INTERFAITH DIALOGUE
Reflection by John Lee
WHAT IS AT STAKE?
The development of interfaith dialogue
began from the thirties by beginning of the missionary enterprise in the
western world with the theme of Christianity and non-Christian religions and
further developed into the theme of “the Word of God and the living faith” from
the seventies onwards. This has been a concern in the ecumenical movement and
led the church into dialogue. Numerous questions arise with the subject of
dialogue: the question of church’s identity and relevance to the perplexed
contemporary global village. What is the theological basis and purpose of
dialogue? Does it blunt the cutting edge of mission and substitute for
Christian proclamation? How does the
Christian community within the human community become one of service and
witness without compromising commitment to the triune God? Does dialogue lead to syncretism? What is the
relation between dialogue, witness and mission?
NECESSITY OF DIALOGUE IN THE GLOBAL CONTEXT
In this global context, since we live with
neighbours of different faiths and non-faith, we cannot ignore the political
implications of dialogue. Furthermore, we have a common goal through the
intensity and the acceleration of speed in the struggle for a just,
participatory and sustainable society. As a result the emergence of world
inter-religious organizations seeking peace and justice in our world community
has implications with the churches. On the other hand, development of science
and technology brings us new ways of understanding the relation between nature,
humanity and God and new forms of community life to sustain personal values on
the other.
Hence the search for new forms of
spirituality to sustain personal and community life is crucial.
Christians need to be aware of their human
solidarity with all their neighbours, no matter what their colour, culture,
faith or unbelief. There is an essential identity of the human species to which
full significance should be accorded, God having ‘made of every nation of
humankind’. All humankind is furthermore being caught up into one universal
history, and made increasingly aware of common tasks and common hopes. This
provides a basis for dialogue which all can share. For Christians, a deep sense
of community is given by their belief that all human beings are created in
the image of God, by their realization that Christ died for every
humankind, and by the expectation of Jesus coming kingdom. Here is the foundation
of Christians’ approach to any human beings. Since they must take seriously the personality of their
neighbours, they must of course respect their particular religious faith as an
integral aspect of their culture and humanity.
Mission denotes the self-giving service
which God sends his people into the world to render, and includes both evangelism
and socio-political action. Evangelism means announcing or proclaiming the good
news of Jesus. Is there any room for “dialogue” in the proclamation of good
news? Evangelical Christians have always emphasized the indispensable necessity
of preaching the gospel, for God has appointed his church to be the herald of
the good news. Preaching is primary task of the church. The gospel is
non-negotiable revelation from God. What is the definition of dialogue?
Dialogue is a conversation in which each
party is serious in his approach both to the subject and to the other person,
and desires to listen and learn as well as to speak and instruct. The living
God of the biblical revelation himself
enters into a dialogue with man.
Dialogue is the means of living out our
faith in Christ in service of community with our neighbours. This indicates the
distinctiveness of the Christian community in the world. Dialogue and witness
is not contradictory. Christian experiences the richness of the Gospel in
different cultural settings through respecting the different faith in their
culture. There is a perceptible change in the framework in which theological
questions are formulated and the mood in which Christians approach people of
other faiths and ideologies.
NATURE OF DIALOGUE
As our dialogue with peoples of other
faiths develops, we may gain light regarding the place held by other religious
traditions in God’s purposes for them and for us; this is a question which cannot
be answered a priori or
academically, but must continue to engage our earnest study and reflection.
What is the biblical basis for true dialogue as well as the historical
background for the conservative Christian’s argument against dialogue which
considers it as bordering on treason against Jesus Christ. True dialogue is a
mark of Christian authenticity, humility, integrity, and sensitivity. But there
is need also for encounter, even confrontation. The nature of dialogue is based
on the Christian assumption that love always seeks to communicate.
Our experience of God’s communion with us
constrains us to communion with peoples of other beliefs. Only so can
Christians live the “with-ness” which was shown them in the Incarnation.
Jesus’ intercourse takes the form of dialogue, since he respects the
differences between him and others, and because he wishes to hear as well as to
speak. The fundamental nature of dialogue is the genuine readiness to listen to
the man with whom we desire to communicate with mutual respect. Our concern
should not be to win arguments. Good dialogue develops when one partner speaks
in such a way that the other feels drawn to listen, and likewise when one
listens so that the other is drawn to speak. The outcome of the dialogue is the
work of the Spirit. True dialogue is a progressive and cumulative process,
which takes place no only through verbal communication, but through the dynamic
contact of live with life. Christians today meet people of other faiths
anywhere in the world. Nothing less than living in dialogue is the
responsibility and privilege to which we are called.
DIALOGUE AND WITNESS
We affirm
that evangel is God’s good news in Jesus Christ. It is good news of a new
creation of a new humanity and a new birth through him by his life-giving
Spirit. Salvation is by God’s grace on
the sole ground of Christ’s death and resurrection and is received by obedient faith.
Evangelization must centre in Jesus Christ who sends his community into the
world, as the Father sent him. Those who proclaim the Cross must be continually
“marked by the cross”. Therefore the good new is God’s “will” in the “form” of Jesus Christ.
Dialogue is
“a fundamental part of Christian service within community”, and “a way
of building up human community”. It is within this service that Christians are
called upon to give loving witness to their faith. For this reason we do not
see dialogue and giving of witness as standing in any contradiction to each
other. Indeed, as Christians enter into dialogue with their commitment to Jesus
Christ, time and again the relationship of dialogue gives opportunity for
authentic witness. Dialogue should not “compromise the authenticity of
Christian faith and life”, nor interpret a living faith except in its own
terms. We need to strive for the “venture of exploratory faith” in various
contexts and cultures, seeing dialogue both as an encouragement and a challenge
to clarify issues and to deepen one’s faith.
PROCLAMATION, WITNESS VURSUS DIALOGUE
A question arises in the missionary
enterprise what the relationship between dialogue and proclamation of the
Gospel is. Dialogue and proclamation are not identical but related. At any time
or within the course of our living in dialogue, moments for proclamation of the
Gospel may be given. For Christians proclamation is the sharing of the Good
News about God’s action in history through Jesus Christ. Proclamation is made
in other ways besides dialogue, but should always be made in the spirit of
dialogue. On the other hand, dialogue may include proclamation, since it must
always be undertaken in the spirit of those who have good news to share.
The meeting with people of other faiths or
of no faith must lead to dialogue. A Christian’s dialogue with another implies
neither a denial of the uniqueness of Christ, nor any loss of his own
commitment to Christ, but rather that a genuinely Christian approach to other
must be human, personal, relevant and humble. In dialogue we share our common
humanity, its dignity and fallenness, and express our common concern for that
humanity. It opens the possibilities of sharing in new forms of community and
common services. Each meets and challenges the other; witnessing from the
depths of his existence to the ultimate concerns that come to expression in
word and action. As Christians we believe that Christ speaks in this dialogue,
revealing himself to those who do not know him and connecting the limited and
distorted knowledge of those who do not know him and connecting the limited and
distorted knowledge of those who know. Dialogue and proclamation are not the
same. The one complements the other in a total witness. But sometimes
Christians are not able to engage either in open dialogue or proclamation.
Witness is then a silent one of living the Christian life and suffering for
Christ.
READINESS TO DIALOGUE
In our contemporary global context,
inter-religious dialogue of human beings and their temporal and ultimate
destiny in the context of the struggle for world community and increasing
inter-religious contacts are phenomena of the society that has diversity in
culture and religion. The Christian community within this human community has a
common heritage and a distinctive message to share; it needs therefore to
reflect on the nature of the community that we as Christians seek and on the
relation of dialogue to the life of the churches, as they ask themselves how
they can be communities of service and witness without diluting their faith or
compromising their commitment to Christ. Such an inquiry needs to be informed
both by a knowledge of different religions and societies and by insights gained
through actual dialogues with neighbours.
How then can we enter into dialogue with
people of living faith and ideologies?
We need to have a “willingness to maintain an open dialogue with those
who see Christ and the Christian faith through the eyes of a different faith
commitment, ideology or scientific conviction”.
How can we understand Christian confession, “Jesus is the way”? This
statement is based on the confession of
Jesus Christ as saviour; the emphasis on scriptures; the common calling of the
churches; the glory of the Trinity. As we learn from the meaning of
incarnation, the fundamental Christian communication is based on the receiver
of the Gospel, not the giver of it. This changes the whole concept of dialogue
as well as missionary enterprise. We must think what is the understanding of
the receiver of the good news, “Jesus is the way.”
To enter into dialogue, first of all, requires an opening of the mind and heart to
others. It is an undertaking which requires risk as well as a deep sense of
vocation. It is impossible without sensitivity to the richly varied life of
humankind. This opening, this risk, this vocation, this sensitivity are at the
heart of the ecumenical movement and in the deepest currents of the life of the
churches. Christians are invited to see “community” as a fundamental reference
point for the vocation and activity of “dialogue”; they should “feel themselves
called to share with others in the community of humankind in the search for new
experiences in the evolution of communities, where people may affirm their
interdependence as much as respect for their distinctive identities”. Such a vision of a “community of communities”
is seen as a way of viewing the kingly rule of God over all human communities.
It is not one of homogenous unity or totalitarian uniformity, nor does it
envisage self-contained communities, simply co-existing. Rather it emphasizes
the positive part which existing communities may play in developing the
community of humankind.
QUESTIONS:
What
does it mean to say “opening of hearts” in dialogues with different faiths?
- the spirit of incarnation.
- mutual respect.
- "Come, follow Jesus" means
"Come, believe in the
Gospel" or "Come, join in my church."
What
is the positive and negative aspects of syncretic development in dialogue?
|