Just as relationships between individuals require cooperation to thrive, so too must understanding and collaboration exist between different religious traditions in order to build a more just, compassionate and peaceful world. However, determining appropriate levels of inter-religious engagement poses complex challenges that necessarily involve navigating shifting boundaries over time. Willingness to cooperate across religious divisions depends on negotiating these delicate borders responsibly and respectfully.In many areas, boundaries have expanded considerably regarding inter-religious cooperation. Interfaith dialogue and learning about differing beliefs have become widely embraced as positive ways to reduce prejudice through developing familiarity between neighbors of different faiths. Opportunities now exist to build relationships at the personal level across religious divisions that simply were not present in the past. Increased understanding has enabled more cooperation on numerous social issues where values align, like reducing poverty, promoting environmental protection or providing disaster relief. Yet boundaries still exist regarding certain sensitive theological issues, ritual practices or matters of religious identification. Individuals and groups may feel the need to protect certain aspects of distinct religious identity from undue external influence as cooperation deepens. Asserting these boundaries does not inherently signify unwillingness to engage, but rather ensures dialogue happens on mutually agreeable terms that respect differences as much as commonalities. So long as limiting discussion of internal sacred matters to protect freedom of belief, cooperation in shared social endeavors can still flourish.The COVID-19 pandemic has pushed cooperation boundaries too, as lockdowns necessitated new levels of coordination between religious authorities and public health agencies regarding worship regulations. While some viewed restrictive rules as necessary due to epidemiological risk, others perceived them as infringing key religious freedoms. Negotiating such policies highlighted the necessity of establishing clear demarcations between religious self-governance and state authority respecting Constitutionally guaranteed liberties. Flexibility on religious cooperating with social imperatives does not imply unlimited political control over sacred institutional matters. Perhaps most challenging are instances when perceived boundaries differ irreconcilably between religious partners due to conflicting claims about truth and salvation. While interfaith understanding allows appreciation of others’ sincerely held beliefs, asserting exclusive theological authority could threaten cooperation if one side feels conversion is implied as a term of engagement. Progress requires acknowledging all access different religious “homelands,” yet find common ground regarding ethical treatment of dissent and diversity amidst disagreement. Overall, success in inter-religious cooperation correlates directly with flexibility, trust and careful renegotiation of relationship boundaries over time as circumstances evolve. Respecting religious freedom and pluralism sustains willing partnerships, whereas forcing participation or failing to respect others’ right to limit interaction risks dismantling goodwill and further divide communities. With care, understanding and conscience, inter-religious engagement holds tremendous potential to unite people across lines that once strongly separated them.
