Christian – Zen Dialogue

Sacred Stories as a Starting Point for Interfaith Dialogue

Jijimon Alakkalam Joseph

• Publisher: Fortress Press
• Year: 2021
• Print ISBN: 9781506470771
• eBook ISBN: 9781506470788
• Topic: Theology & Religion
• Subtopic: Buddhism

This book is an attempt to contribute to interfaith-dialogue initiatives spearheaded by the Catholic Church with Zen, one of the major and fast-growing spiritual traditions in East Asia. In recent years, the Catholic Church has emphasized the importance of interfaith dialogue in its missionary activities and has encouraged all to take part actively. The number of conferences organized, discussions held, and articles written on interfaith dialogue has escalated. However, interfaith dialogue remains mostly in the realm of specialists. The majority of ordinary believers/laity have not yet become part of interfaith-dialogue activities. Many are unaware of such activities because often they don't take place where ordinary people spend their daily lives. Others shy away because interfaith-dialogue activities are too specialized. But Joseph's experience growing up in a multireligious context in India taught him that the participation of ordinary believers is necessary if interfaith dialogue is to achieve its intended results.

Christian - Zen Dialogue focuses on narratives of faith in Christianity and Zen. Can these sacred stories--gospel stories of Jesus and Chan/Zen stories (K?ans)--be a starting point for dialogue between the two faiths? The book focuses on two aspects: First, what model of interfaith dialogue can help Catholics and Zen followers of all walks of life engage in faith dialogue while remaining in their own life situations? Second, how can they make use of the common elements found in their narratives of faith as the most appropriate starting point for dialogue between them? To achieve the intended results, Joseph applies the hermeneutic phenomenological approach of Paul Ricoeur.

Part One

1

Interfaith Dialogue

Focus on an Experience-Based Starting Point

Nothing ever becomes real till it is experienced.

—John Keats

The practice of dialogue is as old as humanity itself. However, using dialogue systematically as a tool to draw out wisdom from and to share insights with the other has its beginning in ancient Greece. Today the practice of dialogue influences almost all areas of human life. We hear about dialogue as a literary technique, science in dialogue with religion, dialogue in business communication, dialogue of cultures, dialogue of and among civilizations, and so on. In recent years, interfaith dialogue has made its entry into the scene. Today, more than ever, humanity needs interfaith dialogue.

The Urgency of Interfaith Dialogue

For millennia, spiritual traditions have influenced almost every aspect of human life and the world, both positively and negatively, constructively and destructively. However, in recent times, spiritual traditions—which supposedly espouse peace in the world and love among humans—are so commonly connected with intolerance and violence, either falling victim to or sanctioning it (Muggah and Velshi 2019). Amid this growing religious intolerance and violence, interfaith dialogue has become not only an indispensable agent for world peace, unity, and justice but also critical to the survival of humanity. The Swiss theologian Hans Küng summarizes the crucial role interfaith dialogue plays in the emergence of the new world order as follows: “No peace among the nations without peace among the religions. No peace among the religions without dialogue between the religions. No dialogue between the religions without investigation of the foundations of the religions” (2007, xxiii).

In a fast-changing, globalized world, the adherents of various spiritual traditions (are forced to) search for new ways to understand, accept, and collaborate. Contemporary times have witnessed many attempts—academic and nonacademic—to bring spiritual traditions together to work for the well-being of humanity. One such initiative has been to focus on religious narratives of faith / sacred stories and how they interact with and contribute to a shared peaceful future.

Globalization has turned our world into a “global village,” and interdependency has become the way of existence. The pros and cons of globalization are much-debated topics (Osland 2003). Along with its positive contributions, globalization has made the small, weak, and vulnerable feel insecure. Consequently, everyone is becoming very conscious of their identity, and they vehemently protect and promote it both individually and collectively. We are also aware that our world is fast becoming pluralistic (multi-) in all its aspects. In such a situation, people tend to focus more on what differentiates and to overlook what unites them.

As recent history shows, more often than not, we tend to identify and categorize people based on their religious affiliations. In a world where people are becoming increasingly intersubjective and interdependent, spiritual traditions cannot fail to be sensitive to the religious diversity that exists both within and around: “We cannot live in a world in which our economics and markets are global, our political awareness is global, our business relationships take us to every continent, and the internet connects us with colleagues half a world away and yet live on Friday, Saturday or Sunday with ideas of God that are essentially provincial, imagining that somehow the one we call God has been primarily concerned with us and our tribe” (Eck 2001, 24).

The biblical data on interfaith dialogue are complex and ambivalent. In the Old Testament (hereafter OT), the relationship of Israel with surrounding faiths is one of self-assertion and aggression on the one hand and the Suffering Servant proclaimed as “a light to the nations,” on the other (Isa 42:6). In the New Testament (hereafter NT), people belonging to other faiths are derided as hypocrites, pagans, heathens, gentiles (Matt 5:47; 6:5, 7, 32; 18:17), and dogs (Matt 15:26) on the one hand and are praised as the Good Samaritan (Luke 10:25–37), the centurion whose faith made Jesus marvel (Matt 8:5–13), and the Canaanite woman of great faith (Matt 15:21–28) on the other.

Until the Ecumenical Council Vatican II (1962–65), mission and dialogue were seen as being in opposition. The constant and unanimous teaching of the Christian tradition for nearly two thousand years was that outside the Catholic Church, there is no salvation.1 Vatican II heralded a new era in the Catholic Church’s relationship with other spiritual traditions. The council encouraged dialogue and collaboration. Lumen Gentium (Vatican II 1964, hereafter LG), Ad Gentes (1965a, hereafter AG), Dignitatis Humanae (Vatican II 1965b, hereafter DH), Gaudium et Spes (Vatican II 1965c, hereafter GS), and Nostra Aetate (Vatican II 1965d, hereafter NA) contain the Catholic Church’s renewed and open attitude toward other spiritual traditions. The Catholic Church began to recognize and accept that other spiritual traditions contain “elements which are true and good,” “precious things both religious and human,” “elements of truth and grace,” “seeds of the Word,” and “rays of that truth which illumine all humankind.”2

The Catholic Church, particularly after Vatican II, saw the need for interfaith dialogue and incorporated it in its evangelizing mission. Pope John Paul II (1978–2005) believed that interfaith dialogue could promote respect and unity among religions and thus repair and transform our broken world. He expressed this belief very often in his teachings. In Redemptor Hominis (John Paul II 1979, hereafter RH), after stressing the importance of ecumenism, John Paul II invites Christians to come closer to adherents of the non-Christian religions through dialogue, contact, prayer in common, and investigation of the treasures of human spirituality (§6) because self-awareness of the Catholic Church after Vatican II is formed in dialogue (§11). The clear statement that “inter-religious dialogue is a part of the Church’s evangelizing mission” in John Paul II’s encyclical letter Redemptoris Missio (John Paul II 1990, hereafter RM, §55) recognizes the importance of interfaith dialogue in the life of the Catholic Church. In his apostolic letter Novo Millennio Ineunte (John Paul II 2001, hereafter NMI), Pope John Paul II speaks of the great challenge of interfaith dialogue in the context of increased cultural and religious pluralism that are the marks of the new millennium (§55). The postsynodal apostolic exhortation Ecclesia in Asia (1999) of Pope John Paul II is another document that devotes an entire section (chapter V) to dialogue.

The document Dialogue and Proclamation (Pontifical Council for Interreligious Dialogue 1991, hereafter DP) of the Pontifical Council for Interreligious Dialogue and the Congregation for the Evangelization of Peoples speaks of the Catholic Church’s understanding of interfaith dialogue as follows:

Dialogue can be understood in different ways. Firstly, at the purely human level, it means reciprocal communication, leading to a common goal or, at a deeper level, to interpersonal communion. Secondly, dialogue can be taken as an attitude of respect and friendship, which permeates or should permeate all those activities constituting the evangelizing mission of the Church. This can appropriately be called “the spirit of dialogue.” Thirdly, in the context of religious plurality, dialogue means “all positive and constructive interreligious relations with individuals and communities of other faiths which are directed at mutual understanding and enrichment,” in obedience to truth and respect for freedom. It includes both witness and the exploration of respective religious convictions. It is in this third sense that the present document uses the term dialogue for one of the integral elements of the Church’s evangelizing mission. (§9; emphasis mine)

After Vatican II, the Catholic Church emphasizes that mission and dialogue are complementary. Proclaiming Christ and engaging in interfaith dialogue are not in conflict. But “these two elements must maintain both their intimate connection and their distinctiveness; therefore, they should not be confused, manipulated or regarded as identical, as though they were interchangeable” (RM §55). Many theological conferences, events, and initiatives, both institutional and personal, have fostered and enhanced the relationship between Christianity and other spiritual traditions.

The fifteenth and sixteenth General Chapters of the Society of the Divine Word (SVD), the missionary religious congregation I belong to, also stress the need for “prophetic dialogue.” The fifteenth SVD General Chapter reminds its members of their primary missionary commitments: namely, the fourfold prophetic dialogue with people who have no faith community and with faith seekers, people who are poor and marginalized, people of different cultures, and people of different religious traditions and secular ideologies (SVD 2000, §52–71). The sixteenth SVD General Chapter reaffirms the same, but with more clarity (SVD 2006, §7–8).

Forms/Models of Interfaith Dialogue

Inspired by the spirit of Vatican II, scholars have suggested and discussed different approaches, stages, and ideologies that the Catholic Church has or needs to have toward other spiritual traditions. Scholars have discussed different models and paradigms3 of interfaith dialogue.

Generally speaking, the occidental approach to interfaith dialogue is characterized as either-or (conceptual and abstract, contradiction and confrontation) and the oriental as both-and (experiential and symbolic, harmony and convergence).4 The former speaks of religions as systems or as ways to salvation. Thus we have a threefold typology that describes interfaith approaches: (1) ecclesiocentrism/exclusivism that stresses the normative, constitutive, exclusive, and indispensable role of Jesus Christ and the church in the economy of salvation; (2) Christocentrism/inclusivism that stresses the role of Jesus Christ in attaining salvation but in which the role of the church fades to the background; and (3) theocentrism/pluralism, where Jesus Christ becomes one of the mediators of salvation and Christianity becomes one among many ways to God (D’Costa 1986; Pilario 2011). Paul F. Knitter (1984) speaks of five stages in the evolution of the Catholic theology of religions: exclusive ecclesiocentrism, inclusive ecclesiocentrism, constitutive Christocentrism, normative Christocentrism, and dialogical theocentrism. David Lochhead (1988) speaks of four ideologies that have underlined the history of Christian interfaith relations: the ideologies of isolation, hostility, competition, and partnership.

But the catholic theologians in the East emphasize experience and unity rather than doctrines and confrontation in their approach to other spiritual traditions: “We [Asians] speak of people and of God reaching out to them. Religions do not save; God does. Religions are only expressive mediations of divine-human encounter” (Amaladoss 1995, 2). The oriental logic of both-and has no problem in accepting differences, reconciling opposites, and harmonizing contradictions.5 This Asian worldview has its effects on interfaith dialogue as well. Thus we have the “inclusive pluralism” of Jacques Dupuis (1997; 2003), a Jesuit who spent long years in India as a missionary, and the “religious cosmopolitanism”6 of Felix Wilfred (2007), emeritus professor of the State University of Madras, India. Some theologians propose that interfaith dialogue should happen at a grassroots level, where the local community and personal experiences of people become the primary agents of interfaith dialogue, not doctrines and concepts. Aloysius Pieris refers to the grassroots approach as the “third magisterium,” Elisabeth Schüssler Fiorenza as a “discipleship of equals,” and Daniel Franklin Pilario as “rough grounds” (Pilario 2011, 340–42).

The interest here is not so much in different models and paradigms. The search is for the most appropriate starting point for interfaith dialogue between Christianity and Zen. In the recent documents Dialogue and Mission (Secretariat for Non-Christians 1984, hereafter DM, §29–35) and DP (§42), the Catholic Church lays out four forms of dialogue—namely, of life, of deeds/action, of specialists / theological exchange, and of religious experience.

The dialogue of life encourages every follower of Christ to engage in dialogue in their daily lives in an open and neighborly spirit, sharing their joys and sorrows, their human problems and preoccupations. It is a kind of unarticulated dialogue that has no premeditated agenda. It takes place amid everyday human interactions and implies concern, respect, and hospitality toward the other. The dialogue of life permeates every form of Christian life and mission, and the lack of it goes against the demands of real humanity and the teachings of the gospel.

The dialogue of deeds/actions invites every follower of Christ to collaborate with others, especially international organizations, for the integral development and liberation of people. It includes promoting human rights, social justice, moral values, peace, liberty, and protection of the environment. The dialogue of deeds/actions is necessary for the well-being of humanity in the modern world, which is torn apart by various factors.

The dialogue of specialists / theological exchange helps partners confront, deepen, and enrich their understanding of their respective spiritual heritages and appreciate each other’s spiritual values and cultural categories. This domain is reserved for specialists. Since this model of dialogue is highly intellectual and very academic, ordinary believers often shy away from this model of dialogue.

The dialogue of religious experience happens at a deeper level. Here, persons, rooted in their spiritual traditions, share spiritual riches, experiences of prayer, contemplation, faith, duty, and ways of searching for the ultimate. This type of dialogue can aid mutual enrichment and fruitful cooperation. It promotes and preserves the highest values and spiritual ideals of humanity.

The forms of dialogue mentioned above are interconnected. They are not mutually exclusive. They do not claim any particular order of priority. Participants in dialogue can choose any model depending on their interests, expertise, and situation. All these factors make determining the success or failure of a particular model of interfaith dialogue a problematic task.

Since this study focuses on the participation of the laity in interfaith dialogue activities, I propose that among the four models of interfaith dialogue mentioned above, the best-suited models for Christian-Zen dialogue are the models of life and religious experience. My personal experiences as a child growing up in a multireligious situation and as a student of theology interacting with other spiritual traditions have taught me that the dialogue of life and religious experience can be very practical and existential, and believers of every walk of life can actively participate in them.

I am from India, a country that has given birth to important spiritual traditions such as Hinduism, Buddhism, Jainism, and Sikhism. India has always been tolerant of those spiritual traditions that have entered India as well. My countryside home gave me ample opportunities to celebrate multireligiosity. Growing up in a multireligious context—Catholicism at home and other spiritual traditions in my neighborhood—I have always been fascinated and influenced by various spiritual traditions. Interfaith living was not merely conceptual and doctrinal but existential and experiential.

As I left my countryside home for my college, philosophical, and theological studies, I became more conscious of the multicultural, multireligious, multiracial, multilinguistic character of India. My world expanded. I took pride in the much-celebrated axiom “unity in diversity” of India. Spiritual traditions continued to interest me. They slowly became objects of study, analysis, and research. Truth be told, I hated analyzing them academically. The academic study of spiritual traditions emphasized structure and doctrine over meaning and significance, uniqueness over commonality. Slowly, I became aware of the power that religions have, if interpreted erroneously, to divide and to destroy. As a student of theology, I spent much time reflecting on quarrels and dissensions that various spiritual tradition...

Table of contents

• Cover
• Title Page
• Copyright Page
• Dedication
• Contents
• Acknowledgments
• Introduction
• List of Abbreviations
• Part One
• Part Two
• Part Three
• Chinese Glossary
• References
• Index