CENTRO PRO UNIONE N. 77 - Spring 2010 ISSN: 1122-0384 semi-annual Bulletin In this issue: Letter from the Director...................................................p. 2 Religious Congregations and their Contribution to Interreligious Dialogue Michael L. Fitzgerald, M. Afr.......................................... p. 3 A Bibliography of Interchurch and Interconfessional Theological Dialogues Twenty-fifth Supplement (2010)......................................... p. 9 Centro Pro Unione - Via S. Maria dell'Anima, 30 - 00186 Rome, Italy A Center conducted by the Franciscan Friars of the Atonement www.prounione.urbe.it Director's Desk With this issue of the Bulletin we are happy to present the annual bibliography of interchurch and interconfessional dialogues. For those who have access to the web you do not have to wait for the supplement each year since the bibliography is up dated daily. You can access the web page at http://www.prounione.urbe.it/home_en.html and select: catalogue base DIA. We hope that this continued service helps promote not only the knowledge of the dialogues but also their reception. The text of the annual Paul Wattson and Lurana White lecture opens this issue. Archbishop Michael Fitzgerald, M. Afr., Apostolic Nuncio to the Arab Republic of Egypt, delegate to the Arab League and recognized Islamic scholar, addressed a great number of women and men religious whose Congregations are engaged in interreligious dialogue as well as many students from the Ecumenical section of the Pontifical University of St. Thomas Aquinas-Angelicum. Other activities of the Centro included lectures given by William Henn, OFM Cap, during the Week of Prayer for Christian Unity and dom Patrick Lyons, OSB. Both of these lectures had themes that concluded our anniversary celebration of the Genevan reformer Jean Calvin (10 July 1509 – 27 May 1564). These texts will be published in the Fall issue of the Bulletin. Also in the Spring cycle of lectures the Executive Secretary of the World Mennonite Conference, Dr. Larry Miller dealt with the theme: “Glory to God and on Earth Peace”. Historic Peace Church Perspectives on the International Ecumenical Peace Convocation. In his lecture he explained the attempts of the “peace churches” to be involved in the elimination of violence in society as their contribution to the WCC’s decade to overcome violence. To round out the conference schedule, Dr. Michael Root, a Lutheran member of the International Lutheran Catholic dialogue, addressed a delicate theme in the history of Lutheran Reform in his lecture entitled: “Indulgences as Ecumenical Barometer: Penitence and Unity in the Christian Life”. The last activity of this Spring included a book presentation of the Dialogue Report Justification in the Life of the Church from the Lutheran/Catholic Dialogue Commission in Sweden. Bishop Eero Huovinen, Lutheran Bishop of Helsinki made a presentation introducing the contents of the dialogue report. This presentation was made in the presence of the dialogue commission composed of Catholics and Lutherans from Sweden and Finland. The evening was concluded with an Ecumenical Prayer and a reception so that the commission could meet some of our students and professors from the Roman Universities. Check our web site for up to date information on the Centro’s activities and realtime information on the theological dialogues. All of our staff wish you all a very pleasant Summer. This Bulletin is indexed in the ATLA Religion Database, published by the American Theological Library Association, 250 S. Wacker Drive, 16 Floor, Chicago, IL 60606 (thhttp://www.atla.com). James F. Puglisi, sa DirectorN. 77 / Spring 2010Bulletin / Centro Pro Unione 3 Centro Conferences CCCC RELIGIOUS CONGREGATIONS AND THEIR CONTRIBUTION TO INTERRELIGIOUS DIALOGUE Archbishop Michael L. Fitzgerald M.Afr. Apostolic Nuncio to the Arab Republic of Egypt and delegate to the Arab League (Conference given at the Centro Pro Unione, Thursday, 17 December 2009) It is a privilege for me to give this annual lecture in honour of Father Paul Wattson and Mother Lurana White, particularly in this year of the centenary of the reception of the communities they founded into the Catholic Church. I wish to thank most sincerely Father James Puglisi for his cordial invitation. The Franciscan Friars and Sisters of the Atonement were founded for the cause of unity. What the founders had in mind first of all was the unity of Christians, yet they were fully convinced that the death of Christ, as a sacrifice of expiation or atonement, was offered for all. As St Paul says, the work of reconciliation – at- one-ment – accomplished in Christ, has been entrusted to us to hand on. We are ambassadors for Christ, with a single message: be reconciled to God (cf. 2 Co 5:18-20). This message is not confined to Christians; it is offered to all people, whatever may be their religious conviction. It is therefore quite logical that the Friars and Sisters of the Atonement should have extended their ecumenical work into the field of interreligious relations. Hence, the theme of this lecture, Religious congregations and their contribution to interreligious dialogue, is by no means foreign to the concerns of this Centro Pro Unione. Pioneers of dialogue Many people seem to be under the impression that interreli- gious dialogue, defined as “all positive and constructive relations with individuals and communities of other faiths which are directed at mutual understanding and enrichment,” started with 1 the Second Vatican Council. It is true that Nostra Aetate, the Council’s Declaration on the Relation of the Church to Non Christian Religions, has given a great impetus to interreligious relations as an integral part of the Church’s mission. It is also true that, in the field of relations with people of other religions, there was no “movement” comparable to the liturgical move- ment and the ecumenical movement which prepared the way respectively for Sacrosanctum Concilium, the Constitution on the sacred liturgy, and Unitatis Redintegratio, the Decree on ecumenism. Yet without the effort of pioneers, most of whom in fact belonged to or inspired religious congregations, it would hardly have been possible for Nostra Aetate to come into existence. Father Paul and Mother Lurana drew their inspiration from St Francis of Assisi. The visit of the Poverello to the Sultan Malik al-Kamil in Damietta is legendary. Though some elements of the encounter may be later inventions, there is no reason to doubt the historicity of the meeting between the Friar and the Sultan who recognised and respected each other as men of God. Influenced by this experience, Francis gave instructions on how to behave in a Muslim environment: “the friars who ‘through divine inspiration would desire to go among Muslims…. can establish spiritual contacts with them in two ways: a way in which they do not engage in arguments or disputes, but rather are subject to every human creature for the love of God and confess them- selves to be Christians. The other way is that when they see that it would be pleasing to the Lord, they should announce the word of God.’” This pregnant text shows that Francis did not eschew2 mission, which he understood as a Christian presence among Muslims, but he wanted his followers to engage in this mission out of love and with great humility and patience. Coming as I do presently from the land in which Damietta is situated, I can attest that this spirit of Francis is well alive among the Friars Minor and the numerous congregations of Franciscan Sisters in Egypt. It is only right, I think, to mention as pioneers for establishing positive and constructive relations with people of other religions the two Jesuits, Matteo Ricci (1552-1610) and Roberto de Nobili (1577-1656), in China and India respectively. Their missionary methods had more to do with inculturation than with dialogue, Pontifical Council for Interreligious Dialogue and Congregation 1 for the Evangelization of Peoples, Dialogue and Proclamation (1991), N. 9. For the full text of this document (which will henceforth be cited as DP) and other documents quoted, see F. GIOIA (ed.), Interreligious Dialogue. The Official Teaching of the Catholic Church from the Second Vatican Council to John Paul II (1963-2005) (Boston: Pauline Books and Media, 2006) n. 933. From the Regola non bollata of 1221, quoted in Secretariat for 2 Non Christians, The Attitude of the Church toward the Followers of Other Religions. Reflections and Orientations on dialogue and Mission (1984) n. 17 (it will be referred to henceforth as DM); cf. GIOIA, Interreligious Dialogue n. 824 (translation slightly amended).4 Bulletin / Centro Pro UnioneN. 77 / Spring 2010 yet in their adaptation to the milieu in which they operated, whether of mandarins or of Brahmins, they showed great respect for the religious sensitivities of the people to whom they were relating. We could also remember the Jesuits who, during the same period, engaged in dialogue with Muslim scholars at the court of the Mughal Emperor Akbar (1556-1605). In a later century, Charles Lavigerie (1825-1892), the founder of the missionary society to which I belong, the Missionaries of Africa (White Fathers), proposed a patient and painstaking approach to the Muslim milieu with which he was familiar as Archbishop of Algiers. He emphasised the need to influence society as a whole, overcoming hostility through attention to culture, and through a witness of disinterested love and service. He encouraged dialogue on themes common to Christians and Muslims: the greatness of God, the relationship of creature to Creator, the need for human beings to repent and receive forgiveness. In his writings he took up the ideas of Pope Gregory VII in his letter to the Muslim ruler al-Nasir, to which Nostra Aetate refers. Lavigerie was in no hurry to have Muslims baptised, but “wanted every conversion to be tested through one or two years of ‘spiritual’ formation (the ‘Postulate’) to make sure that the prospective convert was really under the influence of the Spirit and determined to go ahead.”3 The intuitions of Lavigerie were developed and systematised by a member of the Society of Missionaries of Africa, Henri Marchal (1875-1957). Jean-Marie Gaudeul presents Marchal’s teaching under the heading “The mystery of Christ’s preaching.” This distinguishes it from the teaching and example of another pioneer, characterised as “The mystery of Nazareth.” This pioneer is of course Charles de Foucauld (1858-1916) who, from his experience as a hermit in the Sahara, proposed a life of presence, in poverty and a spirit of service, with the ideal of becoming a “universal brother.” He has also been proposed as an example in the document Dialogue and Mission. De Foucauld4 thought that Louis Massignon (1883-1962), a brilliant French scholar, might be his successor in Tamanrasset. Massignon had recovered his Christian faith through his experience of Muslim kindness and hospitality in Mesapotamia. He did not take up religious life (although later he was ordained a priest in the Greek Catholic Church), but as a professor he was able to have an influence on the Catholic approach to Islam, thus preparing the way for Vatican II. His thought, presented by Gaudeul as “The mystery of Christ’s sacrifice,” gives a place to Islam in God’s plan of salvation, used by God to draw people to himself in marvellous ways.5 Moving from Islam to Hinduism, it would be good to recall the pioneering efforts of Jules Monchanin (1895-1957), not a religious but a priest of the diocese of Lyon, who, together with Henri Le Saux (1910-1973), a Benedictine monk of the abbey of Kergonan, in Brittany, founded the ashram Shantivanam, engaging in a profound dialogue with Hindu spirituality. Another monk, influential in encouraging dialogue, in his case with Buddhists, was the prolific writer Thomas Merton (1915-1968).6 Institutions for dialogue There is a danger that when individuals disappear, their ideas and influence disappear also. Continuity is given by institutions. I should like to mention two whose foundation pre-dates Vatican II. The first of these is the Institut de Belles Lettres Arabes (IBLA) founded by the Missionaries of Africa in Tunis in 1926. A fine library has been built up, much frequented by Tunisian university students and also by a number of their lecturers. The institute publishes a journal, IBLA, which focuses particularly on Tunisian culture. Since Tunisian Muslims are engaged in the editing of the journal, a continuous cultural dialogue is facilitated. A similar institute was created in Cairo by the Dominicans. Originally planned as an extension of the Ecole Biblique in Jerusalem, but with a vocation to pay special attention to Islamic culture, the Institut Dominicain d’Etudes Orientales (IDEO) was established as a separate entity in March 1953. The first director was Fr Georges Chehata Anawati, O.P. who deserves the title “pioneer” in his own right, but also for his collaboration with another scholar, Louis Gardet (Frère André of the Petits Frères de Jésus). IDEO possesses a very rich library specialising in the sources for the study of Islam from its origins to the Ottoman period. It is much appreciated by the students of al-Azhar, young men and young women, who find there the materials they need for their research, and also people, who are willing to guide them, particularly as regards methodology. The research of the members of the Institute, and others, is published in the Mélan- ges which have appeared periodically since 1954.7 A quasi-institution also helped to prepare the way for Vatican II in so far as Christian-Muslim relations are concerned. I am Cf. J.-M. GAUDEUL, Encounters and Clashes. Islam and 3 Christianity in History, Vol. I: A Survey (Rome: Pontificio Istituto di Studi Arabi e d’Islamistica, 2000) 315. Cf. DM 17; GIOIA, Interreligious Dialogue, n. 824. 4 On Marchal, de Foucauld and Massignon see GAUDEUL, 5 Encounter and Clashes, Vol. 1, pp.310-324; on Massignon, see also M. L. FITZGERALD and J. BORELLI, Interfaith Dialogue. A Catholic View (London/Maryknoll: SPCK/Orbis, 2006) 229- 232. For brief notes on Monchanin and Merton see FITZGERALD, 6 Interfaith Dialogue, pp.232-237. For more details and further references see R. MORELON (ed.), 7 Le Père Georges Chahata Anawati, dominicain (1905-1994). Parcours d’une vie (Cairo: Institut Dominicain d’Études Orientales, 1996); J.-J. PERENNES, Georges Anawati (1905- 1994). Un chrétien devant le mystère de l’Islam (Paris: Le Cerf, 2008).N. 77 / Spring 2010Bulletin / Centro Pro Unione 5 referring to the “Journées Romaines,” a week-long meeting held roughly every two years from 1956 to 1999. It was the initiative of different religious: Dominicans in Egypt, Jesuits in the Lebanon, Benedictines and Franciscans in Morocco, Missionar- ies of Africa in Algeria, Tunisia and in Rome. The aim was to bring together for exchange and reflection those who were in dialogue with Muslims in the field. It can be safely said that these meetings facilitated a warm reception of Nostra Aetate.8 The drafting of Nostra Aetate Yet Nostra Aetate had still to be written. No document of this nature had been foreseen during the preparation of the Council; it developed out of the desire of Pope John XXIII to have a special declaration on relations with Jews. The responsibility for drafting this document was entrusted to the Jesuit Cardinal Augustine Bea, head of the Secretariat for Christian Unity. One of his first permanent collaborators, who was actually given the Jewish portfolio, was Thomas Stransky, an American Paulist Father. He was assisted by other religious: Gregory Baum OSA, George Tavard AA and Leo Rudloff OSB. As the document expanded other religious were called on to provide their exper- tise. For the paragraph on Islam we find George Anawati OP, Robert Caspar M.Afr., Joseph Cuoq, M.Afr., Jean Corbon (a priest of the Greek Catholic Church in the Lebanon, but a former M.Afr.), with John Long SJ as the coordinator. With regard to Traditional Religions, Buddhism and Hinduism, the team brought together included two Jesuits, Josef Neuner and Josef Pfister, a Dominican, Yves Congar, Thomas Stransky, the Paulist, and Msgr Charles Moeller, a diocesan priest working in the Secretariat for Christian Unity. Without any doubt, the contribution of religious to the composition of Nostra Aetate was enormous.9 The implementation of Nostra Aetate Religious congregations have also been very much to the fore in the implementation of the new approach to the followers of other religions enjoined by Vatican II. With regard to relations with Muslims, one of my own confreres was the first secretary of the Secrétariat pour les Relations avec l’Islam set up by the French hierarchy. The subsequent secretaries, in the thirty or so years of existence of this secretariat, have counted a Franciscan, another Missionary of Africa, two priests of the Mission de France and one diocesan priest. The German province of the Missionaries of Africa set up a research centre, CIBEDO, and worked in different diocesan centres for practical relations with Muslim “guest workers.” In Spain, the centre Darek-Nyumba catered for both immigrants needing to learn Spanish and for Spaniards wishing to learn Arabic in order to establish relations with Muslim migrants or to work in the Arab world. In Belgium it is the Dominicans, both Fathers and Sisters, who have been staffing El-Kalima, the centre in Brussels for relations with Muslims, though for a time a Missionary of Africa held this responsibility. Lest I be accused of concentrating only on Islam, let me mention some institutes set up in Asia. The Carmelites of Mary Immaculate, a congregation of the Syro-Malabar Church, run Dharmaram College in Bangalore, a university which specialises in the study of religions. They have also opened centres for dialogue in other cities in India. It is they who run the Centre for Indian Studies and Spirituality here in Rome. For many years a CMI Father was the secretary of the commission for interreli- gious dialogue of the CBCI. This position is currently held by a member of the Society of the Divine Word. This Society has also set up a dialogue centre in Mumbai. The SVD took the initiative of founding the Nanzan Institute in Nagoya, Japan, which engages in serious study of the religions of Japan. In Japan also the Xaverian Missionaries opened a house of prayer and dialogue, Shinmeizan, which was originally a “daughter” of a nearby Buddhist monastery before becoming independent. It is frequented by both Buddhists and Christians. A member of another Italian missionary society, the Pontificio Istituto per le Missioni Estere (PIME), founded the very active movement named Silsilah, in Zamboanga, on the troubled island of Minda- nao in the Southern Philippines. These are just a few examples of the initiatives taken by religious congregations, initiatives of different nature and with different aims, but all directed towards fostering interreligious dialogue according to the spirit inculcated by Vatican II. A particular concern has been with formation for dialogue, providing a sound knowledge of the religions of the people with whom contact is being made, and facilitating a Christian reflection on interreligious encounter. Before moving on, let me mention one further institute, for it would be unpardonable of me to pass it over in silence. This is the Pontifical Institute for Arabic and Islamic Studies (PISAI) here in Rome. This centre of formation for relations with Muslims had its origin in Tunisia. It formed part of IBLA, already mentioned, from which it was separated in 1949. Transferred to Rome in 1964, it is still under the responsibility of the founders, the Missionaries of Africa, although the current director is a member of the Comboni Missionaries. In fact there is an organic link with Dar Comboni, the centre for Arabic studies in Cairo, run by the Comboni Missionaries, where PISAI students spend their first year. Dialogue in action Formation for dialogue: acquiring knowledge of other religions, developing the attitudes required for a fruitful encoun- The first meetings were attended only by male religious, and 8 were confined also to the Arab world. After Vatican II the field was enlarged to Christian-Muslim relations throughout the world, and the participants included women religious, then Anglicans, Protestants and Orthodox, and finally Muslims invited as speakers; cf. M. BORRMANS, “Les ‘Journées Romaines’ et le dialogue islamo-chrétien,” Islamochristiana 30 (2004) 111-122. I am grateful to John Borelli for supplying the details in this 9 paragraph. He is currently preparing, with Fr Thomas Stransky, a book on the genesis of the Declaration Nostra Aetate.6 Bulletin / Centro Pro UnioneN. 77 / Spring 2010 ter, learning about the pitfalls to be avoided – what is all this for, it may be asked. Interreligious dialogue, as ecumenical dialogue, does not consist simply in meetings of high-level officials to discuss theological issues, though the importance of these should not be overlooked. Dialogue has to be understood in a much broader sense, including cultivating friendly relations at a local level, working together in common projects, exchanging experience in the realm of spirituality. In these areas religious congregations have always been to the fore. In the spirit of Charles de Foucauld, the Little Brothers and Little Sisters of Jesus open a fraternity in a neighbourhood. They live there simply, faithful to prayer, open-hearted in their welcome, unthreatening in their Christian witness. They build up friendly relations with people regardless of their religious affiliation. Other congregations are active in the field of education. In countries where the majority of the population is not Christian it is obvious that the majority of pupils in schools run by Brothers, Sisters or Fathers, will in most cases also not be Christian. The school thus becomes a locus for learning about interfaith relations through experience. Though for religion classes the children may be separated according to their respective religions, there may well be a class of moral education which is attended by all and which allows for the expression of different view- points. There are also extra-curricular activities in which the pupils are involved without regard for their religious affiliation. The school also provides the possibility for relations with families, through parent-teacher associations. The fact that people of other religions continue to send their children to Catholic schools, even when other private schools have been opened with perhaps more modern facilities, is a proof that the ethos of these schools is appreciated. Religious are also engaged in social action. They are active in the medical field through hospitals, dispensaries, work with AIDS victims, and so on. They care for all, regardless of the religion to which they belong. Similarly in the field of develop- ment, in agricultural projects, in adult education or the formation in the skills of different crafts, in centres for mothers and children, in facilitating micro-financing for home initiatives, the religious engaged in these activities are ready not only to help, but also to cooperate with Muslims, or Buddhists or Hindus as the case may be. Such activity cannot last and bear fruit unless a climate of trust has been built up, and for this to happen attention to different religious sensitivities is required. We have here a dialogue in action. With regard to the dialogue of religious experience, where “persons rooted in their own religious traditions can share their experiences of prayer, contemplation, faith, and duty, as well as their expressions and ways of searching for the Absolute,” I10 would like to refer to monastic dialogue. This has developed particularly since the late 1960s, so much so that the Benedictine family, under the Abbot President, has appointed a special secretary for Monastic Interreligious Dialogue to guide and coordinate the activities. These activities include exchanges, where Christian contemplatives spend time in Buddhist monas- teries and Buddhist monks come to experience life in Catholic monasteries or convents. There are also contacts between neighbouring monasteries to exchange on different themes, or to experience the respective forms of worship. On a more formal level, though still with much emphasis on experience, two Buddhist-Catholic Encounters have taken place at Gethsemani Abbey, Kentucky, the monastery of Thomas Merton. Meetings have also been facilitated in the USA for “Nuns in the West,” and “Monks in the West,” where it has been possible to address questions pertaining to living the contemplative life in a secular world. 11 Monastic dialogue has been primarily with Buddhists, since monastic life is an important element in most forms of Bud- dhism, whether Theravada, Mayahana, or Vajrayana (Tibetan) Buddhism. Yet contacts have been made also with Hindu temples and with Hindu sannyasin. Islam traditionally condemns monasticism, yet the dialogue of spiritual experience has been conducted, and is going on, with various sufi groups. Since the assassination of the Trappist monks of Tibherine in Algeria, the contacts between these monks and members of the ‘Alawi Sufi Order in Medea have become better known. Monastic dialogue can play an important role in the develop- ment of theology. As John Borelli writes: “The profound truths of the faith when placed in dialogue in the lives of individuals who take those truths seriously give rise to powerful experiences. This does not take away from erudite interreligious discussion, which is always needed if theology is to escape the shortcomings of isolation; rather, the spiritual dimension seems to enhance theological dialogue, giving an almost tangible feel to the grappling of the mind with the dense truths at the heart of both traditions. Theological reflection is not simply an exercise of the mind, although clarity, logic, accuracy and consistency are important. Theological reflection arises from practice, which is as much a discipline as study.”12 Coordination Where Christians are living in a multi-cultural, multi-religious environment – which is practically everywhere in the world today – encounters with people of other religions occur. Yet it is helpful when there is some sort of coordination. This has been the role of commissions for interreligious dialogue set up by Episcopal conferences, at the national level, or on a regional or even continental basis (vg FABC). Religious congregations have also seen the usefulness of such structures. Reference has been made above to the Secretary for Monastic Interreligious Dia- logue. The Order of Friars Minor has a special commission for DM 35; GIOIA, Interreligious Dialogue n.842. 10 For more details see the chapter by J. Borelli, “Dialogue and 11 Spirituality: The Example of Buddhist-Catholic Dialogue in the USA,” in M.L. FITZGERALD, Interfaith Dialogue, pp. 193-211. M.L. FITZGERALD, Interfaith Dialogue, p.210. 12N. 77 / Spring 2010Bulletin / Centro Pro Unione 7 ecumenical and interreligious dialogue which meets periodically to reflect on experience and provide orientations. The Society of Jesus, at its General Congregation of 1995, set up a special office for interreligious dialogue as part of the General Curia. Fr Thomas Michel, who was the first person to run this office, has described how he envisaged his task. He was concerned with formation, at its initial stages, but also ongoing formation, and the formation of formators. There was a need to make provision for a better understanding of different religions, particularly to dispel prejudices. There was a further need for theological reflection, especially in order to see the implications of the practice of dialogue for the theology of religions. Another concern was to allow the spirit of dialogue to permeate all apostolic activities. The second sphere of activity was communi- cation, sharing experiences, both positive and negative, so as to learn from them. As secretary for interreligious dialogue he was also called on to advise superiors on persons who could be called for particular tasks regarding dialogue, and also on specialised studies that should be undertaken. Finally he men- tioned coordination, maintaining contact with charismatic individuals, but also with the ordinary rank and file.13 The aptitude of religious congregations for interreligious dialogue The pioneering work of religious in the field of interreligious relations and their constant engagement in this field lead to a question which is perhaps the real reason for this talk: why is it that religious congregations show themselves to be particularly apt for interreligious relations? I think two series of answers can be given to this question, one practical, the other more theoretical or theological. Practical reasons Whereas diocesan clergy, under the bishop, have to run parishes and staff diocesan structures, religious are in a sense freer to follow their own particular charism. Parishes may be entrusted to them, but they will usually run them in accordance with the spirit of the congregation and with a particular outreach. In other words, we could say that religious are generally con- cerned more with mission than maintenance. This greater freedom applies particularly to missionary congregations whose optic has always been to help to build up the Local Church, handing over the works they have created whenever possible. This means that they can negotiate with the local bishop and offer to start up new initiatives, as in the field of interreligious dialogue, which the Local Church may not be ready to take on.14 A further advantage of religious congregations is that they provide for the continuity of the works they have initiated. This is especially true when care is taken that any initiative is not the private affair of an individual, but is truly adopted by the congre- gation. Another advantage for religious congregations is their experience of community. Sister Christiane Mégarbané, former Superior General of the Franciscan Missionaries of Mary has said: “Dialogue can only be true if it is lived first among our- selves, in community, where one experiences what it means to dialogue, what this supposes as a process of pardon and reconcil- iation, of going beyond and of acceptance of difference and otherness.” The international character of many religious congregations is also a key factor. Formation in international communities implies already a commitment to cultural dialogue, the acquisi- tion of a spirit of openness and mutual acceptance. This becomes a preparation for interreligious dialogue with its demand for relations of respect and esteem and a readiness to collaborate. Theological reasons In November 2003 the Union of Superiors General took as the theme for its general assembly: “Interreligious Dialogue. A Priority Task for Consecrated Life.” One might ask why this should be a priority. The communications to the assembly provide us with some answers. Father Glen Lewandowski, of the Crosier Fathers, proposed that religious life implies an explicit engagement with God and consequently an experiential knowledge of God. This, he felt, provides a good foundation for interreligious dialogue, especially when this is institutionalized (he is obviously thinking of more formal dialogue). Such a dialogue will turn on the experience of God, with a readiness to acknowledge the touches of the divine, leading to feelings of wonder and praise. Such a contemplative mysticism is integral to religious life. Mgr Felix Machado, formerly under-secretary at the Pontifical Council for Interreli- gious Dialogue, now bishop of Vasai in India, made a similar point. Expressing a preference for the term “encounter” over “dialogue,” he saw this encounter as a religious person meeting another religious person with an openness to God and to others. Another element emphasised by speakers was the strong sense of identity which comes from belonging to a religious congregation. The development of a particular spirituality enables the religious to reach out to others without fear. The late Father Chris McVey, OP, quoted his confrere Claude Geffré as saying that Christianity is essentially a religion of otherness, and thus encourages a “being for others.” Fr McVey went on to say: “This ‘being for others’ is what religious are supposed to be good at doing,” and he underlined that these “others” are to be met as they really are, not as they might be imagined, but as people of real flesh and blood. The religious vows are a source of freedom. They allow the religious to be “free to cross bound- aries, free to go beyond our own inherited faith and enter into the mystery that is the very heart of faith.” The religious, as a follower of Jesus, is called to go “outside the camp” (cf. Heb 13:13), to be ready to live, following the expression of the Drawn from his communication to a meeting organised in 13 Rome, in November 2003, by the Union of Superiors General: “Interreligious Dialogue. A Priority Task for Consecrated Life.” From her communication to the meeting referred to in n.12. 148 Bulletin / Centro Pro UnioneN. 77 / Spring 2010 Dominican bishop Pierre Claverie, assassinated in Algeria, on “the fault-lines of society.” The cultivation of the practice of discernment equips religious to engage in interreligious dialogue. It helps them to recognise the work of the Spirit in the person of another religion, but also in that person’s religious tradition. Yet we must remember that the Spirit of Truth is also the one who convicts the world of sin (cf. Jn 16:8). So discernment includes an awareness of evil, the recognition of whatever may be oppressive in another tradition, but also an acknowledgement of personal weakness and of structural sin of which one may be an unwilling part. As stated in the document Dialogue and Proclamation: “Dialogue requires, on the part of Christians as well as of the followers of other traditions, a balanced attitude. They should be neither ingenuous nor overly critical, but open and receptive.”15 As is well known, the discernment of spirits is a characteristic of Ignatian spirituality. In his communication to the USG assembly, Fr Thomas Michel quoted Decree 5 of the General Congregation of 1995: “The Jesuit heritage of creative response to the call of the Spirit in concrete situations of life is an incentive to develop a culture of dialogue in our approach to believers of other religions. This culture of dialogue should become a distinctive characteristic of our Society, sent into the whole world to labour for the greater glory of God and the help of human persons.” Fr Michel comments: “Dialogue and shared life are not so much goals that we want as actions of the Holy Spirit for which we permit ourselves to be used.” Conclusion It is time to conclude this rapid survey of the contribution of religious congregations to interreligious dialogue. Pioneers in this field, contributors both to the fashioning of the teaching of the Church on relations with people of other religions and to the application of this teaching, men and women religious continue to reach out to other believers in a spirit of dialogue. Can any future perspectives be outlined? The recent Special Assembly for Africa of the Synod of Bishops tackled the theme of the Church in Africa in the service of reconciliation, justice and peace. It also examined, naturally, the question of relations with Muslims and, to a lesser degree, with the followers of Traditional Religions and other religions. It could be suggested that these concerns need to be brought together, not only in Africa but everywhere in the world. There is need for reconciliation not only in the Congo, but also in Kosovo, India and Sri Lanka. Justice has to be fought for everywhere, and peace is the aspiration of all peoples. The problems of this world, poverty, disease, financial crises, equitable trade arrangements, climate change, are so great that the cooperation of all is needed in attempting to find solutions. The insights from different religions do not necessarily provide the answers, but they can offer pointers and, importantly, strengthen the resolve to tackle these urgent questions which are, literally, matters of life and death. Religious congregations could be instrumental in reaching out to people of other religions and encouraging cooperation. There may well be opposition to such action, for the forces of secularism are strong. Religious congregations, that have often had the experience of surviving difficulties, and even in some cases suppression, have the strength to make the religious point of view in the public arena. They could find partners from the followers of other religions, for they too are often dismayed by the secular trend of society. What is important here is the defence not of religion as such, but of human dignity. Women religious have a special role to play, as suggested already by the apostolic exhortation Vita Consecrata. “A particular field for successful common action with people of other religious traditions is that of efforts to promote the dignity of women. In view of the equality and authentic complementarity of men and women, a valuable service can be rendered above all by consecrated women” (VC 102 emphasis in the original text). This suggestion, made in 1996, has lost none of its relevance. Finally it may be said that religious congregations that are open and attentive to the Spirit, aware that the Spirit blows wherever it wills (cf. Jn 3:8), will be ready to follow the Spirit’s guidance in new ways. To the contribution of religious congre- gations to interreligious dialogue can be applied the words of John Paul II: “You have not only a glorious history to remember and to recount, but also a great history still to be accomplished! Look to the future, where the Spirit is sending you in order to do even greater things” (VC 110 emphasis in the original text). DP 47; GIOIA, Interreligious Dialogue n. 971. 15N. 77 /Spring 2010Bulletin / Centro Pro Unione 9 A BIBLIOGRAPHY OF INTERCHURCH AND INTERCONFESSIONAL THEOLOGICAL DIALOGUES Twenty-fifth Supplement - 2010 ABBREVIATIONS FOR CONFESSIONAL FAMILIES CHURCHES AND COUNCILS A...............................Anglican AC...............Assyrian Church of the East AIC...............African Instituted Churches B................................Baptist CC.................Chaldean Catholic Church CEC.........Conference of European Churches CCEE.Council of European Episcopal Conferences CP................Constantinople Patriarchate CPCE Community of Protestant Churches in Europe (formerly Leuenberg Church Fellowship) D........................Disciples of Christ DOMBES...............Groupe des Dombes E............................Evangelicals FC..........................Free Churches FO.........................Faith and Order L.....Lutheran (includes German ‘Evangelische’) M.............................Methodist MECC.........Middle East Council of Churches Mn...........................Mennonite Mo............................Moravian O................Eastern Orthodox (Byzantine) OC......Old Catholic (includes Polish National) OO......Oriental Orthodox (Non-Chalcedonian) Pe............................Pentecostal R..............................Reformed RC........................Roman Catholic SA.........................Salvation Army SDA.................Seventh-Day Adventist U.........................United Churches W............................Waldensian WCC..............World Council of Churches LIST OF DIALOGUES A-B: Anglican-Baptist International Forum A-D / aus: Anglican Church of Australia-Churches of Christ Conversations A-L: Anglican-Lutheran International Commission A-L / africa: All Africa Anglican-Lutheran Commission A-L / aus: Anglican-Lutheran Conversations in Australia A-L / can: Canadian Lutheran Anglican Dialogue A-L / eng-g: Representatives of the Evangelical Church in Germany (EKD) and of the Church of England A-L / eng-nordic regions: Representatives of the Nordic countries and of the Church of England A-L / eur: Anglican-Lutheran European Regional Commission A-L / usa: Episcopal-Lutheran Dialogue in the USA A-L-R / eng-f: Official Dialogue between the Church of England and the Lutheran-Reformed Permanent Council in France A-M: Anglican-Methodist International Commission A-M / eng: Anglican-Methodist Conversation in Great Britain A-M / usa: United Methodist-Episcopal Bilateral Dialogue A-Mo: Anglican-Moravian Conversations A-Mo / usa: Moravian-Episcopal Dialogue in the USA A-O: Anglican-Orthodox Joint Doctrinal Commission A-O / usa: Anglican-Orthodox Theological Consultation in the USA A-OC: Anglican-Old Catholic Theological Conversations A-OC / na: Anglican-Old Catholic North American Working Group A-OO: Anglican-Oriental Orthodox Dialogue A-OO / copt: Anglican-Coptic Relations A-R: Anglican-Reformed International Commission A-RC: Anglican-Roman Catholic International Commission (ARCIC) A-RC: International Anglican-Roman Catholic Commission for Unity and Mission (IARCCUM) A-RC / aus: Anglican-Roman Catholic Commission of Australia A-RC / b: Belgian Anglican-Roman Catholic Committee A-RC / br: Brazilian Anglican-Roman Catholic National Commission A-RC / can: Canadian Anglican-Roman Catholic Dialogue Commission A-RC / eng: English Anglican-Roman Catholic Committee A-RC / eur: Anglican-Roman Catholic Working Group in Western Europe A-RC / f: Anglican-Catholic Joint Working Group in France A-RC / usa: Anglican-Roman Catholic Dialogue in the USA A-U / aus: Conversations between the Anglican Church of Australia and the Uniting Church in Australia AC-CC: Joint Commission for Unity between the Assyrian Church of the East and the Chaldean Catholic Church AC-OO / copt: Theological Dialogue between the Assyrian Church of the East and the Coptic Orthodox Church AC-OO / syr: Bilateral Commission between the Assyrian Church of the East and the Syrian Orthodox Church AC-RC: Mixed Committee for Theological Dialogue between the Catholic Church and the Assyrian Church of the East AIC-R: Dialogue between the African Instituted Churches and the WorldNext >