Marianne Moyaert is a reserach fellow at the Faculty of Theology, KU Leuven (Belgium). AbstractThis article focuses on multiculturalism in the context of present-day societies and the need to incorporate minorities within a reframed social order. In his critical theory, Axel Honneth rightly draws attention to the idea of the moral grammar of struggles for recognition. Analyzing his theory in depth, the article shows that Honneth underestimates the violent power of ideological discourse in marginalizing and excluding society's others, e.g. cultural minorities. It then puts forward an alternative approach based on Ricoeur's creative and original reflections on ideology and utopia. For the incorporation of cultural minorities to occur, the symbolic order of society needs to be critiqued, transformed and expanded. From this perspective, the author highlights the subversive and transformative strength of utopian counter-narratives. The latter form a vital resource for cultural minorities in their struggle for recognition. Keywords: Multiculturalism, Ricoeur, Honneth, Recognition, Cultural Minorities RésuméLa présente contribution se concentre sur le multiculturalisme dans le contexte des sociétés contemporaines et sur la nécessité d'intégrer les minorités dans un ordre social transformé. Dans sa théorie critique, Axel Honneth attire à juste titre l'attention sur l'idée de ‚grammaires morales‛ des luttes pour la reconnaissance. En analysant cette théorie en profondeur, l'auteur démontre que Honneth sous-estime le pouvoir violent du discours idéologique dans la marginalisation et l'exclusion de membres de la société, par exemple, les minorités culturelles. Il s'agit de proposer, dans un second temps, une appproche alternative fondée sur la réflexion créative et originale de Paul Ricoeur sur l'idéologie et l'utopie. Pour que l'intégration des minorités culturelles puisse se produire, l'ordre symbolique de la société doit être critiqué, transformé et élargi. A partir de ce changement de focal, l'auteur met en évidence la force subversive et transformatrice de l'utopie des contre-récits. Ceux-ci constituent une ressource vitale pour la culture des minorités dans leur lutte pour la reconnaissance.

General rightsCopyright and moral rights for the publications made accessible in the public portal are retained by the authors and/or other copyright owners and it is a condition of accessing publications that users recognise and abide by the legal requirements associated with these rights.• Users may download and print one copy of any publication from the public portal for the purpose of private study or research. • You may not further distribute the material or use it for any profit-making activity or commercial gain • You may freely distribute the URL identifying the publication in the public portal Take down policyIf you believe that this document breaches copyright please contact us providing details, and we will remove access to the work immediately and investigate your claim.

This article focuses on inter-ritual hospitality, 'where the reciprocal roles of host and guest set the parameters for interaction' (60). This type of hospitality has the potential to enhance the dialogue between religions; indeed, one may ask whether there can be a greater token of mutual respect and appreciation than that of inviting another to share one's rituals. In this article, however, I am not interested primarily in the success stories of inter-ritual hospitality that have brought growth and enrichment for the parties involved; rather, I will focus my attention on its infelicitous counterparts. The failure of inter-ritual hospitality is a subject that has been explored very little in interreligious studies, and there is little (ethnographic) documentation on this subject. One could say that inter-ritual failure is virgin territory among interreligious scholars. I will begin to explore some of the issues at stake and examine where inter-ritual hospitality can go wrong. In doing so, I continue and expand the research done by ritual scholars who have focused their attention on infelicitous ritual performances conducted mainly in 'monoreligious' settings. KEYWORDS ritual failure; ronald grimes; inter-rituality; interreligious hospitality This article focuses on inter-ritual hospitality, 'where the reciprocal roles of host and guest set the parameters for interaction' (Pratt 2015, 60). This type of hospitality has the potential to enhance the dialogue between religions; indeed, one may ask whether there can be a greater token of mutual respect and appreciation than that of inviting another to share one's rituals. Exploring how ritual gestures of welcome help to establish friendly interreligious relations is an important topic of research that fits in with the broader research programme of interreligious studies, which examines the 'dynamic encounter and interaction between religions' with a special interest in 'the meaningful growth, enrichment, and benefit gained [from such an encounter]' (Hedges 2013, 1077). In this article, however, I am not interested primarily in the success stories of inter-ritual

One of the main challenges to interreligious dialogue is in locating a proper balance between commitment to one's own religion while maintaining openness to the other. 1 "Can one combine openness and identity, dialogability and steadfastness in the interreligious dialogue?" 2 It is generally understood that the problem of the tensive relationship between identity and openness should be addressed from a theological perspective and that interreligious dialogue should be based on a correct theological evaluation of religious traditions. It is up to theological reflection to clarify why Christians must be open-or, conversely, should not be open-to those of other religions. It is theology that sets limits as to how far that openness extends and if there should be limits to one's openness when encountering the religious other. If Christians are to become more open, the questions of why this openness is appropriate (or not) and how this openness to the faith of another is related to one's own faith commitment, are answered, one by one, through theological reflection on, and interpretation of, religious diversity.In the first section of this article I explicitly take up the challenge of reflection from a theological perspective on the relationship between faith commitment and openness. This implies turning to the so-called theology of religions and the threefold soteriological typology of exclusivism, inclusivism and pluralism. My primary interest is to show precisely how the Christian