Challenges and Opportunities
It is nearly 50 years ago, on October 28, 1965, that the Second Vatican Council published its “Declaration on the Relation of the Church to Non-Christian Religions”, Nostra Aetate (NA). Many developments in the field of interreligious dialogue have taken place since then. In the context of the thrust towards New Evangelization, it may be helpful to look at the past in order to look at and plan for the future of the Church’s mission in the world, especially in South Asia. The Synod on New Evangelization said, in its proposition 53:
The dialogue with all believers is a part of the New Evangelization…Faithful to the teaching of Vatican II, the Church respects the other religions and their adherents and is happy to collaborate with them in the defense and promotion of the inviolable dignity of every person.
There was also concern for religious freedom. In the context of increasing interreligious violence in many parts of the world and, especially, of the widespread persecution of the Christians in many parts of the globe, protecting such religious freedom based on the dignity of the human person and dialogue between religions seems to be an urgent task for the promotion of peace in the world. At the same time, precisely because of the interreligious tensions, interest and involvement in dialogue and collaboration seem to be lessening. This may be a moment to look back at our recent past, with its inspirations as well as tensions, so that we can plan better for our mission in the future.
The Inspiration: the Second Vatican Council
At the Council, the Pastoral Constitution on The Church in the Modern World – Gaudium et Spes affirmed the availability of salvation as a participation in the paschal mystery of Christ to all men of good will in whose hearts grace is active invisibly. For since Christ died for all, and since all men are in fact called to one and the same destiny, which is divine, we must hold that the Holy Spirit offers to all the possibility of being made partners, in a way known to God, in the paschal mystery. (GS, 22)
The same Pastoral Constitution also indicates the possible way in which the grace of salvation is available to the humans:
It is by the gift of the Holy Spirit that man, through faith, comes to contemplate and savour the mystery of God’s design. Deep within his conscience man discovers a law which he has not laid upon himself but which he must obey. His voice, even calling him to love and to do what is good and to avoid evil, tells him inwardly at the right moment: do this, shun that. For man has in his heart a law inscribed by God. His dignity lies in observing this law, and by it he will be judged (15-16. Cf. also the Dogmatic Constitution on the Church – Lumen Gentium, 16).
Here we see the Holy Spirit linked to God’s voice in conscience. The Decree on Religious Freedom Dignitatis Humanae gives conscience a social dimension. Suggesting that the humans must not be prevented from acting according to their conscience in religious matters, since the practice of religion consists of those voluntary and free internal acts by which the humans direct themselves to God, it goes on to say:
His own social nature requires that man give external expression to these internal acts of religion, that he communicate with others on religious matters, and profess his religion in community (DH, 3).
A communitarian dimension is also affirmed in the Declaration on Other Religions:
All men form but one community. This is so because all stem from the one stock which God created to people the entire earth (cf. Acts 17:26), and also because all share a common destiny, namely God. His providence, evident goodness, and saving designs extend to all men (cf. Wis 8:1; Acts 14:17; Rom 2:6-7; 1 Tim 2:4). (NA, 1)
Referring to the ‘unsolved riddles of human existence’, the same Declaration continues:
The religions which are found in more advanced civilizations endeavor by way of well-defined concepts and exact language to answer these questions… The Catholic Church rejects nothing of what is true and holy in these religions. She has a high regard for the manner of life and conduct, the precepts and doctrines which, although differing in many ways from her own teaching, nevertheless, often reflect a ray of that truth which enlightens all men… The Church, therefore, urges her sons to enter with prudence and charity into discussion and collaboration with members of other religions. (NA, 2. Cf. also AG 9, 11, 15, 18; GS 92, OT 16)
The Council, in this way, lays the foundation for interreligious dialogue.
The Practice and Teaching of St. John Paul II
In the spirit of Vatican II, St. John Paul II invited the leaders of other religions to come together to Assisi to pray for world peace in October 1986. (He did something similar also later during the conflict in Bosnia and the jubilee year 2000.) Explaining this initiative, he declared, in a discourse to the Roman Curia on December 22, 1986, that all authentic prayer is from the Holy Spirit. (cf. No. 11). Developing this further, in 1991, he said in The Mission of the Redeemer – Redemptoris Missio (RM):
The Spirit manifests himself in a special way in the Church and in her members. Nevertheless, his presence and activity are universal, limited neither by space nor time (DEV 53)… The Spirit’s presence and activity affect not only individuals but also society and history, peoples, cultures and religions… Thus the Spirit, who “blows where he wills” (cf. Jn 3:8), who “was already at work in the world before Christ was glorified” (AG 4), and who “has filled the world,… holds all things together (and) knows what is said (Wis 1:7), leads us to broaden our vision in order to ponder his activity in every time and place (DEV 53)… The Church’s relationship with other religions is dictated by a twofold respect: “Respect for man in his quest for answers to the deepest questions of his life, and respect for the action of the Spirit in man (RM, 28-29).
St. John Paul II, however, clarifies that the action of the Spirit in the history of peoples, cultures and religions “serves as a preparation for the Gospel and can only be understood in reference to Christ, the Word who took flesh by the power of the Spirit ‘so that as perfectly human he would save all human beings and sum up all things’” (GS 45; DEV 54). It is the same Spirit that impels the Church to proclaim Christ and also guides it to discover its gifts to other peoples, to foster them and receive them in dialogue. (RM 29) It is in this context that St. John Paul goes on to affirm:
Dialogue is based on hope and love, and will bear fruit in the Spirit. Other religions constitute a positive challenge for the Church; they stimulate her both to discover and acknowledge the signs of Christ’s presence and of the working of the Spirit, as well as to examine more deeply her own identity and to bear witness to the fullness of Revelation which she has received for the good of all. (RM 56)
Some Theological Tensions
Such an openness to other religions and to dialogue with them has given rise to much theological reflection regarding the significance of religions with regard to salvific divine-human encounter and their relationship to the Church. Given a wide variety of such reflections, some theologians group them under various paradigms like “Exclusivism, Inclusivism and Pluralism” and “Ecclesiocentrism, Christocentrism and Theocentrism”. Such paradigms are not very helpful. They are not faith based, but abstract and rational-philosophical classifications. Besides, they are inadequate and mistaken. For example, if we believe that Christ is God, the second Person of the Holy Trinity, the opposition between Christocentrism and Theocentrism is meaningless. Such a distinction downgrades Christ, humanizing him and making him one mediator among others between God and the humans. This is obviously not acceptable to us.
Similarly, pluralism is affirmed by philosophers like John Hick according to the Kantian principle that God or ‘Absolute Truth’ in itself is unknown and unknowable: we have only various claimed personal perceptions, relative to the perceivers and their contexts, without any objective validity. This is pure relativism and is not acceptable. God has manifested Godself to us in history through various prophets and finally through his Son, Jesus, who, we believe, is the fullness of Truth. (cf. Heb 1:1-2) Such divine manifestations experienced by the humans are not merely humanistic, relative, pluralistic perceptions in the sense of John Hick.
The Church and the Kingdom
Such paradigms, however, bring up the question of how to relate the Church to the other religions. St. John Paul II suggests a solution in The Mission of the Redeemer. God has only one plan for the salvation of the universe, which he has manifested in Jesus Christ. St. Paul says:
With all wisdom and insight he has made know to us the mystery of his will, according to his good pleasure that he set forth in Christ, as a plan for the fullness of time, to gather up all things in him, things in heaven and things on earth. (Eph 1:8-10)
St. John Paul II echoes this:
Salvation consists in believing and accepting the mystery of the Father and of his love, made manifest and freely given in Jesus through the Spirit. In this way the Kingdom of God comes to be fulfilled: the Kingdom prepared for in the Old Testament, brought about by Christ and in Christ, and proclaimed to all peoples by the church, which works and prays for its perfect and definitive realization. (RM 12)
The Kingdom of God is proclaimed, inaugurated and realized by Jesus (cf. Mark 1:14-15). By his preaching and miracles Jesus communicates to us an experience of the loving and forgiving Father (cf. Lk 15) who wants to share God’s life with us (cf. Jn 6) and makes it possible by his own passion, death and resurrection and the gift of the Spirit. This Kingdom is for all people, and all are called to become its members. This call goes out particularly to the poor and the oppressed of the world. (cf. Lk 4:18-20) It is an eschatological project, not in the sense that it will happen only at the end of the world, but in the sense that it has started now but will find its final fulfillment at the end of times, so that we live in a period of ‘already-not yet’. (cf. RM 13).
The Kingdom is the concern of every one: individuals, society, and the world. Working for the Kingdom means acknowledging and promoting God’s activity, which is present in human history and transforms it. Building the Kingdom means working for liberation from evil in all its forms. (RM 15)
This Kingdom is not merely an earthly reality, though it is being realized in history. The church is ordered to the Kingdom of God of which she is the seed, sign and instrument. Yet while remaining distinct from Christ and the Kingdom, the church is indissolubly united to both… The result is a unique and special relationship which while not excluding the action of Christ and the Spirit outside the church’s visible boundaries, confers upon her a specific and necessary role. (RM 18)
What is this special role? The Church is at the service of the Kingdom. It serves it by proclaiming and witnessing to the Kingdom and by establishing ‘new particular churches’. It also serves the Kingdom “by spreading throughout the world the ‘Gospel values’ which are an expression of the Kingdom” (RM 20). In so far as the people live ‘Gospel values’ and are open to the working of the Spirit, “the inchoate reality of the Kingdom can also be found beyond the confines of the church among peoples everywhere” (RM 20). It is in this context that we have to say that the church has the fullness of God’s self-revelation in Jesus Christ, the incarnate Word, while it may be found in an inchoate way among other peoples. The church also serves the Kingdom by her intercession because it is God’s gift and work.
Earlier in the Encyclical St. John Paul II had explained that, though salvation is meant for and ‘made concretely available to all’, often social and cultural conditions do not allow many people to become part of the church, and they are members of other religious traditions.
For such people salvation in Christ is accessible by virtue of a grace which, while having a mysterious relationship to the church, does not make them formally part of the church but enlightens them in a way which is accommodated to their spiritual and material condition (RM 10).
This is possible because the Church is not merely the visible, institutional body, but is also the mystical body of Christ ordained to the Kingdom of God.
It is in this context that St. John Paul II affirms: “The Church contributes to humanity’s pilgrimage of conversion to God’s plan through her witness and through such activities as dialogue, human promotion, commitment to justice and peace, education and the care of the sick, and aid to the poor and to children” (RM 20).
In his Apostolic letter Ecclesia in Asia (1999), after warning that salvation by Christ apart from the ordinary means of salvation, namely the Church, “does not thereby cancel the call to faith and baptism which God wills for all people” (31)1, he adds: “interreligious relations are best developed in a context of openness to other believers, a willingness to listen and the desire to respect and understand others in their differences… This should result in collaboration, harmony and mutual enrichment” (31)2.
Pope Francis also emphasizes this:
An attitude of openness in truth and in love must characterize the dialogue with the followers of non-Christian religions, in spite of various obstacles and difficulties, especially forms of fundamentalism on both sides… In this dialogue, ever friendly and sincere, attention must always be paid to the essential bond between dialogue and proclamation, which leads the Church to maintain and intensify her relationship with non-Christians. (Evangelii Gaudium, 250-51)
1. This quotation is from a letter which he wrote to the FABC at its V assembly in 1991. AAS 83 (1991), 101.
2. This is a quotation from Propositio 41 of the Synod for Asia.
The Indian Tradition
India is a multi-religious country. Hinduism, Buddhism, Jainism and Sikhism had their origin here. Christianity has been present in India from the time of St. Thomas the Apostle, according to a strong tradition. Islam has also been present from about the 8th century. Interreligious tensions and conflicts were not totally absent. But there was an atmosphere of tolerance. Already in the 3rd century B.C. the Buddhist emperor Ashoka declared in one of his rock-cut edicts:
King Priyadarsi honours men of all faiths, members of religious orders and laymen alike, with gifts and various marks of esteem… The faiths of others all deserve to be honoured for one reason or another. By honouring them, one exalts one’s own faith and at the same time performs a service to the faith of others. By acting otherwise, one injures one’ own faith and also does disservice to that of others. For if a man extols his own faith and disparages another because of devotion to his own and because he wants to glorify it, he seriously injures his own faith. Therefore concord alone is commendable, for through concord men may learn and respect the conception of Dharma accepted by others. 3
In the 16th century the Muslim emperor Akbar invited scholars of different religions for a conversation. Two Jesuits from Goa went to take part in them 4. Akbar himself tried to found a new religion, taking whatever he considered good in the other religions. When the British came, some of the educated Indians responded positively to the message of Jesus in the gospels. They recognized Jesus as an Oriental guru and declared themselves his disciples, though they did not wish to join his Church, which was seen by them as a European organization. Mahatma Gandhi was inspired by Jesus’ teachings, and by his suffering on the cross, to develop his own policy of non-violent resistance to injustice. He successfully led India to its independence from British colonialism through a non-violent struggle.
When the Indian subcontinent was divided into India and Pakistan along religious lines, India chose to be a secular country, not only treating all religions equally, but even offering special rights to the minority religions (and cultures) to practice and propagate their religion.
On the Christian side, already in the early 20th century, there was an openness towards Hinduism as a preparation for the Gospel. J.N. Farquahar, a Christian missionary, wrote a book Christianity the Crown of Hinduism, and Pierre Johanns, a Belgian Jesuit, published a series of pamphlets To Christ through the Vedanta, trying to show that the questions of Hindu Vedantic philosophy were answered by the theology of St. Thomas Aquinas. In 1950, two French priests, Abbe Jules Monchanin and Dom Henri Le Saux, founded a Christian ashram, hoping that the mystical tradition of Christianity, centred on the Trinity, lived in such ashrams will attract the Hindus who also had a mystical tradition. Similar efforts to reach out to Hinduism were also found elsewhere in the country like, Pune, Kolkata, etc.
3. Rock edict XII, in N.A.Nikam and Richard Mckeon (eds), The Edicts of Ashoka. (Mumbai, 1962), pp. 49-50
4. Cf. John Correia-Afonso, Letters from the Mughal Court(Anand: Gujarat Sahitya Prakash, 1980)
These and similar efforts received a boost, so to speak, with the encouragement of the Second Vatican Council to dialogue with other religions. Dialogue groups, in which members of different religions came together for an intellectual exchange were founded in different parts of the country. The Catholic Bishops’ Conference of India had an active Secretariat that organized “live-ins”, in which members of different religions came to live together for a few days, sharing their thoughts and their scriptures and even meditating together on common themes. Christian ashrams were founded a little all over the country.
Challenges of Interreligious Dialogue Today
But the situation has been changing in recent years. At the political level, India still remains a secular country and the rights of the minorities are still upheld by the law courts, but there are any attempts by the State to encroach on them, and tensions on the field seem to be growing. Though there have been Hindu-Muslim tensions, sometimes leading to violence, for over a century, now they have taken new forms inspired by terrorist tendencies. Christians had been targeted by anti-conversion bills in some states. In the last fifteen years there has been anti-Christian violence in some parts of the country. The Hindu majority is becoming restive. There are increasing attempts to assert its identity for social and political gains. One problem is that, after incidents of interreligious violence, ‘peace’ is restored through political (police) power, but no serious effort is made towards reconciliation and peace, respecting truth and justice – as happened, for instance, with the Truth and Reconciliation Commission in South Africa under the leadership of Nelson Mandela and Bishop Desmond Tutu –, although enquiry commissions, largely fruitless without proper follow-up, are generally appointed.
At the level of the Church itself, the ashrams are no longer as alive and active as before, after their pioneers have passed to the Lord. Many dialogue groups have disappeared. Formal meetings of various religious leaders are held occasionally. Dialogues at an intellectual level are rare, and if they continue it is normally in academic or secular settings, like departments of sociology in Universities. Given the tense atmosphere in the country in the area of interreligious relations – especially after the recent elections – the programme of interreligious dialogue needs to be re-invented and encouraged. We can think of it at four levels: peace-making; living together; coming together for prayer and comparative theologizing.
Four Levels of Dialogue
The situation in the country today is not one of peaceful living between the religious groups. Even where there no active, ongoing conflict, there are memories of hurts, suspicions and prejudices. In the age of the mass media, one tends to identify with the suffering of the other even at a distance. Conflicts between religious groups are triggered not so much for strictly religious reasons, but for economic and political reasons, religious identity being used to weld a group together. It may not be possible for the Church and other religious groups to get directly involved in peace making. But we can operate at two levels. On the one hand, we can join other Non-Governmental Organizations in trying to bring out the truth and to obtain justice through the courts of law. On the other hand, we can prepare the people of different religious groups to understand and accept each other, getting rid of their ignorance of and prejudice against others. We can especially focus on the youth in our educational institutions through programmes of interreligious and peace education, in which they are introduced to the different religious groups both in theory and practice and are also taught the values of reconciliation and forgiveness, dialogue and peace in the process of building up human communities who live happy and fulfilled lives. The fact that these groups tend to be interreligious is an advantage. Special text books and training programmes can be devised. This has started to happen in some places.
Religious ghettos in which people belonging to the same religion live together in the same geographical area seem to be disappearing in urban areas. But Christian leaders can take the initiative in constituting a group of leaders belonging to all religions (and ethnic groups) to discuss and act upon common civic issues. There can also be participation in each other’s social festivals to create a sense of community.
A third level of dialogue will be to follow the example of St. John Paul II and to come together to pray for peace and prosperity. This need not be a regular event, but is needed in moments of social crisis. When there has been interreligious violence or some big accidents or natural catastrophes, people can come together to implore God’s protection and help. Even if they do not pray together, being together before God the Creator in a time of need can be a unifying experience.
Another level of dialogue consists in what is known today as ‘comparative theology’. In the past, scholars claimed to study the various religions with scientific objectivity. It was known as a comparative study of religions. Even a non-believer could do this. Today religions are studied and compared, taking into account the point of view of the believers. This is known as comparative theology. This has not been done much in India. We can go even a step further, by trying to do such a comparative study as a group of scholars, who believe in the different religions, engaging in dialogue.
By engaging in such dialogue we are not abandoning our duty to proclaim the good news of the Kingdom of God and to be witnesses to Jesus in our lives. When we are relating to the religious ‘other’ in dialogue in the ways evoked above, we do not bracket our faith convictions, but are actually witnessing to our faith and promoting Gospel values. A positive proclamation can occur when there is an opportunity. We can recall here the advice of Pope Francis: “It is not by proselytizing that the church grows, by ‘by attraction’.” (Evangelii Gaudium 14)
Recognition of the religious ‘other’ does not mean that we subscribe to sweeping statements like “All religions are the same”, “All religions are true”, etc. While we recognize that the religions may play a role in facilitating a salvific divine-human encounter for their believers, this does not excuse us from the task of discerning and even judging them in the light of the revelation we have received from God, while we need also to be open to a similar judgment on the way that we live our own faith commitment. Though the Church is the mystical body of Christ, in its visible, institutional manifestation it remains a pilgrim that needs reformation and growth. (cf. LG, 14; 48).
While we recognize the other religions as facilitating the salvific divine-human encounter, we believe that God’s salvific plan for the universe has been manifested fully and in a unique manner in Jesus Christ (cf. Eph 1:3-10; Col 1:15-20). If we use terms like inspiration and revelation to refer to God’s definitive self-manifestation in Jesus Christ, we do not use the words in the same sense to refer to other possible divine self-manifestations in other religions. Of course Muslims and Hindus speak about their ‘scriptures’. In the Christian tradition we speak of private revelations. But all these cannot be equated, from the point of view of our faith, to the ‘public revelation’ that God has granted to us in Jesus Christ. As the International Theological Commission said, “Although one cannot explicitly exclude any divine illumination in the composition of those books (in the religions which have them), it is much more fitting to reserve the qualification of “inspired” to books of the canon (cf. DV, 11).” While we have to avoid such comparative statements, we can listen to Popes Francis and St John Paul II. Pope Francis says:
The same Spirit everywhere brings forth various forms of practical wisdom which help people to bear suffering and to live in greater peace and harmony. As Christians, we can also benefit from these treasures built up over many centuries, which can help us better to live our own beliefs (EG, 254).
Similarly, St. John Paul challenges us, Indians:
In preaching the Gospel, Christianity first encountered Greek philosophy; but this does not mean at all that other approaches are precluded. Today, as the gospel gradually comes into contact with cultural worlds which once laid beyond Christian influence, there are new tasks of inculturation, which mean that our generation faces problems not unlike those faced by the church in the first centuries. My thoughts turn immediately to the lands of the East, so rich in religious and philosophical traditions of great antiquity. Among these lands, India has a special place. A great spiritual impulse leads Indian thought to seek an experience which would liberate the spirit from the shackles of time and space and would therefore acquire absolute value. The dynamic of this quest for liberation provides the context for great metaphysical systems. (Fides et Ratio, 72).
Conclusion
India certainly shares in the global situation which seems to be ruled by individualism and consumerism, profit motivation and corruption in public life, and widely prevalent economic and socio-political inequalities. Only religions can offer a sense of values and motivation and inspiration for personal and social transformation. In a multi-religious country like India, the religions are called to provide this help to society together. St. John Paul II, in a talk to other religious leaders in Chennai in February 1986, said:
By dialogue we let God be present in our midst; for as we open ourselves in dialogue to one another, we also open ourselves to God… As followers of different religions we should join together in promoting and defending common ideals in the spheres of religious liberty, human brotherhood, education, culture, social welfare and civic order.
One element of the religious context that we have to take into account is that, while India is not secularized in the sense that the people have become anti-religious or atheist, as in some European countries, religions may remain an otherworldly concern, without playing a transformative role in society. In addition, religions may be becoming indicators of a socio-political identity in a conflictual multi-religious community. The first task of dialogue in such a situation would be to free religions from such a socio-political baggage and highlight the values that they stand for. Then we should seek, through dialogue and collaboration, to make them relevant to individual and social life.
What can be the Christian contribution to this common effort? The Hindus and others in India have always been attracted by the ethical teachings of Jesus in the Sermon on the Mount. Beyond that, the teachings and actions of Jesus show us God as a parent who loves and forgives. Jesus gives us a new commandment to love one another as he has loved us. He has shown this love in service (washing of the feet of the disciples), sharing (the Eucharist) and total self-gift unto death on a cross. His resurrection gives us an assurance that we are destined for life, not death, and that the risen Christ is sharing God’s life with us and leading us to all fullness. It is this message of forgiveness of sins and salvation, love and hope that we are called to share with the people with whom we are in dialogue. But this should not simply be a message that we share, but a project of action that we live in community.
Interreligious dialogue is therefore a challenge, but a necessary one, because we are collaborating with God in Jesus who is gathering all things together (cf. Eph 1:8-10), reconciling all of us with each other and with Godself (cf. Col 1:15-20 ), so that God will be “all in all” (1 Cor 15:28).
Michael Amaladoss, S.J.