Silberman5

538 PSYCHOLOGY OF RELIGION AND APPLIED AREAS

good, with the Jews defined as the evil ones, as the offspring of Saran. By demonizing Jews as a symbol of “all evil,” John’s Gospel, for example, bas aroused and legirimized hostility coward Jews throughout the course of Christian history (Carroll, 2001).

Fifth, severa! world religions have encouraged evange!ism, which suggests that there is “either an obligation unfulfilled or spiritual reality unfulfilled as long as the whole world does not profess thetenets of a particular religion” (Gopin, 2000, p. 31). Evangelism, which reąuires the members of a particular religious group to make the effort to change the religious meaning systems of members of outgroups, does not inherently require violence, but, when imposed forcefully, it has brought about extreme violence throughout history (e.g., during the time of the Inąuisition), and has the potential to do so in the futurę.

Beyond that, evangelism, which is restricted by law in many countries, can provoke a violent response against it. For example, the recent increase (particularly sińce September 11, 2001) in the activism of Christian missionaries in Islamie countries has been a source of tension. It has been interpreted by some individuals as a threat to the fragile peace among Muslims and Christians in countries like Lebanon, and even as a crusade against Islam on the part of the Bush Administration. This missionary activism has coincided with mounting restrictions on missionary efforts by the regimes of Islamic-majority countries and with inereasing anti-Western militancy, which has involved the arrest and the imprisonment, or even the murder, of some Christian missionaries (Van Bierna, 2003).

Religion as a Facilitator of Peace

Religions as meaning systems, then, can encourage harred, discrimination, and violence. However, they seem to also have strong potential to facilitate conflict resolution and peace. For excellent discussions, see Appleby, 2000; Cox et ak, 1994; Gopin, 2000, 2002; Helmick, 2001; Helmick & Petersen, 2001; Johnston & Sampson, 1994; Silberman et a!., 2005. First, religious meaning systems (individual or co!iective) often include values that can facilirate peace (Gopin, 2000), such as (1) sanctity of life, which is sometimes sup-ported by the religious idea that al! humans are creared in the image of God (Gopin, 2000; Montville, 2001); (2) selfless love and compassion (Poethig, 2002), inciuding in some systems (e.g., Christianity) the idea that one must love or at leasr care for one’s enemy (Gopin, 2000); (3) empathy (Gopin, 2000); (4) suspension of judgment of others; (5) forgiveness (Helmick Sc Petersen, 2001; Rye et ak, 2000; Tsang et al., 2005); (6) hu-mtlity (Gopin, 2000), self-examination and self-criticism (Carroll, 2002); (7) interiority, that is, the emphasis on the positive inner experience promoted by prayer, meditation, or feelings of divine lovc (Gopin, 2000); (8) religious discipline, that is, the religious idea that contro! of the senses may facilitate restraint in violent situations (Gopin, 2000); (9) the notion of inrerdependence, that is, the idea that the aers of one individua! or nation can affect the whole world (Poethig, 2002); (10) the exp!icit encouragemenr of nonviolence, and the cali for peace and pacifism (which is a critical concept of the inner life in the East-ern traditions of Jainism, Buddhism, and Hinduism) (Gopin, 2000; Poethig, 2002); and (11) messianism and imagination, that is, the vision of a morę just social construction and new possibilities for the human socia! order (Gopin, 2000; Silberman et al., 2000).

Second, religion systems of meaning can include powerful myths in a way that may facilitate peaceful activism. For example, the powerful Abrahamie myth that was dis-cussed above can be reframed as emphasizing the family relations berween Jews and Muslims—a family that might have a somewhat disturbed history but that is stili a family. Reports that religious Jewish and Musiim participants in conflict resolution efforts in the Middle East often refer to each other as “cousins” may reflecc longings for this family unity (Gopin, 2000). When it comes to myths regarding the relations between Christian-iry and Judaism, there have been efforts by the Catholic Churcli sińce 1962 to change irs history of hostility toward the Jews, which may eventually lead to a perception of Judaism within the meaning systems of many Catholics as the older sister of Christianity, rather than the rejected religion (Carroll, 2002).

Third, religions as systems of meaning can increase activism for peace by prescribing special rituals of forgiveness and reconciliation that can be applied in both interpersonal and intergroup conrexts (Gopin, 2002),

C0NCLUD1NG COMMENTS

This chapter explores the influence of religion on nationa! and international relations by shedding light on agents, venues, and processes through which religion can impact na-tional and international relations in both positive and negative ways. The chapter por-trays religion as a complex (individual or collective) system of meaning that can be learned, developed, and changed in a variety of ways. The chapter suggests that religious (and nonreligious) poiicymakers and other agents have che ability to direct religious Systems toward different goals by choosing to emphasize certain ends (e.g., forgiveness or conflict resolution) over other ends (e.g., revengc or victory over outgroups) (see Hunsberger & Jackson, 2005; Tsang et al., 2005; Martin, 2005; Silberman, 2005a; Silberman er al., 2005). These ideas have been demonstraced in a elear way in recent aca-demic and nonacademic discussions about the continuous struggle between hardliners and moderares for the soul of Islam—that is, over the futurę of the faich and its relation-ship with the West (e.g., Benard, 2004; Lewis, 2003; Powell, 2004).

This chapter needs ro be read with the following points in mind: First, the role of religion in national and international conflicts and their resolutions is very complicated and this chapter was not able to address all the relevanr issues. Second, while this chapter focuses on the religious aspects of narional and international relations, it.is important to emphasize that most conflicts and other political eventsare motivated and influenced by complex com-binations of factors (e.g., Fox, 2000; Silberman et al., 2005). Even wben religion can be viewed as the main factor in certain national or international conflicts or in their resolutions, the role religion plays may be shaped by social, political, economic, and historical context variables, as well as by individua! differences in personality variables thatcharacter-ize the relevant leaders (see Silberman et al., 2005, for a review). Third, it is important to re-alize that, at times, religion can indeed serve as a causa! factor of national and international conflicts and their resolutions, Yet at other times religion may be used just as an excuse or as an epiphenomenon for actions that are motivated by other factors. It would be important for futurę rcsearch to identify ways to distinguish between the two cases (Gopin, 2000).

Religion: The Missing Dimension in National and International Relations

Considering the historical and current significant positive and negative impacts of religion on national and international relations, and the predictions for its continuous futurę influence (e.g., Appleby, 2000; Huntington, 2003), the generał neglect of the study of religion in academia and particularly in psychology is surprising and detrimental (Bau-meister, 2002; Emmons, 1999; Emmons et aL, 2003; Miller & Thoresen, 2003;