On Inter-Religious Dialogue: II The Catholic Obligation for Inter-Religious Dialogue

Last updated on: June 30, 2007 at 1:07 pm by voxnovablog

On Inter-Religious Dialogue: II The Catholic Obligation for Inter-Religious Dialogue 2007-06-30T13:07:00-05:00 voxnovablog

LOGO Patheos Explore the world's faith through different perspectives on religion and spirituality! Patheos has the views of the prevalent religions and spiritualities of the world.

“The Church, therefore, exhorts her sons, that through dialogue and collaboration with the followers of other religions, carried out with prudence and love and in witness to the Christian faith and life, they recognize, preserve and promote the good things, spiritual and moral, as well as the socio-cultural values found among these men” Nostra Aetate (Vatican: 1965). Inter-religious dialogue is an important part of the Church’s mission. It is not optional; it is obligatory for her existence. Indeed, not only does it support the Church’s mission to proclaim the truth, it has always been a part of how she does so. “Inter-religious dialogue is a part of the Church’s evangelizing mission. Understood as a method and means of mutual knowledge and enrichment, dialogue is not in opposition to the mission ad gentes; indeed, it has special links with that mission and is one of its expressions” John Paul II, Redemptoris Missio (Vatican: 1990), 55.

The Church, the pillar and ground of the truth, is required to proclaim what she knows to others. While she must use words to do so, we must understand what this means; we must not believe that any one statement can declare the fullness the truth. This is simply because the human intellect cannot fully comprehend the truth, and our words can only be, at best, either pointers to the truth or analogous representations of that truth. Thus, we must understand that the formulae she uses to declare the truth can be improved upon. She always states what she believes, but she will say it according to the needs and abilities of the people she encounters as well as according to the abilities of the people who are doing the proclaiming. This means, when there is some improvement of human ability to understand some aspect of truth, or some improvement in the human ability to declare something about the truth (and the two usually go hand in hand), the Church’s formulation about the truth improves in kind. Just looking at early Christological controversies can show how this has played out in history: compare St Cyril of Alexandria’s Christology with the more precise formulation of St Leo the Great; both are valid, both are true, but one is clearly more precise. Moreover, we can see how the Schoolmen’s interest in Aristotle allowed them to have greater precision in theological declarations. This means, of course, that in the development of her proclamation, the Church has had to reflect upon what others outside the confines of the historical Church have said, and she has been enriched by them, learning from them. Thus we can see in her history that she has constantly improved upon the way she declares the truth, without it being any change in what that truth actually is. “For as the centuries succeed one another, the Church constantly moves forward toward the fullness of divine truth until the words of God reach their complete fulfillment in her” Dei Verbum (Vatican: 1965).

The Church certainly is called to send missionaries out into the world to proclaim the truth, but this proclamation requires dialogue; to be effective it can never be a pure monologue. St Paul went to Mars Hill and said that he worshiped the “Unknown God” of the Greeks; he didn’t go to tell the Greeks they were wrong about everything they believed. He set out to understand their beliefs, and said that much of what they believed was good and true. He showed them respect, and that respect has led, as a result, to many great benefits for the Catholic faith. Many great saints were converted by the respect the Church showed to them, and they brought with them their keen insights and abilities. Moreover, missionaries have long found themselves enriched in their faith and understanding by their dialogue with non-Christians. Both sides, the missionaries and their dialogue partners, have always had something to learn from each other. We can see that in the long history of missions that many missionaries have incorporated non-Christian insights into their proclamation, despite the criticisms they faced for doing so. Of course, the way one incorporates non-Christian values and ideas into the Church is difficult and problematic, and can never be done haphazardly. This is a serious issue which many theologians who have done something similar in their theology have had to face. Without any great surprise, we can see that they were criticized for this work, as for example, the criticism St Thomas Aquinas was given by well-meaning people: “Don’t you believe the Catholic Church already has the fullness of truth? What need is there for you to study Aristotle and his Arabic commentators?” Yet, like St Paul, theologians like St Thomas Aquinas and missionaries such as Matteo Ricci understood that truth did not contradict truth, and wherever truth is to be found, it has the Catholic Church as its proper home. They also understood that to proclaim the truth we can’t ignore what others understand, but we must learn from them. This explains why inter-religious dialogue has always been an important, indispensable part of any proper missionary activity, as Pope John Paul II said to the members and staff of the Secretariat for Non-Christians (4-28-1987) “Your assembly must thus reaffirm the commitment of the Catholic Church both to dialogue and to the proclamation of the Gospel. There can be no question of choosing one and ignoring or rejecting the other.”

Yet inter-religious dialogue is not only for missionaries, or ecclesiastical authorities such as the Pope. Time and time again, we find it said that inter-religious dialogue is a duty that everyone has, and, with it, we must understand that in our inter-religious dialogue, we are called to engage others and engender true respect for Christians by non-Christians, while at the same time developing the same respect for them that we want from them. Pope Benedict certainly makes it clear that there is a great need for Christians to engage in dialogue with Muslims. “Interreligious and intercultural dialogue between Christians and Muslims cannot be reduced to an optional extra. It is in fact a vital necessity, on which in large measure our future depends” Pope Benedict XVI, Apostolic Journey to Cologne on the Occasion of the XX World Youth Day: Meeting with Representatives of Some Muslim Communities (Cologne; 8-20-2005). Pope John Paul II, before Benedict, pointed out that this dialogue is necessary because we can use it to overcome the misunderstandings between Muslims and Christians which provoked them to hate each other and act violently towards each other. “It is important that Muslims and Christians continue to explore philosophical and theological questions together, in order to come to a more objective and comprehensive knowledge of each others’ religious beliefs. Better mutual understanding will surely lead, at the practical level, to a new way of presenting our two religions not in opposition, as has happened too often in the past, but in partnership for the good of the human family” John Paul II, Address at Omayyad Mosque of Damascus (Damascus: 5-6-2001).

While current events often highlight the dialogue that Christians need to have with Muslims, our inter-religious dialogue cannot begin and end with Islam. Inter-religious dialogue is to be had with members of all religious traditions. Certainly, we cannot forget the long, often tortured, history Christians have had with the Jews.Because Judaism, Christianity and Islam, the three monotheistic religions, are related to each other in Abraham, it is not surprising that they can have and have had in history fruitful dialogues with one another. But dialogue is being engaged all over the world, and some of the most profound examples of it are not with those who are most similar to us, but those who are quite different from us, such as the Buddhists. This difference should not lead to any less respect for Buddhists or any other religion quite dissimilar to Christianity than to Judaism or Islam. To a delegation of Buddhist monks from Thailand, Pope Paul VI made this clear, “We have a profound regard for the spiritual, moral and socio-cultural treasures that have been bestowed on you through your precious traditions. We recognize the values of which you are the custodians, and we share the desire that they should be preserved and fostered. We hope that there will be increasingly friendly dialogue and close collaboration between the traditions that you represent and the Catholic Church” Pope Paul VI, Address to a Group of Buddhist Leaders from Thailand (Vatican, 6-5-1972). Pope John Paul II saw that, “Contact with the religions of Asia, especially Hinduism and Buddhism, which are noted for their contemplative spirit, their methods of meditation and asceticism, can contribute greatly to the inculturation of the Gospel on that continent. A wise exchange between Catholics and the followers of other traditions can help in discerning points of contact in the spiritual life and in the expression of religious beliefs, without ignoring the differences. Such a discernment is all the more urgent where people have lost their roots in their own tradition and are looking to other sources for spiritual support and enrichment” John Paul II, Address to the Participants of the Plenary Assembly of the Pontifical Council For Interreligious Dialogue (Vatican: 11-13-1992).

There are two major concerns that Christians and non-Christians have about inter-religious dialogue. The first goes along with the fact that missionary activity contains inter-religious dialogue. If this is the case, then how can it foster mutual respect? Should it not be seen as another form of erroneous proselytism? While all missionary activity engages inter-faith dialogue, not all inter-faith dialogue is for the sake of missionary activity. As Popes Paul VI, John Paul II, and Benedict XVI have noted, there is a need for inter-religious dialogue because it helps overcome imbalanced, biased, and erroneous assumptions about the beliefs of others. Base proselytism cannot last in such an environment. At its root, it relies upon false presentations of other faiths. Thus, the Catholic Church recognizes that, “Manipulation or base proselytism, at times practiced in the media, is incompatible with the ecumenical task and with the spirit of inter-religious cooperation, as the Word of God indicates and as the decisions of ecclesiastical authorities affirm” The Pontifical Council for Social Communications, Criteria for Ecumenical and Inter-Religious Cooperation in Communications (Vatican: 8-4-1989). Interfaith dialogue is in part aimed at overcoming the errors associated with proselytism, not because it does not think there is no reason for people to convert, but because of the way proselytism engages others. Proselytism degrades the faith and dignity of others. Thus, interfaith dialogue suggests that those involved in the dialogue should be open to what others have to say, and not go in with any predetermined ideas as to what others believe. Moreover, it believes that both sides should be free to proclaim their faith and the reasons why they believe it to be the truth (if this is not allowed in the dialogue, then the dialogue will be incomplete). It is a part of the religious faith to hold itself to be true, and to offer reasons to justify this claim. If in a dialogue this does not happen, is dialogue really happening? As Raimon Panikkar puts it, “To exclude my religious convictions from religious dialogue is like the renouncing the use of reason in order to enter a reasonable encounter” Raimon Panikkar, The Intra-Religious Dialogue (New York: Paulist Press, 1999; revised edition), 81.

The second concern lies in the problems of syncretism. Many people think that the goal of inter-faith dialogue is to create a syncretistic merging of world religions into one super-faith which rejects all the beliefs which they do not hold in common. This of course is non-sense; trying to engage and get to know someone else does not mean you want to merge with them and become someone you are not. Pope Paul VI clearly understood that any Christian attempting to do this would demonstrate their lack of true Christian faith. “An immoderate desire to make peace and sink differences at all costs (irenism and syncretism) is ultimately nothing more than skepticism about the power and content of the Word of God which we desire to preach” Pope Paul VI, Ecclesiam Suam (Vatican: 1964). The same, of course, would be true for people of other faiths.

However, there is another problem with syncretism which is important and cannot be easily dismissed. That is the concern that people involved in inter-faith dialogues will seek to adapt what they find in other faiths into their own, even if what the find is incompatible with their own faith. While the concern is there, one of the major problems with syncretism is how it operates: it is very simplistic in its understandings of religious beliefs. This, of course, is incompatible with interfaith dialogue. Such dialogue requires one to appreciate religious beliefs within their proper context, to know where it comes from, how it works within the whole of a religious tradition, and why those beliefs which might at first seem to be the same in different faiths end up being completely different because of the context those beliefs are found in. Interfaith dialogue works to prevent the kinds of equivocations which are needed to give syncretism any sense of validity. This does not mean that there can be no adaptation possible as a result of such interfaith encounters. Fear of syncretism should not cause one to ignore truth when one finds it. However, it means there will be a lot of serious work needed to make this adaptation viable. St Thomas Aquinas’s adaptation of Aristotle included a purifying of Aristotle’s thoughts, correcting it when it contradicted the Christian faith. The same must be true in any interfaith encounter we have. We must understand the other faith in its own context, make sure we are not misunderstanding what they are saying, adapt it with a clear identification of how we are adapting it and what, if anything, we are changing or modifying both in the original source but also in our own thinking because of it. Then we must examine the result of the process: does it still hold in unity with the rest of our faith? We might not be, and probably should not be, the one to answer this last question. We should submit our ideas or suggestions to someone else in authority who then can come back to us with their own response to what we have proposed. They would work to make sure that our presentation is true to our faith without any injustice being done to the idea we are trying to adapt. If we are honest about how human understanding has progressed through the centuries, we can see this process has been done since the very beginning of the Christian faith, and not only in inter-religious dialogue, but also when Christians have encountered other areas of human understanding such as the sciences.

Dialogue

Henry Karlson

Previous Post

June 30, 2007

Warts and Carbuncles

Next Post

June 30, 2007 A Little Bit of Humor

Browse Our Archives

Select a Category 2019 A Consistent Ethic of Life Aaron Weldon Abortion absurdity Abuse Scandal Academics Adoption Advent Africa agreement/disagreement with Church teaching Alexander Schmemann Alexham Alterity America Amnesty International Anarchism angels Anglicanism Animals Annual Statistics Anthony Anxietas Apocalyptic Apophatic Appalachia Aquinas Art Atheism Atonement Augustine Authority Baptism Beauty Bible biblical criticism biblical scholarship Bioethics Bishops Black Catholics Black Theology Blackadder Blogs Books Breastfeeding Brett Salkeld Buddhism Bush administration Byzantine Catholic Calvinism Canada Canon Law Capital Punishment Capitalism Caryll Houselander Catholic Blog Awards Catholic Blogging Catholic League Catholic Social Teaching Catholic Worker Movement Catholicity CFL Charity Children Chris West Christ and Culture Christian Democracy Christian Unity Christmas Christology Church Church Doctrine Church History Climate Change Cohabitation Colbert Collegiality Communion Communism Comparative Theology Competition Conferences conscience conscience rights Consequentialism Consistent Life Ethics Consumerism Contraception Contrition Conversion Converts Coptic COVID-19 Creation Critical Thinking Cross Cuba Culture Culture of Death Culture of Life Darfur David Cruz-Uribe David Wheeler-Reed Death Death Penalty Democracy Demons Desert Fathers Devil Dialogue dignity Disability Disarmament discernment Discipleship discrimination Dissent Distributism Division Doctrine Domestic Church Dorothy Day Double Effect Doubt Down syndrome Driving Early Church Easter Eastern Churches Ecclesiology Economics Economy Ecumenism Education El Salvador Election Election 2020 Ellul Embryonic Stem Cell Research Empire Energy Enlighenment Environmentalism Ephraim Radner Episcopal Church epistemology Equality Eschatology Ethics Eucharist Europe Euthanasia Evangelization Evil Evolution Excommunication F.X. Durrwell Facism Facts Fair Trade Faith Family Fashion Feddie Feminism Feminist theology Fertility Fetal Rights Fiction Film Finances First Things flags Folk Religion Food Foreign Affairs Forgiveness Frank Sheed Free Speech Freedom gay & lesbian persons Genocide George W. Bush George Weigel Gerald L. Campbell Girard/Mimetic Theory Global Warming Globalization Gnosticism Good Friday Grace Gratitude Greed Grey Cup 2009 Guadalupe Guest Post Guest Posts Gun Control Gustave Martelet Habitat for Humanity Hans Urs von Balthasar Harry Potter Hate Speech Health Health Care Healthcare Heather King Hebrew Bible Henri de Lubac Henry Karlson Herbert McCabe Heresy HHS Mandate Controversy History Holidays Holiness Holy Spirit Homiletics Homily Homosexuality Hope Hospitality How Far Can We Go? How Far Can We Go? Human Person Human Rights Humanae Vitae Humility Humor Hunger Hunting Identity Idolatry Ignacio Ellacuría Imagination Immigration In Memoriam Income Inequality Inculturation Indigenous People Individualism Inklings Intellect Interdependence Internet Interpretation Interviews Introduction Iraq War Islam Israel Jain James Alison James Martin Jazz Jesus Christ Jews Joe Biden Joe Hargrave Johann Baptist Metz John Allen John Henry Newman John Paul II John the Baptist John XXIII Jonathan Josef Pieper Joseph (the husband of Mary) Joseph Bernardin Joseph Ratzinger Josh Brumfield Journals Joy Judgment Just War Justice Kari Lundgren Karl Rahner Katerina Ivanovna Kenya Keynes Kingdom of God Kyle R. Cupp Labor Language Latin America Law Leanne Ogasawara Legion of Christ Leisure Lent Liberalism Liberation Theology Libertarianism Libya Lies Life life & dignity & responsibility of the human person Literature Little Way Liturgical music Liturgical Year Liturgy Living Simply Living Wage Local Church Lombard Lord of the Rings Louis Dupre Love M.Z. Magic Magisterium Mark DeFrancisis Mark Gordon Marriage Martin Luther Martin Luther King Jr. Martyrdom Marxism Mary Masculinity Matt Talbot Matthew Fish Matthew Levering McCain Media Memorial Day Mennonites Mental Illness mercy Michael Iafrate Middle East militarism Miroslav Volf Mitt Romney Modesty Moral Theology Morality Mormonism Morning's Minion Mother Teresa Music Muslims Natalie Nate Wildermuth Nationalism Native Americans Nature Nazis Neuhaus New Evangelization New York City News NFP nihilism Nonviolence Not Abortion Nova's Ordo Nuclear weapons Nuns Obama Occult Old Age Opus Dei Ordination ordination of women original sin Orthodoxy Oscar Romero Other Voices Pacifism Palestine Palin Papacy Papal Peace Messages Papal Social Encyclicals Particular Affections Partisanship Patriotism Paul Paul Ryan Paul VI Peace Pentimento persecution Personalism Phantastes Philosophy PKD Planned Parenthood Pluralism Poetry Policraticus Politcal Apathy Politics Poll Pope Benedict XVI Pope Francis Pope John Paul II Pope Leo XIV Population Postcolonialsim Poverty Power Prayer Preaching Predictions Predictions for 2012 President Barack Obama priestly formation & discernment Pro-Life Progress Prophetic Witness Proportionalism Public Diplomacy Public Policy Question Quotes Rachel Maddow Racism Radical Catholic Mom Radical Catholicism Raymund Schwager Real Catholic TV Real Presence Reconciliation Reginald Garrigou-Lagrange Religion religious freedom Responsibility Ressourcement Resurrection Rick Garnett Ridiculous Crap You Never Thought You'd See Robert Barron Roe v. Wade Roman Curia Rome Russia Sacraments Saints Salvation History Sam Harris Sam Rocha Same-sex Marriage Saskatchewan Roughriders Satire School of the Americas Science Scripture Seamless Garment Second Vatican Council Seeing Sex sexual violence Sexuality Sia Sin social justice Social Security Socialism Society of Jesus Sofia Loves Wisdom Solidarity Sophia soteriology Soutenus Spirituality Sports St. Dismas St. Joseph Stanley Hauerwas Statistics Stimulus Suffering Sunday Reflections Supernatural Supreme Court Symbolism Syria Taxing Technology Terrorism The State The Tea Party The Trump Administration Theological Anthropology Theology Theotokos Thomas Merton Throwaway Culture Tim Muldoon Tim Riley Tim Tebow Time Titian Tolkien Torture Toys Trade Traditionalism Transgender Transportation Transubstantiation Trinity Truth TV U.S. Affairs Uncategorized Unions unity among people who disagree US Catholicism USCCB Usury Utilitarianism Utopia Valentine's Day Vatican Vatican II Veterans Vicarious Suffering Video Violence Virgin Mary Vocations Voluntary Associations Voluntary Poverty Voting Vox Nova vox nova blog war War and Peace War Strategy Wealth Weirdness Welfare state Women Women Priests Work Woundedness Youth

Select a Month June 2026 May 2025 February 2025 January 2025 July 2024 May 2024 April 2024 March 2024 February 2024 January 2024 December 2023 July 2023 March 2023 January 2023 December 2022 November 2022 October 2022 September 2022 August 2022 July 2022 June 2022 November 2021 September 2021 July 2021 June 2021 May 2021 April 2021 February 2021 January 2021 December 2020 November 2020 October 2020 September 2020 August 2020 July 2020 June 2020 May 2020 April 2020 March 2020 February 2020 January 2020 December 2019 November 2019 September 2019 August 2019 July 2019 June 2019 April 2019 March 2019 February 2019 January 2019 December 2018 November 2018 October 2018 September 2018 August 2018 July 2018 June 2018 May 2018 April 2018 March 2018 February 2018 January 2018 December 2017 November 2017 October 2017 September 2017 August 2017 July 2017 June 2017 May 2017 April 2017 March 2017 February 2017 January 2017 December 2016 November 2016 October 2016 September 2016 August 2016 July 2016 June 2016 May 2016 April 2016 March 2016 February 2016 January 2016 December 2015 November 2015 October 2015 September 2015 August 2015 July 2015 June 2015 May 2015 April 2015 March 2015 February 2015 January 2015 December 2014 November 2014 October 2014 September 2014 August 2014 July 2014 June 2014 May 2014 April 2014 March 2014 February 2014 January 2014 December 2013 November 2013 October 2013 September 2013 August 2013 July 2013 June 2013 May 2013 April 2013 March 2013 February 2013 January 2013 December 2012 November 2012 October 2012 September 2012 August 2012 July 2012 June 2012 May 2012 April 2012 March 2012 February 2012 January 2012 December 2011 November 2011 October 2011 September 2011 August 2011 July 2011 June 2011 May 2011 April 2011 March 2011 February 2011 January 2011 December 2010 November 2010 October 2010 September 2010 August 2010 July 2010 June 2010 May 2010 April 2010 March 2010 February 2010 January 2010 December 2009 November 2009 October 2009 September 2009 August 2009 July 2009 June 2009 May 2009 April 2009 March 2009 February 2009 January 2009 December 2008 November 2008 October 2008 September 2008 August 2008 July 2008 June 2008 May 2008 April 2008 March 2008 February 2008 January 2008 December 2007 November 2007 October 2007 September 2007 August 2007 July 2007 June 2007 May 2007

TAKE THE

Religious Wisdom Quiz

I am a coat of many colors that sparked jealousy among brothers. What am I?

Select your answer to see how you score.

Joseph's coat Jacob's robe The priests robe A royal garment