Other articles from this issue | Version in English | Version in French

The Young Leadership of the International Council of Chtistians and Jews
International Council of Chtistians and Jews - Young Leadership Section

THE YOUNG LEADERSHIP OF THE INTERNATIONAL COUNCIL OF CHRISTIANS AND JEWS

YLS, the Young Leadership Section of the International Council of Christians and Jews (ICCJ), was founded by ICCJ in 1983 to help promote the work of ICCJ among the young. Since then it has grown in size and strength to make its own important contribution to Jewish-Christian relations. It brings together Jews and Christians, as well as Muslims, between the ages of 18 and 35 to combat conflict and prejudice between the religions and to promote issues of humanitarian concern.

There are officially organized volunteer-run YLS groups in Australia, Germany, Great Britain, Israel, Italy, the Netherlands and the USA. Equally important are those countries where YLS is not yet officially organized but where YLS individuals and small groups are promoting its work. These countries include: Austria, Egypt, France, Ireland, Jordan, Latvia, Lithuania, Palestinian Authority, Poland, Russia, Slovakia, Sweden, Switzerland, and the Ukraine. Desiring a more dynamic Christian-Jewish dialogue focused both on pressing contemporary concerns for our religious communities and on understanding the tragic growth of antisemitism throughout the Christian world, these young adults are effectively joining forces to tackle the evils caused by racism and intolerance.

Receiving its official constitution at the 1987 ICCJ Conference in Montreal, YLS has since had its own conferences in Paris (1989), Birmingham (1991), Germany (1992), Jerusalem (1993), London (1994), Hungary (1995), Todtmoos, Germany (1996), Rome (1997) and Klingenthal, France (1998). YLS is also gradually developing an Abrahamic Youth Forum to promote contacts between Jews, Christians and Muslims in Europe and to foster relations with various Jewish-Christian-Muslim groups. It is hoped that in the near future a joint meeting of European and Middle East members will hold a conference in Europe. Particular attention is being paid to dialogue between Jews, Christians and Muslims in the Middle East. One such successful meeting was held this year in Cyprus.



YLS Leaders Speak through SIDIC


Lucia Faltin - Lucia works at the Centre for European Policy in Bratislava, Slovakia. She is the current Chairperson of YLS.

The present situation of young people in Central and Eastern Europe remains largely determined by the four to seven decades of totalitarianism that varied in scope and strength across the region. The changes of 1989 and the early 1990s have not only set new opportunities but, in light of the previous regimes, also fundamental challenges. The three key challenges involve reading history, defining national identity and finding a place within the recent rapid global development.

In spite of the frequently denied connection between the young people of today and their parents’ or older friends’ recent past within the totalitarian structures, they live together and share claim for wellbeing. This requires that they share responsibility for reading the history of their countries and countrymen in spite of having made minimal or even no contribution. This need to read history faces the ignorance and denial of the young and the lack of interest, at best, of their older compatriots. However, the past continues to play its formative role, in spite of the lack of concrete individual participation in it. In most Central and Eastern European countries, state structures and institutions remain in the embryonic stage of democratic practice. Common practice is nonexistent, or at best, a distant notion. It is often said that even those who weren’t Bolsheviks got in the way of living under their skin.

The young face the grave dichotomies between the ideals which are claimed officially to be put into practice and the reality of limited pluralism, as well as between citizenry and democratic practice. In too many former communist countries the church has remained unchanged for decades - formerly due to the lack of communication, now for the sake of at least somewhat retaining acquired power. Because of the latter, in the downturn of democracy the church paradoxically tends to cooperate with the nationalists or former communists in order to preserve this element of power. The church often awakens too late to realize that it has again become a mere tool abused for other gains than those originally envisaged. In other cases the church remains authoritarian, unaware of developments elsewhere in the world due to opportunities missed during the decades of totalitarian blockade. All these phenomena put increasing pressure on the young to deal with the past of their countries in order to understand the developments of today. In spite of the limited interest in the past, except perhaps for Jews who have taken a more active part in the search for and research of their ancient and more recent history, there is an urgent need to read history - to look at both its dark and brighter sides.

The definition of identity is based on both reading history and implementing SWOT analysis, i.e., the examination needed to counteract the increasing inferiority complex which is resulting in a growing nationalism which too quickly finds scapegoats all across Central and Eastern Europe. It is this very nationalism that is so successfully recruiting the members of the young generation. The church, itself often involved in the struggle for survival, too often fails to provide a sufficient safety net and clear guidance for those searching for solutions in this confused situation. It is amazing that the church first has to be violated before it opens up to and joins the struggle for democracy. Frequently it merely follows numerous civil initiatives. The phenomenon of dissent (the religious and civil underground movement during communist times) has assumed a new face, often that of martyrdom. Such selfperception doesn’t allow the former dissidents to join with the contemporary ones, for the latter are considered to have suffered too little to be worthy of full and genuine acceptance. This seems to be the basis for the divided opposition to the newly emerging authoritarianism across the region. No longer is the issue about civil and religious approaches. It is increasingly becoming a matter of the degree of past suffering. The role played by dissent in bringing about the new order in the late 1980s is indisputable. However, the recent development must be attributed, to a certain degree, to these people, to the role they have attached to themselves and particularly to their unwillingness to reach down to the common people, “the sinners”. And this involves the church as well.

In order to take a full and particularly active part in the dramatic changes in Europe, particularly during this time of unprecedented integration, the first two challenges have to be successfully and objectively accomplished. Only then can one have the solid foundation which enables one to assume a role and a place as an individual and a member of the society in the movements sweeping across Europe. This involves the definition of one’s needs and abilities, the realization of one’s duty now and in the future, the readiness to assume responsibility for life through one’s choices – which involves enjoying success and admitting failures. Central and Eastern Europe, particularly its human resources uniquely shaped by its recent past and its present turmoil, represents a challenge for all of Europe of which it is an integral part – a part of its conscience and an inevitable element of its regional security. Considering the role Europe plays today and the increasing importance it will acquire following successful integration, the issues faced now by Central and Eastern Europe concern more than just those living here.


Dr. James Aitken - James is a research fellow in the Divinity Faculty at Cambridge University, UK. He is the past chairperson of YLS.


Dialogue is a challenge. It is an attempt to cross barriers and to face with honesty “the other”. It is a greater challenge when one not only meets with someone of another religion, but someone from another country, as in ICCJ. That challenge is made easier, however, when the other is someone of one’s own generation, and consequently my first real experiences of dialogue were with other young people at meetings of the ICCJ YLS. This does not mean that it was less of a challenge, but meeting with one’s own peer group allowed space for new questions to be raised. It also gave the security to seek new ways of understanding and relationship between the religions. The challenge lay in raising the issues that seemed to be most pertinent even when they appeared difficult or painful.

My occupation is as an academic researching into early Jewish history, but contrary to many people’s assumption, that is not my reason for being involved in dialogue. Dialogue is a contemporary concern and must deal with the relationship between individuals and groups in today’s society. The YLS impressed me because its members were concerned about various parts of the world, they were keen to help as religious people and, most important of all, they acknowledged the individual. It is easy to speak about communities and to talk about the other faith without engaging with how each individual lives and works in that community. In the YLS, debates on issues are sometimes fierce (if in good spirit), but this is because of the awareness that the topics matter and that they are concerned with people’s very lives. Being involved in this dialogue with people from various backgrounds is a living experience, a way of deepening one’s knowledge and understanding through participating in a theology that is active and alive. Having read a number of books and articles on Jewish-Christian relations, the impression from some is that a historical explanation and a re-wording of theology can solve the problems of conflict between religions. Hard sayings in the New Testament, for example, can be explained in their historical context so that they are not understood as referring to Jews of all time or the Jews of today. This is an important statement, but how does it engage with the fact that a religious text is, as it were, a living entity? It is read and re-interpreted by everyone that reads it and has a role in shaping the life of a community, irrespective of its original historical meaning. We need to find new ways of appreciating the text and of explaining its contents in order to take account of its varied use. Only if we acknowledge how it really is read can we begin to have an effect on that reading process in each person and each community.

The passion (we might even say youthful vigour or optimism) for the dialogue in the YLS reflects the enthusiasm for change. But where do we hope that that change will be made? It is imperative that dialogue continues at the grassroots level, engaging those that are not religious leaders or specialist theologians. Whilst greater understanding by the teachers and leaders of the religious communities will have an effect on the wider communities, it takes time and does not always reach where it should. Emphasis should be placed on working with small groups in their local situations, and allowing them to experience the dialogue, as many have in ICCJ YLS. Furthermore, the world is constantly changing and we should also respond to those changes.

Let us look at the world today; it is one that has changed so dramatically even in my own short lifetime that it can but affect the way we view our relations between each other and the social context in which Jewish-Christian relations operate. The nature and extent of world changes since the late 1980’s is staggering - the fall of Apartheid in South Africa, the collapse of the Soviet Union, the end of Soviet control over Central and Eastern Europe, the unification of Germany, the end of the Cold War, the replacement of the Iron Curtain by a “Silver Curtain” (meaning an economic divide between East and West), the rapid integration of the European Community, and the break-up of the Yugoslav states. In addition to all this, we have talk of ever-fragile peace agreements in Israel and Northern Ireland. It is, therefore, encouraging how earnestly young people are involving themselves in dialogue in the Middle East, and that possibilities for similar work in northern Ireland have been mooted. It is an important message to our generation that religion can be a reconciling force and not just a dividing one.

In all these international changes there is a concern that Europe is becoming a “Fortress”, defending itself from immigrants and refugees, and the new European structures are creating a kind of pan-European nationalism. If we have learnt from our histories then refusal to acknowledge refugees and the signs of nationalism in any form should strike us as chilling warnings for the future. In this new Europe religious prejudice continues, but not only (or maybe primarily) against Jews but against Muslims. Our relations with Islam are at the heart of dialogue for many young people today. As it is one of the largest growing religions in Europe we should, as religious people, aim to foster true understanding of the religion, especially when so much anti-Islamic prejudice seems to come from Jews and Christians. Happily, this is happening, and the greatest hope for the future, in whichever direction Europe and the rest of the world move, is that the dialogue itself continues.



Dr. Dvora Ross – Dvora is a mathematician and computer programmer. She teaches at the Yakar Institute in Jerusalem and was a member of the YLS Executive Committee.

Growing up as a religious Jewish girl in Jerusalem, Israel, I was exposed very little to non-Jewish people. We sometimes had non-Jewish guests in my parents’ home, and there were also our Arab cleaning woman and Arab builders; however, personally I really didn’t have any non-Jewish friends. Education in many religious schools in Israel is very ethnocentric, so our experience in school did not give us much appreciation of what other religions had to say. But personally I was always interested in and attracted to the different, so understanding other religions did interest me.

My relationship to Europe and to the Christians there was more complicated. All of my grandparents were born in Eastern Europe and most of their families were killed there - before, during and after the Second World War - by the Nazis and other Eastern European antisemites. I grew up hearing their stories and reading books of Jewish history in Europe - about hatred, murder and pogroms. The first time I went to Europe as an adult I didn’t really know what to expect. I wasn’t sure if the European people were still Jew-haters. To my relief, most (though not all) of the people I encountered had nothing against Jews. While there, I also acquired some non-Jewish friends, and since I am a religious person, the religious side of their life and traditions interests me very much.

A few years ago a friend who was studying with me told me about a group of Jews and Christians who were meeting weekly in a private home to discuss religion. Very interested, I began participating in their meetings. Unfortunately their meeting time was inconvenient for me so I couldn’t attend often. When I later heard about a group of young Jews and Christians connected with the Israel Interfaith Association (a member organization of ICCJ) I joined the group and became very involved in its meetings. A few months later the ICCJ Young Leadership Section held its annual conference in Jerusalem. This encounter with many young religious people from all over Europe really inspired me. The conference was very interesting and successful and I formed some deep friendships.

I now became more active in our local ICCJ group. I went to more ICCJ conferences and met more people. Later I was elected to the ICCJ YLS committee and was responsible for helping to plan and organize these conferences myself. Each conference was a real experience for me: meeting more people, hearing more points of view, and hearing more about the variety of religious experience.

The Israel Interfaith Association is not only for Jews and Christians; its membership also includes Muslims and Druze. However, initially our youth group was mainly Jews and Christians. Most of the Christians were European students in Israel for a year or two of studies. The few Arab participants (Christian and Muslim) did not come very regularly. Initially for me this was actually an advantage: I was more interested in the intellectual experience than in any political effort for more understanding between Jews and Arabs. About two years later we tried to reach out and invite more Arab participants. During this time, along with other members of the group, I also participated in a WCRP youth conference in Italy which was much more politically oriented. We recruited some Israeli Arabs for this conference, where we also met Arabs from other Middle-Eastern countries. We immediately began planning for a Middle-East Jewish-Christian-Muslim conference but have had many difficulties with it.

Meanwhile, in the ICCJ YLS conferences we also felt uncomfortable with the lack of Muslim participation. At times we invited “token” Muslim participation, but the meetings were still primarily oriented for Christians and Jews. Then, for the 1996 conference, we received financial assistance to invite several Christian and Muslim Middle-Eastern delegates. The success of this venture led us to establish the Abrahamic Forum, a forum which includes Muslims and which meets parallel to the usual ICCJ meetings.

Here in Israel we have now established connections with Palestinian organizations as well as with groups and organizations from neighboring Arab countries. We maintain an ongoing relationship with them. We will also soon have a Middle-Eastern Abrahamic Forum conference with the goal of bringing more understanding between the people of the Middle East through their religions.

Since the Jewish-Arab conflict is both political and religious, it is very difficult in our meetings to separate the religious aspect from the political one. This is a big drawback. We try to concentrate on mutual understanding and learning about our respective religions, but the dialogue always very quickly moves to political issues. I must admit that my personal belief in a real political solution is very much diminishing. However, I do hope that the personal encounter in these meetings will bring more understanding and better relationships between the people involved.