Faith-based organizations should seek to transcend the divide between pacifism and activism
In the realm of Christian religious freedom and human rights advocacy, the division between peacemaking and advocacy can be a counterproductive approach. This division, common among national and international Christian institutions, artificially separates complementary strategies that, when combined, offer a more effective approach to addressing conflict and injustice.
Wissam al-Saliby, President of 21Wilberforce, is a proponent of this integrated approach. Al-Saliby began working in Christian religious freedom and human rights advocacy in 2018, having previously served as Director of the World Evangelical Alliance United Nations Office in Geneva.
Peacemaking, rooted in God's mission of reconciliation, is a relational and experiential concept developed by Mennonites, Quakers, and Brethren churches and universities. It involves selfless, trust-building actions that create a foundation needed to address difficult issues like religious freedom effectively. Advocacy, on the other hand, focuses on championing the rights and legal frameworks that protect those freedoms and promote justice for marginalized groups.
When treated as isolated tasks, advocacy risks lacking the relational trust that peacemaking builds, while peacemaking without advocacy may not result in the structural or policy changes needed for durable freedom and rights protection. For Christian organizations, peacemaking is often expressed through living out faith by fostering reconciliation and cooperation among conflicting parties, while advocacy leverages this relational capital to influence policy makers and public opinion in defense of religious freedom and human rights.
For instance, the Community Peacemaker Teams engage in both direct peace work in conflict zones and advocacy back home with policymakers, highlighting the complementary dual role of these disciplines. Research also supports this integrated approach, showing that integrating religious peacemakers with advocates strengthens efforts to reduce violence and protect religious minorities.
In light of these findings, Christian institutions should reconsider the peacemaking-advocacy institutional dichotomy for more coherent and strategic public engagement. Maintaining a strict distinction between peacemaking and advocacy risks fragmenting efforts, reducing credibility, and diminishing long-term impact in advancing religious freedom and human rights. Effective Christian organizations blend these roles to build relationships and then pursue justice, leveraging the theological and practical strength of each approach in tandem.
Currently, al-Saliby's team is supporting churches that have been ravaged by large-scale mob violence, providing psychosocial support, equipping leaders with peacemaking tools, and advocating for justice. Recently, al-Saliby spoke with leaders in a country where churches were affected by mob violence, emphasizing the importance of this integrated approach in their ongoing work.
This article was originally published on the site of 21Wilberforce and re-published with permission. The goal of both peacemakers and advocates is to ensure that evangelical Christians and churches can fulfill God's calling and that all citizens' rights and dignity are respected.
Education-and-self-development is crucial for effective Christians advocating religious freedom and human rights, as it empowers individuals with knowledge needed for advocacy and equips them with skills for peacemaking. Personal-growth, through spiritual and intellectual cultivation, is essential for leaders like Wissam al-Saliby, as it enables them to navigate complex situations, build trust, and advocate for change effectively.
