Religionsdialog i Göteborg med omnejd

Abstract

The aim and research questions: This study explores and describe the work on the religious dialogue in Gothenburg. The main purpose of the study has been to identify and highlight the conditions and opportunities of the dialogue as a specific activity, to generate new practices and action alternatives. The study's research questions are as follows: • How is the meaning of the religious dialogue described by those involved in the dialogue? • Which obstacles are experienced and what improvement suggestions indicates for religious dialogue work. Method: The study is based on 15 selected interviews conducted in 2013 and 2014. The interview questions were initially designed without the intention of writing a scientific text. In this way, the study can be regarded as inductive, which means first observing reality and then creating a theoretical frame of reference. Through interviews of those who have been active in the meantime and their experiences, I wanted to capture and preserve their thoughts for the future as a unique documentation viewed from the perspective of the various contributors. Results: The participants inquire for deeper cooperation which in turn would lead to more and different cultural meetings and intercultural cooperation. When it comes to a society level, many express their awareness that the religious dialogue should work more actively to improve the society by targeting ignorance and prejudice that in various ways favours the split between the believers and the secular. Similarly, it should be a continuous mission to explain and convey differences between cultural traditions that are rooted in religion and when people use religion to maintain and consolidate cultural traditions - for example, clothing or acts that can create exclusive consequences in different contexts and in relation to society. Furthermore, the religious dialogue should work actively towards extremism by resolving ethnic conflicts that occur in exposed areas and working purposefully to improve the conditions for the integration of different groups in the Swedish society. Conclusions: The religious dialogue needs to be restructured and focus its activities on issues that are relevant in Sweden today, but which lay the foundation for future social development and thus contribute actively to a multicultural society with new cultural contexts. This requires those leading the religious dialogue to put aside some ideological and sometimes political agendas, to curb segregation as a result of an already extensive distancing from the Swedish society.