agendas.

     It is even more difficult to evaluate the power of prayer, but certainly remarkable changes have recently taken place in the world scene, especially since the first World Day of Prayer for Peace at Assisi in 1986. Each year some people of all religions join in The Week of Prayer for World Peace. Special days of prayer are held to mark human rights anniversaries and for particular areas of conflict. Many people regularly repeat the Universal Prayer for Peace:

"Lead me from death to life, from falsehood to truth.

Lead me from despair to hope, from fear to trust;

Lead me from hate to love, from war to peace.

Let peace fill our heart, our world, our universe."

Religious Institutions Engage in Dialogue

 Often those who have pioneered the search for good relations between religions have faced misunderstanding and even hostility in their own faith community. They have been accused of compromising or watering-down the distinctive beliefs of their own religion. In fact, however, most pioneers witness that learning about other religions has helped them appreciate their own more deeply.

     Slowly the value of interfaith dialogue has become more widely recognized. In the Christian world, in 1966, The Second Vatican Council’s decree Nostra Aetate transformed the Catholic Church's attitude to people of other religions. A Secretariat for non-Christians was established, which is now called The Pontifical Council for Inter-Religious Dialogue. At much the same time, The World Council of Churches established a Unit for Dialogue with People of Living Faiths (now the Office on Inter-Religious Relations), which has arranged various consultations and has encouraged Protestant and Orthodox churches to rethink their theological approach to other religions. Some other religions now have agencies to encourage dialogue; these include the International Jewish Committee on Inter-Religious Consultations and the World Muslim League's office for inter-religious affairs.

     Clearly, official dialogue has a character of its own. Participants have some representative role. Much of the work is to remove misunderstanding and build up good relations, as well as encouraging practical cooperation on moral issues and social concerns. More speculative discussion about questions of "truth" may be inappropriate. Further, while most organizations fully respect the freedom of all who participate in consultations, the host organization may have its own agenda. This means that official inter-religious discussions need to be distinguished from interfaith organizations, where ultimate control rests with a board or executive which is itself inter-faith in composition and where funding comes from several religious communities. The growth of discussions between representatives of religious communities is, however, a sign that the importance of harmony between religions is now seen as urgent by the leaders and members of religious communities themselves. This is in part due to the pioneering work of interfaith organizations.

Bilateral Conversations

As in a family, there are times when the whole family wishes to be together and times when two members of the family want to talk by themselves, so there are times when members of just two religions wish to engage in dialogue. A particular example of this is Jewish-Christian dialogue. A major international organization, The International Council of Christians and Jews, was formed in 1975 to foster good relations between the two religions. Other examples are the growing Christian-Muslim dialogue, some Muslim-Jewish dialogue and considerable Christian-Buddhist dialogue both in North America and in Japan. There are now many study and conference centers in different parts of the world which promote dialogue between members of two or three religions.

The Practical Importance of Interfaith Understanding

The Gulf War, the Salman Rushdie affair, and the conflicts in former Yugoslavia have emphasized the practical importance and urgency of interfaith understanding. No longer can anyone dismiss religion as obsolete or irrelevant to world affairs. But many wonder whether the future belongs to the interfaith movement or whether we are likely to see increasing religious rivalry. Some indeed have an apocalyptic vision of the next century being dominated by renewed conflict between Christendom and the world of Islam. The interfaith movement has serious problems to overcome if it is to achieve its goals.

     In all religions there is an increase of extremism, which also alienates others from any religious allegiance. Missionary groups in some religions make exclusive claims that theirs is the only way to truth and salvation. Elsewhere religious differences enflame political and economic divisions and sometimes religion is exploited by the powerful as an instrument of social control. Even India, of whose tolerance Swami Vivekananda boasted at the World's Parliament of Religions one hundred years ago, has seen the increase of "communalism," or rivalry between different religious and ethnic groups.

     In Eastern Europe, the renewed nationalism is often closely linked to religious identity and has been accompanied by anti-semitism and discrimination against religious minorities. It is easy to deplore intolerance—especially in others.

     It is harder to understand its causes, which may be psychological or related to a group that is feeling politically, culturally, or economically marginalized. Intolerance may be caused by fear or ignorance or it may be based on exclusive claims to truth.

Even dialogue itself may be misused. As it becomes more popular, it may be "hi-jacked" for ideological purposes—that is to say, people may have hidden agendas such as wanting to change the views of their dialogue partners or seeking to gain their support for a political cause.

Much to Be Done

Despite all the problems, the interfaith movement has made progress, especially in recent years. Even so, it is still very weak. The initiative was often with "marginal" groups—to whom all credit is due. Gradually liberal members of the major religions began to take part. Now, many religious leaders are committed to this work; even so, the religious communities are still reluctant to fund interfaith work, most of which is semi-voluntary. Cooperation between interfaith organizations is still only on an ad hoc basis. Adequate structures for greater coordination and cooperation are required. There is an urgent need, too, for centers of information about worldwide interfaith work. There is also much popular ignorance. The Year of Interreligious Understanding and Cooperation declared by several interfaith organizations in 1993 was intended to increase public awareness of the need for interfaith cooperation and to encourage those involved to assess their progress and to determine priorities for future work.

     The educational task is still far from complete. The growth of comparative religious studies has helped to dispel ignorance about the world religions, but ignorance is still widespread. Theologians have helped their communities rethink traditional attitudes to other faiths, yet exclusive attitudes are still common. All religions claim insights into Truth. There needs, therefore, to be continuing dialogue so that religions may share their insights and together come to a deeper understanding of Ultimate Reality. This dialogue includes both intellectual discussion and efforts to appreciate each other's patterns of prayer and meditation. Yet in many cases the thinkers are quite remote from religious leaders. Meanwhile, religious rivalries destroy lives. Religious people are reluctant to make clear that their commitment to the search for truth and 0the defense of human rights is stronger than their group loyalty—costly as this may be.

     The interfaith movement is becoming increasingly more practical with a new emphasis on ways of cooperating to face urgent problems and to seek a "global ethic" or consensus on moral values. The discovery of those who attended the first meeting of the World Conference on Religion and Peace in Kyoto, Japan, in 1970, was that "the things which unite us are more important than the things which divide us." The interfaith organizations have shown that people of many religions can agree on the importance of peace and justice and on action to relieve suffering and to save the planet's eco-system. The events and publicity during 1993, The Year of Interreligious Understanding and Cooperation, provided a chance to make the vital importance of interfaith work far more widely known, not only in combating extremism and communalism but in harnessing the energies of all people of faith and of good will to tackle the urgent problems of the world. Only by working together will the dreams of 1893 be realized. Only by standing together will prejudice and discrimination be removed, violence and injustice ended, poverty relieved, and the planet preserved.

II) A New Agenda

Since 1993, there has been rapid growth of interfaith activity throughout the world, with increasing emphasis on its practical importance. The number of local interfaith groups has also increased in several countries. Indeed, I see 1993 as a milestone in the growth of the interfaith movement. The focus has changed from trying to get people of different religions together to discovering what people of faith can do together for our world. Paul Knitter, for example, argues in his recent One Earth, Many Religions that "concern for the widespread suffering that grips humanity and threatens the planet can and must be the `common cause' for all religions." Hans Kung, in his A Global Ethic for Global Politics and Economics, seeks to show how moral principles can and should be applied to the affairs of the world. For myself, during the Year of Inter-religious Understanding and Cooperation in 1993, I came to see that we were not just talking about cooperation between religious people, but about cooperation within national societies and between nations as essential for our life together.

     Despite the very practical efforts of some groups, up until 1993 much of the energy in the interfaith movement had to go into persuading people of different faiths to meet. There was first of all ignorance and quite often hostility to overcome. People of one faith knew little about another faith and what they knew was often erroneous. A second task was encouraging people of different faiths to get to know each other, to relax in each other's company, to talk and perhaps to become friends. As prejudices were dispelled and friendship grew, many people found they had to rethink their attitudes toward the members and theologies of other religions.

     Now, however, many people long for the religions to be "the moral conscience of humanity," as Pope John Paul II expressed it to the Assisi World Day of Prayer for Peace. This new agenda reflects the fact that the great problems that threaten human life and the environment concern us all, just because of our common humanity. Since 1993, several international interfaith bodies have focused on practical questions. [These activities are described in more detail in Chapter 21. Ed.]

     The question now is what effect does all this work have. Indeed, the subject of two of the conferences of the International Interfaith Centre at Oxford have been "How effective is interfaith activity in halting and healing conflict?" To have an even greater impact, the interfaith movement must address a number of concerns.

Widening the Circle of Dialogue

1. Traditionalists are welcome.

The dangers that threaten our world society may be the basis on which traditional members of the faiths may be encouraged to engage more fully in interfaith activity. Yet they are often put off by what they suppose to be the "liberal presuppositions" of the interfaith movement. There are those who reject any meeting with members of another faith tradition. Although these are often labeled "extremists" or "fundamentalists," the cause of their suspicion of and hostility to others may be primarily because of political and economic divisions. Many others who perhaps are best described as "traditionalists" do not wish to give religious legitimacy to another faith tradition. Quite possibly, they have not thought much about the matter, but do recognize that people of different faiths have to live together and therefore need to understand some basic things about each other: for example, what foods should not be served at a civic reception in a religiously plural city?

     A pluralist society requires respect for those of other persuasions. Even societies where one religion is dominant may have to take account of significant religious minorities. Teddy Kollek, for example, while Mayor of Jerusalem, tried to be sensitive to the religious concerns of Muslim and Christian minorities. Many Islamic states have to make allowance for significant minorities of other faiths.

     I doubt if we can reach widespread agreement on the philosophical or theological basis for interfaith work, at least in the immediate future. Perhaps rather than assuming that theological pluralism is the basis for interfaith dialogue, we should acknowledge a pluralism of dialogue. Probably within each religion one can find those to whom the labels "exclusivist," "inclusivist," and "pluralist" can be applied. Perhaps the need is to discover the contribution each group can make to interfaith dialogue.

     For instance, the exclusivist stresses commitment, and this is a welcome reminder that interfaith activity should not evade questions of truth. The inclusivist speaks as a member of a particular faith community and can help that tradition reinterpret its theology so that while affirming its central witness it need not deny the witness of others. The pluralist affirms that the richness of the Divine Mystery cannot be contained in one tradition.

     I wonder if even as individuals most of us operate within only one model. I recognize that in part I could fit under all the categories. I have a personal commitment as a disciple of Christ; in my theological thinking I seek as a Christian to see God's purpose in the whole religious life of humanity; and as a student of religion and as an interfaith activist, I do not presume that any faith has a privileged position.

2. Listening to Minority Voices.

Practical cooperation is not without its difficulties. Is it genuinely inter-religious and international or are certain groups recruiting support for their own agenda? Marc Ellis, in his Unholy Alliance, reminds us that Palestinians feel that Christian-Jewish dialogue has added to their sufferings, while the Dalits in India feel this about Hindu-Christian dialogue. In some places, women feel they have been excluded from the dialogue.

Does the emphasis on religious consensus allow space for the voices of religious minorities and of those who have no formal religious commitment? A consensus document may be a threat to minorities, especially to those whose religious identity is resented by the mainstream.

3. Listening to Spiritual Movements.

We have also to recognize that spiritual wisdom is not the monopoly of religious officials. The Spirit, like the wind, "bloweth where it listeth." I believe that the Chicago Parliament did us all a good turn by opening its doors to all who wanted to come; on the whole, few religions have been in the vanguard of progress. Some groups did withdraw due to the inclusiveness, but that was their choice. It may well be that religious and denominational organizations and hierarchical leadership will become less significant in the next millennium.

4. Listening to Other Disciplines.

Equally, we need the wisdom of the experts in many particular disciplines, especially those who are people of faith. Dialogue needs to be multi-disciplinary as well as multi-faith. Experts in a whole range of disciplines may themselves be committed members of a faith. This was made clear to me when I spoke to the Retired Generals for Peace about the Global Ethic and the role of the military in peace-keeping. Many of those high-ranking officers were committed members of a faith.

     If interfaith dialogue is to deal with the vital issues that face human society, it should not be confined to religious specialists or religious leaders. It needs to engage those with expertise in all the relevant disciplines. Particularly, there should be an attempt to involve in this debate those with political and economic power as well as those who control the media. They, however, will perhaps not be interested until there has been far wider public education about the vital importance of interfaith cooperation. Change will begin to happen only as the politically aware public demands that nations act in the interest of the world society and seek to shape that society according to ethical values upheld by the great spiritual traditions as well as by many humanists.

Difficulties to be Addressed

1) Disagreements Within Religions.

We are all aware of the disagreements within religions. At one Christian-Jewish dialogue group, it was suggested after our first session that the Jews go into one room to sort out their differences and that the Christians should go into another and solve their disagreements. The differences may be not only theological, but relate to the great social, ecological, and moral issues which we have been suggesting should be the focus of interfaith activity.

     Intra-religious dialogue is very important. But in our concern for the environment, the protection of human rights, and the struggle for economic justice, we may well find ourselves in opposition to some members of our own and other faiths. The more socially engaged the interfaith movement becomes, the less it may be a unifying force amongst all believers.

2)   Interfaith Organizations Need To Work Together.

When people hear of another interfaith organization, the reaction may be, "Do we need another interfaith body?" To those on the outside, one interfaith group looks much the same as another, and the motley variety of initials used for the organizations seems designed to confuse.

     In fact, there is plenty of work for them all to do. As we have seen, there is a great variety of approaches to interfaith work and each organization has its own particular focus and constituency. Only by working together will the interfaith movement be listened to by the media and by those who control economic and political power.

     There have been suggestions that what is needed is a World Council of Faiths, which could perhaps be formed by the merging together of the various international interfaith organizations. It is questionable whether one super Organization would be more effective or just more bureaucratic. What seems to me important is a sense of partnership between the organizations and awareness of belonging to a movement that is bigger than any of us. I have hoped that there could be some world-wide coordinating body, rather like the International Council of Christians and Jews, for those engaged in Christian-Jewish dialogue, or the Society for Buddhist-Christian Studies.

     The International Interfaith Centre (IIC) at Oxford, which has been set up by the International Association for Religious Freedom, the World Congress of Faiths, and Westminster College, Oxford, has as its purpose to encourage education about interfaith activity and to facilitate cooperation amongst all those engaged in this work. The Centre aims to hold information about interfaith work across the world, to keep those involved in touch with each other, while being a source of information to the media; it also aims to encourage research on questions of concern to many people involved in interfaith work, regardless of their particular organization.

     As mentioned above, a particular concern at IIC conferences has been to examine how interfaith work can be more effective in areas of conflict, such as Sri Lanka, Northern Ireland, former Yugoslavia, and the Middle East. The center is also developing electronic communication capabilities. Nonetheless, hospitality to visitors to the Centre and the many individual contacts and introductions made by the Centre remain at the heart of its work to create a sense of spiritual fellowship amongst all engaged in what has been called a "Pilgrimage of Hope."

Wishful Thinking?

If the interfaith movement is to be effective in helping to rebuild our world on spiritual and moral principles, there is a great deal of work to be done. In many societies, religions are peripheral to the centers of economic and political power. Perhaps the greatest task is to argue that this is a moral and spiritual world.

     Is that hope, as Hans Kung asks in his Preface to A Global Ethic (1993), a "sheer illusion"? In answer, he points "the eternal skeptic" to the worldwide change of awareness about economics and ecology, about world peace and disarmament, and about the partnership between men and women. Perhaps one special contribution of faith is to inspire hope that change is possible. Such a conviction is based on our inner life. Although I have stressed the needs of the world as our common agenda, the hope and energy to address this will come from the inner life of prayer and meditation. The source of practical action is our spirituality. Inner and outer belong together. The activist will be exhausted without an inner life and the true mystic longs for the world's renewal.

     My hopes for interfaith work are graphically expressed in a passage at the end of Choan-Seng Song's The Compassionate God. There he described an African's dream of the world: “A giant snake, enormously powerful, was coiling itself around the globe. The globe seemed too weak to withstand the pressure. I could see the first cracks in it. Then I saw a light at the center of the world. Enter into this light, I was told, but I resisted... But the light was irresistible. I went towards it and, as I did so, I saw many others moving towards it, too. And the snake's grip gradually began to loosen.”  Choan-Seng Song comments on the dream: “The world has in fact begun to crack. We seem destined for destruction at our own hands. But behold, miracle of miracles, out of the cracks a light shines... We all need that light, for that light is our only hope—we, the poor and the rich, the oppressed and the oppressors, the theists and the atheists, Christians, Muslims, Jews, Buddhists, and Hindus. We must all get to that light, for it is the light of love and life, the light of hope and the future. The movement of persons toward that light must have constituted a formidable power, for the snake, the demon, begins to loosen its grip on the globe.” (The Compassionate God, SCM Press 1982, pp. 259-60)

     There is abundant spiritual energy and hope to release our world from the fears and dangers that threaten to crush us, if only we can harness that energy effectively.

 

(Parts I and II of this essay are Chapter 2 and part of Chapter 8 in Faith and Interfaith in a Global Age, CoNexus Press and Braybrooke Press, 1998, Grand Rapids and Oxford.)

 

*   *   *   *   *

Books by Marcus Braybrooke

ALL IN GOOD FAITH A resource Book for Multi-Faith Prayer. Edited by Jean Potter and Marcus Braybrooke. Spiritual teachers, drawn from all faiths, write about the place of prayer in their tradition. The book includes an anthology of short readings and a selection of interfaith services. Published by the World Congress of Faiths £7.99 or $12. (ISBN 0905468 01 5)

A WIDER VISION. A History of the World Congress of Faiths. By Marcus Braybrooke, published by Oneworld Publications. Special price £10 or $15. (ISBN 1 781851 681198)

FAITH AND INTERFAITH IN A GLOBAL AGE. By Marcus Braybrooke. This readable book tells the story of international interfaith developments and discusses key issues in interfaith work. Published by CoNexus Press and Braybrooke Press. £6.99 or $11.50. (ISBN 09516883 5 9)

PILGRIMAGE OF HOPE. One Hundred Years of Global Interfaith Dialogue. By Marcus Braybrooke. Tells the story of interfaith organisations from 1893 to 1992. Published by SCM Press. Special price £20 hdbk or $30. (ISBN 033402500 1)

TESTING THE GLOBAL ETHIC. Voices from the Religions on Moral Values. Contributors from several religions indicate the moral values which they share. Published by IIC, WCF and CoNexus press. Edited by Peggy Morgan and Marcus Braybrooke £11.99 or $18. (ISBN 095 24 24140 15)

 

Displayed by 

Lucien Cosijns, Binnensteenweg 240, A26, 2530 Boechout, Belgium

T. +32 3 455 6880   lfc.cosijns@gmail.com

www.interfaithdialoguebasics.info


 

Comments