EDITORIAL
Salaam alei kum!
Today ‘Dialogue’ is the key factor for our life and existence. It has become the very foundation at every level of relationships – international, national and local / personal. On the one hand dialogue sounds easy, while on the other hand, it is quite challenging and demanding. It presupposes ones openness, sensitivity, familiarity, concern, love, honesty and candidness. Attitudes like arrogance, reticence, pride, superiority and condescension will take us away from the arena of dialogue. As convinced and committed persons, we cannot but be part of the process of dialogue in all our activities, attitudes, thoughts and words. It demands maturity and preparedness at all levels: Intellectual, Emotional, Social, Spiritual and Academic.
Murder and blood shed caused by the recent attacks of the Maoists against the cops and innocent people at different parts of our country, shocked all of us. Can we really enter into sincere dialogue with these people? In the North East states of India, a lot of peace efforts have been made to build bridges and win the hearts of the Bodos. Most Rev Thomas Menamparampil and his inter-religious and ecumenical teams are quite actively involved in the peace-process with them. Violence will only breed violence. We need to face such violent groups tactfully. It is here that we need inter religious collaboration. I am very much of the opinion that every town / city should form inter religious groups to enter into dialogue with such groups. We also need to listen to them and help them to put down violence and to give up hostility and brutality. So inter-religious dialogue can be a channel, to establish peace and harmony and to bring people to the main stream of the society.
Heavy rains and floods over a few days have wrecked havoc in the states of Karnataka and Andhra Pradesh, marooning hundreds of villages and rendering thousands of people homeless. It is estimated that over 206 lives are lost, more than 300,000 people are displaced and more than two lakh houses have either collapsed or damaged in the 14 districts of Karnataka. Over 13 lakh people are affected following unprecedented floods in the Krishna river basin, which has claimed 50 lives so far in 7 districts of Andhra Pradesh, which left thousands of people homeless, while hundreds of them have lost their lives. Many inter religious groups have already been pressed into service bringing solace and comfort to the victims and are involved in the rehabilitation projects. The Catholic Church in India too has appealed to its members for solidarity and contribution towards these affected people irrespective of their caste and religion. It is indeed an example of dialogue of life. Similarly, Indonesia was struck by the destructive Earth-quake and Tsunami recently which left thousands orphans. Similar efforts are being made there too through local Caritas Organization and inter religious groups.
Inter religious dialogue can instill hope in the people and bring about changes in their lives. One needs to be aware and be open to the realities around. Most Rev Felix Machado in the article “Interreligious Harmony for Promotion of Civilization of Peace” brings out the fact that Interreligious dialogue can promote the civilization of peace. It is our Christian faith that motivates us to engage in the ministry of interreligious dialogue and creates in us the openness to interact with people of other faiths. The Church emphasizes in interreligious encounters, the meeting of people of different religions on a deeper level, namely, on the level of spirituality. The author concludes by saying that it is necessary to nourish our practice of interreligious encounters with solid spiritual food: God can never become a negotiable item or a marginal thought in our interreligious encounters. He is at the centre or like a foundation of all interreligious encounters.
The Jesuits are known for their academic performance and contribution. Since 1932 they have been actively involved in the education ministry in Baghdad. The article “The Jesuit Contribution to Christian Education in Iraq” by Joseph Seferta, helps us to know about the Jesuits interaction with the people of Iraq through education. The Baghdad College which the Jesuits founded later became al-Hikma (Wisdom) University. They contributed their mite to the over all growth of the students, until they were expelled from there in 1969. in order to remember their educational involvement in Iraq, in 1977 they decided to have a reunion, which was attended by 360 Iraqis and Jesuits. Since then, regular annual reunions have been taking place at various locations in the U.S., Canada and even Britain, and attended by ever increasing numbers. These reunions have proved to be very popular and joyous occasions for the Iraqi students. The Jesuits found the Iraqi students warm, humorous, imaginative, receptive, hardworking and appreciative of educational opportunities and the Iraqis found the Jesuits intelligent, generous, fun loving and dedicated. We can truly say that the mission of the Baghdad Jesuits is still continuing, not in the Jesuit fathers (most of whom have died by now) but in their grateful Iraqi alumni.
“Religious Missionary Formation – Sufi Model” by Pushpa Anbu is an article based on the model of Sufi life. Sufis are the Islamic Mystics, who by their exemplary life attract many people to the Islamic faith. The life and formation of the Sufis is found to be such that one could easily find their formation very much parallel to that of the priestly / religious formation. The author opines that today we could have the formation of our candidates to priesthood and religious life on the model of Sufi formation. In fact, their life style is so simple and appealing. ‘Reflections on Jewish-Christian Dialogue’ by Leo D. Lefebure is to help our readers to familiarize dialogue with Jews. Dialogue is a process and each of us is to be part of this dialogue process. It is enriching and inspirational to be in dialogue with our dialogue partners.
Khuda Hafiz!
Monday, October 12, 2009
Interreligious Harmony for the Promotion of Civilisation of Peace
Interreligious Harmony for the Promotion of Civilisation of Peace
Archbishop Felix Machado
Introduction
We as Christians are surrounded by people of so many different religions. As believers in God who is fully and definitively revealed in Jesus Christ, we are nonetheless struck by the religiosity, the sense of the sacred and the spontaneous expression of prayer of the believers of other religions. In this context, I often ponder on the words of Paul VI and those of John Paul II: “Evangelization is to be achieved, not from without as though by adding some decoration or applying a coat of colour, but in depth, going to the very centre and roots of life. The Gospel must impregnate the culture and the whole way of life of man… This work must always take the human person as its starting point, coming back to the interrelationships between persons and their relation with God… This proclamation is relevant also for immense sections of the human race who profess non-Christian religions in which the spiritual life of innumerable human communities finds valid expression. In these we hear reechoed, as it were, the voices of those who for a thousand years have sought God in a manner which, while imperfect, has always been sincere and upright. These religions, possessing as they do, a splendid patrimony of religious writings, have taught generations of men how to pray…1”
Defending his action accomplished in Assisi in 1986 and inviting his closest collaborators to commit themselves to receive the conciliar teachings of the Church John Paul II said: “Every authentic prayer is under the influence of the Spirit ‘who intercedes insistently for us… because we do not know how to pray as we ought,’ but he prays in us ‘with unutterable groanings’ and ‘the one who searches hearts knows what are the desires of the Spirit (Rm 8:26-27). We can indeed maintain that every authentic prayer is called forth by the Holy Spirit, who is mysteriously present in the heart of every person… the unity that comes from the fact that every man and woman is capable of praying, that is, of submitting oneself totally to God and of recognizing oneself to be poor in front of him2”
A few months earlier to his inviting the leaders of different religions to pray for peace in Assisi the same Pope had said to the representatives of various religions in India: “As an inner attitude of the mind and heart, spirituality involves an emphasis on the inner man and it produces an inward transformation of the self. The emphasis on the spiritual nature of man is an emphasis on the sublime dignity of every human person. Spirituality teaches that at the core of all outward appearances there is that inner self which in so many ways is related to the Infinite. This spirituality of inwardness which is so predominant in the Indian religious tradition achieves its complement and fulfillment in the external life of man3”.
1. Searching for deeper motivation for Engaging in Interreligious Dialogue
I have been wondering if the term ‘interreligious dialogue’ adequately and correctly communicates what the Church intends by its teaching concerning relations with other religions. Does it not give an impression of engaging in a purely cerebral discussion? Is it not a term which seems to limit interreligious relationships to a few select experts? In the Church’s invitation to her faithful to commit to interreligious dialogue there is primarily an aspect of a religious person meeting another religious person, people of one religion encountering people of other religions. The ‘religious’ dimension seems to me at the centre of the Church’s call to interreligious dialogue. I am prompted to recall here another discourse of John Paul II: “The fruit of dialogue is union between people and union of people with God, who is the source and revealer of all truth and whose Spirit guides men in freedom only when they meet one another in all honesty and love. By dialogue, we let God be present in our midst, for as we open ourselves in dialogue to one another, we also open ourselves to God. We should use the legitimate means of human friendliness, mutual understanding and interior persuasion4”.
What makes my encounter with a Hindu an act of interreligious dialogue is his and also my openness to God5 and therefore openness to others. Surely we are not talking here of the same belief in that God. But for both of us our meeting has a transforming value which is an essential element of spirituality. On my part this encounter provokes in me a deeper realisation of God (and who I am and who others are) whose source and modalities I, as a Christian, find in the Blessed Trinity. Thus my encounter with a Hindu (or a Buddhist, or a Muslim, or a Sikh) becomes for me an occasion for self-transformation.
2. Engagement in interreligious dialogue is motivated by Christian faith
The explicit practice of Interreligious dialogue in the Catholic tradition dates back to the Second Vatican Ecumenical Council (1962-1965). But even before the Declaration on the Relationship of the Church to Non-Christian Religions (Nostra Aetate) was promulgated (19 October 1965) Paul VI had expressed the following challenge to the religious leaders (3 December 1964) who represented different religions in Bombay (now Mumbai): “We must therefore come closer together, not only through the modern means of communication, through press and radio, through steamships and jet planes – we must come together with our hearts, in mutual understanding, esteem and love. We must meet not merely as tourists, but as pilgrims who set out to find God – not in buildings of stone but in human hearts. We must meet man, nation must meet nation, as brothers and sisters, as children of God.6” In the course of these forty years the Catholic tradition has been evidently enriched by the challenge of interreligious dialogue. There have arisen also some important questions and concerns for the Catholic side as its faithful engage in dialogue with other religions and their respective adherents7. But the Church keeps exhorting her sons and daughters to pursue the path of dialogue. At the dawn of this new millennium John Paul II said: “… a relationship of openness and dialogue must continue. In the climate of increased cultural and religious pluralism which is expected to mark the society of the new millennium, it is obvious that this dialogue will be especially important in establishing a sure basis for peace and warding off the dread spectre of those wars of religion which have so often bloodied human history. The name of the one God must become increasingly what it is: a name of peace and a summons to peace”8.
Is the Catholic Church’s commitment to interreligious dialogue purely for sociological reasons? Does this commitment on the part of the Catholic Church involve only anthropological concerns? Should we not at the same time seek and deepen theological and spiritual foundations for interreligious dialogue? In fact, the Catholic Church is motivated to dialogue with other religions mainly for theological and spiritual reasons: “The Church…feels itself called to dialogue principally because of its faith. In the Trinitarian mystery, Christian revelation allows us to glimpse in God a life of communion and interchange. In God, the Father, we contemplate a pervasive love unlimited by space and time. Every reality and every event are surrounded by his love… the Church has the duty of discovering and bringing to light and fullness all the riches which the Father has hidden in creation and history, not only to celebrate the glory of God in its liturgy but also to promote among mankind the movement of the gifts of the Father… In God the Son we are given the word and wisdom in whom everything was already contained and subsisting even from the beginning of time. Christ is the Word who enlightens every person because in Him is manifested at the same time the mystery of God and the mystery of mankind (cf. RH 8, 10, 11, 13). He is the redeemer present with grace in every human encounter, to liberate us from our selfishness and to make us love one another as he has loved us…In God the Holy Spirit, our faith allows us to perceive the force of life and movement and continuous regeneration (cf. LG 4) who acts in the depth of people’s consciences and accompanies them on the secret path of hearts towards truth (cf. GS 22). The Spirit also works ‘outside the visible confines of the Mystical Body’ (RH 6; cf. LG 16; GS 22; AG 15). The Spirit both anticipates and accompanies the path of the church which, nevertheless, feels itself impelled to discern the signs of Her presence, to follow Her wherever She leads and to serve Her as a humble and discreet collaborator… The reign of God is the final end of all persons. The Church, which is to be ‘its seed and beginning’ (LG 5,9), is called from the first to start out on this path towards the kingdom and, along with the rest of humanity, to advance towards that goal”9. If it is so, then faith cannot be put into brackets dilited, misrepresented or played down.
3. Open to encounter others while firmly rooted in faith
Every Christian who engages in the apostolate of interreligious dialogue must be aware of the deeper motivation for this engagement. This clarity with regard to the Christian believer’s motivation is necessary in order to avoid, facile irenicism, indifferentism, relativism, syncretism or fundamentalism, all enemies, not only of the Christian faith but also of interreligious dialogue10. Some Christians seem to think that their faith in the mystery of Jesus Christ, Lord and Saviour, is the obstacle in their way to engage in friendly, open, respectful and harmonious relationships with people of other religions. This faith is considered to be an offence to others. But Christians must know that precisely it is their faith in the mystery of Jesus Christ that becomes the ‘launching pad’, a starting point and a firm foundation for them to engage in interreligious relationships. This is what the Holy Father said to the participants in the ‘Study and Reflection Days’ on the occasion of the tenth anniversary of the death of H.E. Mgr. Piero Rossano: “A serious and authentic interreligious dialogue must rest on solid foundations so that it will bear the hoped for fruit at the appropriate time. Being open to dialogue means being absolutely consistent with one’s own religious tradition”11. Openness to others can never be separated from fidelity to Christ’s teaching. In the course of the last forty years, and even before that, we see such unconditional adherence to Christ, Saviour and Lord of all, and openness to others in the lives of many Christians who committed their lives to the apostolate of interreligious dialogue. In fact, the absolute fidelity to Christ, as these examples would show, can become a solid starting point for meeting people and appreciating those riches which – as the Second Vatican Council says – God in his munificence has distributed to the peoples12.
A Church document reminds us that “before all else, dialogue is a manner of acting, an attitude and a spirit which guides one’s conduct”13. It is important, therefore, to address the question of motivation in dialogue in order to shape the attitude and conduct of the Christian partner. A solid theological foundation becomes imperative for every Christian if our dialogue is to be fruitful and enriching.
4. Christian theology and anthropology calls for interreligious encounters
While the Church exhorts Christians to enter into dialogue and collaboration with the followers of other religions she also admonishes them to bear witness to Christian faith and life14. The Church proposes spiritual foundations for interreligious dialogue by appraising her theology - God is the Father of all15 and anthropology - every human being is created in the image of God16. This God is revealed fully and completely in the salvific mystery of Jesus Christ, the Incarnate Son of God, who is “the way, the truth, and the life” (Jn 14:6)17 and “his gospel in no way detracts from man’s freedom, from the respect that is owed to every culture and to whatever is good in each religion”18. The revelation of God in Jesus Christ is not opposed to the natural thirst every human person has for the absolute truth. In fact, the Church “knows quite well that the divine message entrusted to her is not hostile to the deepest human aspirations; indeed, it was revealed by God to satisfy, beyond every expectation, the hunger and thirst of the human heart. For this very reason the Gospel must not be imposed but proposed, because it can only be effective if it is freely accepted and lovingly embraced”19.
As baptised and active members of the Church Christians are animated by the Holy Spirit who is always present in the Church in a particular manner. Christians are inhabitated by the Holy Spirit and thus they become spiritual members. However, since the beginning of creation the Holy Spirit who hovered over the water (Gn 1:2) has been active in the world, and will remain active until the end of time. Christians must recognise the variety of ways in which the presence of the Spirit is manifested, some of which may be quite surprising20. We cannot set bounds to the action of the Holy Spirit. The Spirit is free (2 Cor 3:17). When Christians go to meet with people of other religions they should not think that the Holy Spirit is exclusively in contact with Christians alone. Rather, Christians should be ready to recognise the presence of the Holy Spirit in the others. The Holy Spirit in Christians must reach out to the Holy Spirit in the hearts of other people (e.g. the motto of Cardinal Newman, “Heart speaks to heart”). During his pilgrimage in India John Paul II declared: “The Church’s relationship with other religions is dictated by a twofold respect: Respect for man in his quest for answers to the deepest questions of his life, and respect for the action of the Spirit in man”. Of course, Christians are called to continuously pray for the gifts of fortitude and discernment which are essential elements of spirituality. This is how Christians will learn to ‘discern’ what is good and what is not good in their dialogue with people of other religions.
The possibility of the presence of the Holy Spirit is not only limited to individuals of other religions but can extend to religions themselves. This is affirmed in one of the documents from the International Theological Commission: “Given this explicit recognition of the presence of the Spirit in the religions, one cannot exclude the possibility that they exercise as such a certain salvific function, that is, despite their ambiguity, they help men achieve their ultimate end. In the religions is explicitly thematized the relationship of man with the Absolute, his transcendent dimension. It would be difficult to think that what the Holy Spirit works in the hearts of men taken as individuals would have salvific value and not think that what the Holy Spirit works in the religions and cultures would not have such value. The recent magisterium does not seem to authorize such a drastic distinction”21.
Our faith teaches us that only in the Church are to be found the means of salvation in all their fullness. This should in no way induce the Christian to assume a triumphalistic attitude or to act out of superiority complex22. Principle of ‘entire cum ecclesia’ needs to be recalled as identity of every Christian is the Church. In other words, it could be said that no Christian is a Christian when alone in the sense of individualistic, separated or isolated from the Church. Thus it is necessary “to think of our brothers and sisters in faith within the profound unity of the Mystical Body and therefore as ‘those who are a part of me”23. Christians who engage in dialogue with people of other religions need to be anchored in the life of the Church which, “by her relationship with Christ is a kind sacrament or sign of intimate union with God, and of the unity of all mankind. She is also an instrument for the achievement of such union and unity”24. Only good citizens are worthy ambassadors of their countries. A commendable Christian partner in dialogue is one who represents the faith of the Church in its integrity.
5. Sound Practice of faith shapes all interreligious encounters
Spirituality could be described as a mature fruit of a life of faith. Such a life is a fruit of a complete docility to the Spirit. As any other commitment interreligious encounter is a consequence of faith. Christians need to sustain and strengthen this commitment, first of all by evangelical values: Christ’s kenotic dimension (Phil 2:5-8) takes on a special meaning for a spirituality of dialogue. “It is not a matter of losing one’s own identity, but of taking the form and likeness of the other. It is a humble love that fosters diaogue”25. Marcello Zago makes an interesting observation concerning the imitation of Christ, namely, “not only does (Christ) reveal that God loves the world, but he gives himself entirely out of love. This love is expressed throughout his entire life, in his words and in his actions especially in favor of the poor (cf. RM 13-15). In his contacts with others, he engages in controversy only with the members of his own religion; he only turns against the Pharisees and the Scribes. He never engages in controversy about the religious traditions present in Palestine, which he knew and with which he came into contact: Romans, Canaanites and Samaritans. Not only did he arouse faith, but he was able to find it in pagans like the centurion or the Canaanite woman”26. The fundamental virtue of dialogue is charity27 the qualities of which are universal, gradual, solicitous, fervent, and disinterested, without limits and calculations, understanding and adapted to everyone28. We need to bear in mind that engagement in interreligious encounters is not the result of our human strategies or calculations; rather, it is the work of the Spirit itself, the agent and main force of salvific work29. This is why attitude of discernment, that is, the discovery of how the Spirit works in people of other religions and calls them to become involved as cooperating agents in his salvific action is necessary to practice interreligious dialogue.
Engagement in dialogue itself is the deepening of Christian spirituality. We not only need to know the others; we need the others to know ourselves. Interreligious dialogue is a deeply religious activity. In our meeting with the people of Traditional Religion we can discover their emphasis on the search for harmony between living and the deceased, between people and the cosmos, and the social agreement accomplished through words, family, community and life values. In our encounter with Hindus we may be struck by such spiritual values as that of their sense of the sacred and of the divine, the priority of experience and witness, the quest for the real inner self, the virtue of equanimity towards everyone and everything, and of ahimsa or universal love. In meeting Buddhists we may discover their efforts for the search for final liberation in an apophatic Absolute, called sunyata (void), and the development of inner life through the many forms of meditation. In the Buddhist perspective, inner attitudes are more important than external actions; the point of departure and arrival is inward perfection, which determines external behaviour. Ethics and ascetism, and especially altruism, may become grounds for cooperation and exchange. The basis for a dialogue with Confucianism may stem from the importance attributed to interpersonal relations and social cohesion. In the dialogue with Islam, Christians may be attracted by the faith in one only God, the creator and judge of all, by the very universalist claim to having received revelation and conveyed salvation, and by practical consistency. Muslims believe that belonging to Islamic community (Umma) creates special bonds.
“The Christian who meets other believers is not involved in an activity which is marginal to his or her faith. Rather it is something which arises from the demands of that faith. It flows from faith and should be nourished by faith”30. All practice of dialogue needs to be nourished, guided, orientated and directed with the help of God. Dialogue is the result of the action of the Holy Spirit and “…the fruit of the Spirit is love, peace, patience, kindness, goodness, faithfulness, gentleness, self-control” (Galatians 5:22-23). The fruits of the Spirit are binders in interreligious relations. A Christian who engages in interreligious dialogue needs to be strongly anchored in prayer which is a very effective means of obtaining God’s grace. Both words and silence in dialogue must emerge from the Christian's union with God who is the Father of all. Proposing an eventual document on the Spirituality of Dialogue the President of the Pontifical Council for Interreligious Dialogue wrote to the Episcopal Conferences throughout the world: “… the more the partners in interreligious dialogue ‘seek the face of God’ (cf. Ps 27:8), the nearer they will come to each other and the better chance they will have of understanding each other”31.
Conclusion
The term “interreligious dialogue”, which is normally used to indicate the new attitude of the Church since the promulgation of Nostra Aetate fails to communicate accurately the intention of the Church in this matter; it does not fully correspond to the practice carried out by the Church, particularly in the last forty years. Every interreligious encounter begins with an openness to God or in the recognition of transcendental values of life. For a Christian interreligious encounter is rooted in his faith in God who is triune.
What is emphasised by the Church in interreligious encounters today is the meeting of people of different religions on a deeper level, namely, on the level of spirituality. Spirituality involves an emphasis on the sublime dignity of every human person. Spirituality is an attitude, a motivation of the mind and heart which produces an inward transformation of the self. Awareness of a deeper motivation to meet people of other religions helps Christians to avoid facile irenicism, indifferentism, relativism, syncretism or fundamentalism.
Christians are invited to be open to people of other religions while at the same time remain faithful to their own religious tradition. Openness to other religions at the exclusion of fidelity to one’s own religious tradition generally results in relativism; fidelity to one’s own religious tradition in today’s pluralistic world, at the exclusion of openness to the people of other religions, often ends in fundamentalism. Rooted in their faith Christians are urged to engage in meeting people of all religions. God is revealed as the Father of all, He is manifested in Jesus Christ as the enlightening Word, and He accompanies the Church through the Holy Spirit. The kingdom of God is the final end of all persons and the Church, ‘its seed and beginning’, is called from the first to start out on this path towards the kingdom of God, and along with the rest of humanity, to advance towards that goal. Just as only good citizens are worthy ambassadors of their countries so also commendable Christian partners in dialogue are those who represent the faith of the Church in its integrity.
Questions, such as the following, are often raised in conversations among Christians: Why should a Christian engage in interreligious encounters? What is the aim of dialogue with other religions? If one understands the spiritual, anthropological and theological motivation the Christian should have in order to engage in dialogue with people of other religions one will be able to comprehend the answers to the above-mentioned questions which cannot be sought outside the context of the Christians faith and the teaching which is the foundation for Christian anthropology, spirituality and theology of interreligious dialogue. It needs to be emphasised that the Christian partners’ engagement in interreligious dialogue is not prompted by human options or carried out for any tactical or ulterior motives but it is undertaken primarily because it is demanded, above all, by the exigencies of their faith. For Christians’ engagement in interreligious encounters is a way of ‘being’ in pluralistic society. It is important to take into cognisance two points: 1) Our world today is a ‘map of religions’; 2) Faith must be lived in its integrity amidst this world. What is the goal of interreligious dialogue? Answer to this question also must be sought in the Christian faith and teaching. Because for Christians interreligious encounters are intrinsically linked to their faith. Separating the two will do harm to both: neither will it be a genuine Christian interreligious encounter, nor will the Christian practice of faith be credible.
It is necessary to nourish our practice of interreligious encounters with solid spiritual food: God can never become a negotiable item or a marginal thought in our interreligious encounters. He is at the centre or like a foundation of all interreligious encounters. Compassion of God the Father, forgiving love of God the Son and filial warmth of God the Holy Spirit, in other words, the guidance, direction and orientation of the Trinitarian God brings all interreligious dialogue to fruition. The more the partners in interreligious encounters ‘seek the face of God’, the nearer they will come to each other and the better chance they will have of understanding each other.
End – Note:
1 PAUL VI, Post-Synodal Exhoration Letter, Evangelii Nuntiandi (8 December 1975), 53
2 JOHN PAUL II, Address to the Roman Curia, l’Osservatore Romano, English Edition, 5 January 1987, 11.
3 JOHN PAUL II, To the Representatives of the Various Religions of India, Insegnamenti (1986), IX/1, pp.319-324, 2.
4 Ibid., 5.
5 Cf. Frére Roger of Taizé, Les Sources de Taizé, France: Les Presses de Taizé: “A simple desire of God is already a beginning of faith (Lk 17:5-6)”, p. 59.
6 PAUL VI, Address to the Respresentatives of the Various Religions of India, 3 December 1964, Insegnamenti (1964) II, pp. 693-695, 2.
7 JOHN PAUL II, Apostolic Letter Novo Millennio Ineunte (6 January 2001), 56: “Dialogue, however, cannot be based on religious indifferentism, and we Christians are in duty bound, while engaging in dialogue, to bear clear witness to the hope that is within us (cf. 1 Pt. 3:15). We should not fear that it will be considered an offence to the identity of others what is rather the joyful proclamation of a gift meant for all, and to be offered to all with with the greatest respect for the freedom of each one: the gift of the revelation of the God who is Love, the God who “so loved the world that he gave his only Son” (Jn 3:16). As the recent declaration Dominus Jesus stressed, this connot be the subject of a dialogue understood as negotiation, as if we considered it a matter of mere opinion: rather it is a grace which fills us with joy, a message which we have a duty to proclaim”.
8 Ibid., n.55
9 Secretaritatus pro non Cristianis (now Pontifical Council for Interreligious Dialogue) The Attitude of the Church towards the Followers of other Religions, Reflections and Orientations on Dialogue and Mission, Pentecost 1984, nn. 22,23 and 24.
10 Denis Isizoh, “Religions in sub-Saharan Africa: Working and Walking together. A Christian Reflection”, in Pro Dialogo, 114, 2003/3: “The spirit that must animate interreligious dialogue includes: consistency with one’s religious traditions and convictions; openness to understand people of other religious traditions without pretence, prejudice, and close-mindedness; honesty; humility and frankness; renunciation of rigid principles; avoidance of false irenicism, intolerance and misunderstandings; realisation that dialogue leads to inner purification and ongoing conversion”.
11 JOHN PAUL II, Discourse, 16 June 2001, Pro Dialogo, 108, 2001/3, pp.291-293.
12 Ad Gentes, 11; cf. also Nostra Aetate, 2
13 Secretariatus pro Non Christianis (now Pontifical Council for Interreligious Dialogue), The Attitude of the Church Towards the Followers of Other Religions, Reflections and Orientations on Dialogue and Mission, (Pentecost 1984), 29
14 Nostra Aetate, 2; cf also John Paul II, Post-Synodal Apostolic Exhortation Vita Consecrata, n 102
15 JOHN PAUL II, Address to the Roman Curia (22 December 1986), l’Osservatore Romano, English Edition, Jan.5, 1987,3: “The one God in whom we believe, Father, Son and Holy Spirit, the Most Holy Trinity, created man and woman with particular attention, according to the narrative in Genesis (cf. Gn 1:26ff., 2:7, 18-24). This affirmation contains and communicates a profound truth: the unity of the divine origin of the whole human family, of every man and woman, which is reflected in the unity of the divine image which each one bears in himself (Gn 1:26) and per se gives the orientation to a common goal (cf NA 1)… Accordingly, there is only one divine plan for every human being who comes into this world (cf Jn 1:9), one single origin and goal, whatever may be the colour of his skin, the historical and geographical framework within which he happens to live and act, or the culture in which he grows up and expresses himself. The differences are less important element, when confronted with the unity which is radical, fundamental and decisive”.
16 Nostra Aetate 4; cf. also John Paul II, Encyclical Letter Redemptoris Missio, 55: “… God who desires to call all peoples to himself in Christ to communicate to them the fullness of his revelation and love, does not fail to make himself present in many ways, not only to individuals, but also to entire peoples through their spiritual riches, of which their religions are the main and essential ex-pression even when they contain ‘gaps, insufficiencies and errors”; cf also John Paul II, Encyclical Letter Centesimus Annus, 24: “At the heart of every culture lies the attitude man takes to the greatest mystery: the mystery of God”. Cf also Dominus Jesus, A Declaration on the Unicity and Salvific Universality of Jesus Christ and the Church, which is published by the Sacred Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith (6 August 2000): it upholds the equal dignity of all persons, no matter of what religion: “Equality, which is a presupposition of interreligious dialogue, refers to the equal personal dignity of the parties in dialogue, not to doctrinal content, nor even less to the position of Jesus Christ – who is God himself made man – in relation to the founders of the other religions” (n. 22).
17 Cf. also other Biblical texts: Mt. 11:27; Jn 1:18; Col 2:9-10; Jn 3:34; 5:36; 17:4; 14:9; 1 Tim 6:14; Tit 2:13
18 JOHN PAUL II, Encyclical Letter, Redemptoris Missio, 3
19 JOHN PAUL II, homily on Pentecost Day (11 June 2002), 3
20 In his Encyclical Letter Dominum et Vivificantem (18 May 1986) John Paul II refers to the Holy Spirit as the ‘hidden God’ who as love and gift ‘fills the universe’. He invites all Christians to go out to meet the hidden God, a meeting with the Spirit ‘who gives life’ (n. 54).
21 International Theological Commission, Christianity and Religions (30 September 1996), 84
22 Cf. John Paul II, Apostolic Letter Novo Millennio Ineunte (6 January 2001): During the Great Jubilee of the Year 2000 John Paul II invited Christians to do “examination of conscience, aware that the Church, embracing sinners in her bosom, ‘is at once holy and always in need of being purified’ (LG 8)” , 6
23 Ibid., 43
24 Second Vatican Council, Lumen Gentium (21 November 1964), 1
25 Marcello Zago, “The Spirituality of Dialogue” in Pro Dialogo 101, 1999/2, p. 243
26 Ibid., pp. 242-243
27 Cf. JOHN PAUL II, To the Religious Leaders of India in New Delhi (7 November 1999), 2: “(The Church) sees this dialogue (with the religions of the world) as an act of love which has its roots in God himself. ‘God is love’, proclaims the New Testament, ‘and whoever remains in love remains in God and God in him… Let us love, then, because he has loved us first… no one who fails to love the brother whom he sees can love God whom he has not seen’ (1 Jn 4:16, 19-20).
28 PAUL VI, Encyclical Letter Ecclesiam Suam (6 August 1964), 40-48.
29 A recent study by FABC theologians is an example of discernment. Cf. The Spirit at work in Asia Today in FABC papers, n. 81, p. 96
30 Cardinal Francis Arinze, “Letter to Presidents of Bishops’ Conferences on the Spirituality of Dialogue”, Pro Dialogo 101, 1999/2, p. 264
31 Cardinal Francis Arinze, “Letter to Presidents of Bishops’ Conferences on the Spirituality of Dialogue”, Pro Dialogo 101, 1999/2, p.266
Archbishop Felix Machado
Introduction
We as Christians are surrounded by people of so many different religions. As believers in God who is fully and definitively revealed in Jesus Christ, we are nonetheless struck by the religiosity, the sense of the sacred and the spontaneous expression of prayer of the believers of other religions. In this context, I often ponder on the words of Paul VI and those of John Paul II: “Evangelization is to be achieved, not from without as though by adding some decoration or applying a coat of colour, but in depth, going to the very centre and roots of life. The Gospel must impregnate the culture and the whole way of life of man… This work must always take the human person as its starting point, coming back to the interrelationships between persons and their relation with God… This proclamation is relevant also for immense sections of the human race who profess non-Christian religions in which the spiritual life of innumerable human communities finds valid expression. In these we hear reechoed, as it were, the voices of those who for a thousand years have sought God in a manner which, while imperfect, has always been sincere and upright. These religions, possessing as they do, a splendid patrimony of religious writings, have taught generations of men how to pray…1”
Defending his action accomplished in Assisi in 1986 and inviting his closest collaborators to commit themselves to receive the conciliar teachings of the Church John Paul II said: “Every authentic prayer is under the influence of the Spirit ‘who intercedes insistently for us… because we do not know how to pray as we ought,’ but he prays in us ‘with unutterable groanings’ and ‘the one who searches hearts knows what are the desires of the Spirit (Rm 8:26-27). We can indeed maintain that every authentic prayer is called forth by the Holy Spirit, who is mysteriously present in the heart of every person… the unity that comes from the fact that every man and woman is capable of praying, that is, of submitting oneself totally to God and of recognizing oneself to be poor in front of him2”
A few months earlier to his inviting the leaders of different religions to pray for peace in Assisi the same Pope had said to the representatives of various religions in India: “As an inner attitude of the mind and heart, spirituality involves an emphasis on the inner man and it produces an inward transformation of the self. The emphasis on the spiritual nature of man is an emphasis on the sublime dignity of every human person. Spirituality teaches that at the core of all outward appearances there is that inner self which in so many ways is related to the Infinite. This spirituality of inwardness which is so predominant in the Indian religious tradition achieves its complement and fulfillment in the external life of man3”.
1. Searching for deeper motivation for Engaging in Interreligious Dialogue
I have been wondering if the term ‘interreligious dialogue’ adequately and correctly communicates what the Church intends by its teaching concerning relations with other religions. Does it not give an impression of engaging in a purely cerebral discussion? Is it not a term which seems to limit interreligious relationships to a few select experts? In the Church’s invitation to her faithful to commit to interreligious dialogue there is primarily an aspect of a religious person meeting another religious person, people of one religion encountering people of other religions. The ‘religious’ dimension seems to me at the centre of the Church’s call to interreligious dialogue. I am prompted to recall here another discourse of John Paul II: “The fruit of dialogue is union between people and union of people with God, who is the source and revealer of all truth and whose Spirit guides men in freedom only when they meet one another in all honesty and love. By dialogue, we let God be present in our midst, for as we open ourselves in dialogue to one another, we also open ourselves to God. We should use the legitimate means of human friendliness, mutual understanding and interior persuasion4”.
What makes my encounter with a Hindu an act of interreligious dialogue is his and also my openness to God5 and therefore openness to others. Surely we are not talking here of the same belief in that God. But for both of us our meeting has a transforming value which is an essential element of spirituality. On my part this encounter provokes in me a deeper realisation of God (and who I am and who others are) whose source and modalities I, as a Christian, find in the Blessed Trinity. Thus my encounter with a Hindu (or a Buddhist, or a Muslim, or a Sikh) becomes for me an occasion for self-transformation.
2. Engagement in interreligious dialogue is motivated by Christian faith
The explicit practice of Interreligious dialogue in the Catholic tradition dates back to the Second Vatican Ecumenical Council (1962-1965). But even before the Declaration on the Relationship of the Church to Non-Christian Religions (Nostra Aetate) was promulgated (19 October 1965) Paul VI had expressed the following challenge to the religious leaders (3 December 1964) who represented different religions in Bombay (now Mumbai): “We must therefore come closer together, not only through the modern means of communication, through press and radio, through steamships and jet planes – we must come together with our hearts, in mutual understanding, esteem and love. We must meet not merely as tourists, but as pilgrims who set out to find God – not in buildings of stone but in human hearts. We must meet man, nation must meet nation, as brothers and sisters, as children of God.6” In the course of these forty years the Catholic tradition has been evidently enriched by the challenge of interreligious dialogue. There have arisen also some important questions and concerns for the Catholic side as its faithful engage in dialogue with other religions and their respective adherents7. But the Church keeps exhorting her sons and daughters to pursue the path of dialogue. At the dawn of this new millennium John Paul II said: “… a relationship of openness and dialogue must continue. In the climate of increased cultural and religious pluralism which is expected to mark the society of the new millennium, it is obvious that this dialogue will be especially important in establishing a sure basis for peace and warding off the dread spectre of those wars of religion which have so often bloodied human history. The name of the one God must become increasingly what it is: a name of peace and a summons to peace”8.
Is the Catholic Church’s commitment to interreligious dialogue purely for sociological reasons? Does this commitment on the part of the Catholic Church involve only anthropological concerns? Should we not at the same time seek and deepen theological and spiritual foundations for interreligious dialogue? In fact, the Catholic Church is motivated to dialogue with other religions mainly for theological and spiritual reasons: “The Church…feels itself called to dialogue principally because of its faith. In the Trinitarian mystery, Christian revelation allows us to glimpse in God a life of communion and interchange. In God, the Father, we contemplate a pervasive love unlimited by space and time. Every reality and every event are surrounded by his love… the Church has the duty of discovering and bringing to light and fullness all the riches which the Father has hidden in creation and history, not only to celebrate the glory of God in its liturgy but also to promote among mankind the movement of the gifts of the Father… In God the Son we are given the word and wisdom in whom everything was already contained and subsisting even from the beginning of time. Christ is the Word who enlightens every person because in Him is manifested at the same time the mystery of God and the mystery of mankind (cf. RH 8, 10, 11, 13). He is the redeemer present with grace in every human encounter, to liberate us from our selfishness and to make us love one another as he has loved us…In God the Holy Spirit, our faith allows us to perceive the force of life and movement and continuous regeneration (cf. LG 4) who acts in the depth of people’s consciences and accompanies them on the secret path of hearts towards truth (cf. GS 22). The Spirit also works ‘outside the visible confines of the Mystical Body’ (RH 6; cf. LG 16; GS 22; AG 15). The Spirit both anticipates and accompanies the path of the church which, nevertheless, feels itself impelled to discern the signs of Her presence, to follow Her wherever She leads and to serve Her as a humble and discreet collaborator… The reign of God is the final end of all persons. The Church, which is to be ‘its seed and beginning’ (LG 5,9), is called from the first to start out on this path towards the kingdom and, along with the rest of humanity, to advance towards that goal”9. If it is so, then faith cannot be put into brackets dilited, misrepresented or played down.
3. Open to encounter others while firmly rooted in faith
Every Christian who engages in the apostolate of interreligious dialogue must be aware of the deeper motivation for this engagement. This clarity with regard to the Christian believer’s motivation is necessary in order to avoid, facile irenicism, indifferentism, relativism, syncretism or fundamentalism, all enemies, not only of the Christian faith but also of interreligious dialogue10. Some Christians seem to think that their faith in the mystery of Jesus Christ, Lord and Saviour, is the obstacle in their way to engage in friendly, open, respectful and harmonious relationships with people of other religions. This faith is considered to be an offence to others. But Christians must know that precisely it is their faith in the mystery of Jesus Christ that becomes the ‘launching pad’, a starting point and a firm foundation for them to engage in interreligious relationships. This is what the Holy Father said to the participants in the ‘Study and Reflection Days’ on the occasion of the tenth anniversary of the death of H.E. Mgr. Piero Rossano: “A serious and authentic interreligious dialogue must rest on solid foundations so that it will bear the hoped for fruit at the appropriate time. Being open to dialogue means being absolutely consistent with one’s own religious tradition”11. Openness to others can never be separated from fidelity to Christ’s teaching. In the course of the last forty years, and even before that, we see such unconditional adherence to Christ, Saviour and Lord of all, and openness to others in the lives of many Christians who committed their lives to the apostolate of interreligious dialogue. In fact, the absolute fidelity to Christ, as these examples would show, can become a solid starting point for meeting people and appreciating those riches which – as the Second Vatican Council says – God in his munificence has distributed to the peoples12.
A Church document reminds us that “before all else, dialogue is a manner of acting, an attitude and a spirit which guides one’s conduct”13. It is important, therefore, to address the question of motivation in dialogue in order to shape the attitude and conduct of the Christian partner. A solid theological foundation becomes imperative for every Christian if our dialogue is to be fruitful and enriching.
4. Christian theology and anthropology calls for interreligious encounters
While the Church exhorts Christians to enter into dialogue and collaboration with the followers of other religions she also admonishes them to bear witness to Christian faith and life14. The Church proposes spiritual foundations for interreligious dialogue by appraising her theology - God is the Father of all15 and anthropology - every human being is created in the image of God16. This God is revealed fully and completely in the salvific mystery of Jesus Christ, the Incarnate Son of God, who is “the way, the truth, and the life” (Jn 14:6)17 and “his gospel in no way detracts from man’s freedom, from the respect that is owed to every culture and to whatever is good in each religion”18. The revelation of God in Jesus Christ is not opposed to the natural thirst every human person has for the absolute truth. In fact, the Church “knows quite well that the divine message entrusted to her is not hostile to the deepest human aspirations; indeed, it was revealed by God to satisfy, beyond every expectation, the hunger and thirst of the human heart. For this very reason the Gospel must not be imposed but proposed, because it can only be effective if it is freely accepted and lovingly embraced”19.
As baptised and active members of the Church Christians are animated by the Holy Spirit who is always present in the Church in a particular manner. Christians are inhabitated by the Holy Spirit and thus they become spiritual members. However, since the beginning of creation the Holy Spirit who hovered over the water (Gn 1:2) has been active in the world, and will remain active until the end of time. Christians must recognise the variety of ways in which the presence of the Spirit is manifested, some of which may be quite surprising20. We cannot set bounds to the action of the Holy Spirit. The Spirit is free (2 Cor 3:17). When Christians go to meet with people of other religions they should not think that the Holy Spirit is exclusively in contact with Christians alone. Rather, Christians should be ready to recognise the presence of the Holy Spirit in the others. The Holy Spirit in Christians must reach out to the Holy Spirit in the hearts of other people (e.g. the motto of Cardinal Newman, “Heart speaks to heart”). During his pilgrimage in India John Paul II declared: “The Church’s relationship with other religions is dictated by a twofold respect: Respect for man in his quest for answers to the deepest questions of his life, and respect for the action of the Spirit in man”. Of course, Christians are called to continuously pray for the gifts of fortitude and discernment which are essential elements of spirituality. This is how Christians will learn to ‘discern’ what is good and what is not good in their dialogue with people of other religions.
The possibility of the presence of the Holy Spirit is not only limited to individuals of other religions but can extend to religions themselves. This is affirmed in one of the documents from the International Theological Commission: “Given this explicit recognition of the presence of the Spirit in the religions, one cannot exclude the possibility that they exercise as such a certain salvific function, that is, despite their ambiguity, they help men achieve their ultimate end. In the religions is explicitly thematized the relationship of man with the Absolute, his transcendent dimension. It would be difficult to think that what the Holy Spirit works in the hearts of men taken as individuals would have salvific value and not think that what the Holy Spirit works in the religions and cultures would not have such value. The recent magisterium does not seem to authorize such a drastic distinction”21.
Our faith teaches us that only in the Church are to be found the means of salvation in all their fullness. This should in no way induce the Christian to assume a triumphalistic attitude or to act out of superiority complex22. Principle of ‘entire cum ecclesia’ needs to be recalled as identity of every Christian is the Church. In other words, it could be said that no Christian is a Christian when alone in the sense of individualistic, separated or isolated from the Church. Thus it is necessary “to think of our brothers and sisters in faith within the profound unity of the Mystical Body and therefore as ‘those who are a part of me”23. Christians who engage in dialogue with people of other religions need to be anchored in the life of the Church which, “by her relationship with Christ is a kind sacrament or sign of intimate union with God, and of the unity of all mankind. She is also an instrument for the achievement of such union and unity”24. Only good citizens are worthy ambassadors of their countries. A commendable Christian partner in dialogue is one who represents the faith of the Church in its integrity.
5. Sound Practice of faith shapes all interreligious encounters
Spirituality could be described as a mature fruit of a life of faith. Such a life is a fruit of a complete docility to the Spirit. As any other commitment interreligious encounter is a consequence of faith. Christians need to sustain and strengthen this commitment, first of all by evangelical values: Christ’s kenotic dimension (Phil 2:5-8) takes on a special meaning for a spirituality of dialogue. “It is not a matter of losing one’s own identity, but of taking the form and likeness of the other. It is a humble love that fosters diaogue”25. Marcello Zago makes an interesting observation concerning the imitation of Christ, namely, “not only does (Christ) reveal that God loves the world, but he gives himself entirely out of love. This love is expressed throughout his entire life, in his words and in his actions especially in favor of the poor (cf. RM 13-15). In his contacts with others, he engages in controversy only with the members of his own religion; he only turns against the Pharisees and the Scribes. He never engages in controversy about the religious traditions present in Palestine, which he knew and with which he came into contact: Romans, Canaanites and Samaritans. Not only did he arouse faith, but he was able to find it in pagans like the centurion or the Canaanite woman”26. The fundamental virtue of dialogue is charity27 the qualities of which are universal, gradual, solicitous, fervent, and disinterested, without limits and calculations, understanding and adapted to everyone28. We need to bear in mind that engagement in interreligious encounters is not the result of our human strategies or calculations; rather, it is the work of the Spirit itself, the agent and main force of salvific work29. This is why attitude of discernment, that is, the discovery of how the Spirit works in people of other religions and calls them to become involved as cooperating agents in his salvific action is necessary to practice interreligious dialogue.
Engagement in dialogue itself is the deepening of Christian spirituality. We not only need to know the others; we need the others to know ourselves. Interreligious dialogue is a deeply religious activity. In our meeting with the people of Traditional Religion we can discover their emphasis on the search for harmony between living and the deceased, between people and the cosmos, and the social agreement accomplished through words, family, community and life values. In our encounter with Hindus we may be struck by such spiritual values as that of their sense of the sacred and of the divine, the priority of experience and witness, the quest for the real inner self, the virtue of equanimity towards everyone and everything, and of ahimsa or universal love. In meeting Buddhists we may discover their efforts for the search for final liberation in an apophatic Absolute, called sunyata (void), and the development of inner life through the many forms of meditation. In the Buddhist perspective, inner attitudes are more important than external actions; the point of departure and arrival is inward perfection, which determines external behaviour. Ethics and ascetism, and especially altruism, may become grounds for cooperation and exchange. The basis for a dialogue with Confucianism may stem from the importance attributed to interpersonal relations and social cohesion. In the dialogue with Islam, Christians may be attracted by the faith in one only God, the creator and judge of all, by the very universalist claim to having received revelation and conveyed salvation, and by practical consistency. Muslims believe that belonging to Islamic community (Umma) creates special bonds.
“The Christian who meets other believers is not involved in an activity which is marginal to his or her faith. Rather it is something which arises from the demands of that faith. It flows from faith and should be nourished by faith”30. All practice of dialogue needs to be nourished, guided, orientated and directed with the help of God. Dialogue is the result of the action of the Holy Spirit and “…the fruit of the Spirit is love, peace, patience, kindness, goodness, faithfulness, gentleness, self-control” (Galatians 5:22-23). The fruits of the Spirit are binders in interreligious relations. A Christian who engages in interreligious dialogue needs to be strongly anchored in prayer which is a very effective means of obtaining God’s grace. Both words and silence in dialogue must emerge from the Christian's union with God who is the Father of all. Proposing an eventual document on the Spirituality of Dialogue the President of the Pontifical Council for Interreligious Dialogue wrote to the Episcopal Conferences throughout the world: “… the more the partners in interreligious dialogue ‘seek the face of God’ (cf. Ps 27:8), the nearer they will come to each other and the better chance they will have of understanding each other”31.
Conclusion
The term “interreligious dialogue”, which is normally used to indicate the new attitude of the Church since the promulgation of Nostra Aetate fails to communicate accurately the intention of the Church in this matter; it does not fully correspond to the practice carried out by the Church, particularly in the last forty years. Every interreligious encounter begins with an openness to God or in the recognition of transcendental values of life. For a Christian interreligious encounter is rooted in his faith in God who is triune.
What is emphasised by the Church in interreligious encounters today is the meeting of people of different religions on a deeper level, namely, on the level of spirituality. Spirituality involves an emphasis on the sublime dignity of every human person. Spirituality is an attitude, a motivation of the mind and heart which produces an inward transformation of the self. Awareness of a deeper motivation to meet people of other religions helps Christians to avoid facile irenicism, indifferentism, relativism, syncretism or fundamentalism.
Christians are invited to be open to people of other religions while at the same time remain faithful to their own religious tradition. Openness to other religions at the exclusion of fidelity to one’s own religious tradition generally results in relativism; fidelity to one’s own religious tradition in today’s pluralistic world, at the exclusion of openness to the people of other religions, often ends in fundamentalism. Rooted in their faith Christians are urged to engage in meeting people of all religions. God is revealed as the Father of all, He is manifested in Jesus Christ as the enlightening Word, and He accompanies the Church through the Holy Spirit. The kingdom of God is the final end of all persons and the Church, ‘its seed and beginning’, is called from the first to start out on this path towards the kingdom of God, and along with the rest of humanity, to advance towards that goal. Just as only good citizens are worthy ambassadors of their countries so also commendable Christian partners in dialogue are those who represent the faith of the Church in its integrity.
Questions, such as the following, are often raised in conversations among Christians: Why should a Christian engage in interreligious encounters? What is the aim of dialogue with other religions? If one understands the spiritual, anthropological and theological motivation the Christian should have in order to engage in dialogue with people of other religions one will be able to comprehend the answers to the above-mentioned questions which cannot be sought outside the context of the Christians faith and the teaching which is the foundation for Christian anthropology, spirituality and theology of interreligious dialogue. It needs to be emphasised that the Christian partners’ engagement in interreligious dialogue is not prompted by human options or carried out for any tactical or ulterior motives but it is undertaken primarily because it is demanded, above all, by the exigencies of their faith. For Christians’ engagement in interreligious encounters is a way of ‘being’ in pluralistic society. It is important to take into cognisance two points: 1) Our world today is a ‘map of religions’; 2) Faith must be lived in its integrity amidst this world. What is the goal of interreligious dialogue? Answer to this question also must be sought in the Christian faith and teaching. Because for Christians interreligious encounters are intrinsically linked to their faith. Separating the two will do harm to both: neither will it be a genuine Christian interreligious encounter, nor will the Christian practice of faith be credible.
It is necessary to nourish our practice of interreligious encounters with solid spiritual food: God can never become a negotiable item or a marginal thought in our interreligious encounters. He is at the centre or like a foundation of all interreligious encounters. Compassion of God the Father, forgiving love of God the Son and filial warmth of God the Holy Spirit, in other words, the guidance, direction and orientation of the Trinitarian God brings all interreligious dialogue to fruition. The more the partners in interreligious encounters ‘seek the face of God’, the nearer they will come to each other and the better chance they will have of understanding each other.
End – Note:
1 PAUL VI, Post-Synodal Exhoration Letter, Evangelii Nuntiandi (8 December 1975), 53
2 JOHN PAUL II, Address to the Roman Curia, l’Osservatore Romano, English Edition, 5 January 1987, 11.
3 JOHN PAUL II, To the Representatives of the Various Religions of India, Insegnamenti (1986), IX/1, pp.319-324, 2.
4 Ibid., 5.
5 Cf. Frére Roger of Taizé, Les Sources de Taizé, France: Les Presses de Taizé: “A simple desire of God is already a beginning of faith (Lk 17:5-6)”, p. 59.
6 PAUL VI, Address to the Respresentatives of the Various Religions of India, 3 December 1964, Insegnamenti (1964) II, pp. 693-695, 2.
7 JOHN PAUL II, Apostolic Letter Novo Millennio Ineunte (6 January 2001), 56: “Dialogue, however, cannot be based on religious indifferentism, and we Christians are in duty bound, while engaging in dialogue, to bear clear witness to the hope that is within us (cf. 1 Pt. 3:15). We should not fear that it will be considered an offence to the identity of others what is rather the joyful proclamation of a gift meant for all, and to be offered to all with with the greatest respect for the freedom of each one: the gift of the revelation of the God who is Love, the God who “so loved the world that he gave his only Son” (Jn 3:16). As the recent declaration Dominus Jesus stressed, this connot be the subject of a dialogue understood as negotiation, as if we considered it a matter of mere opinion: rather it is a grace which fills us with joy, a message which we have a duty to proclaim”.
8 Ibid., n.55
9 Secretaritatus pro non Cristianis (now Pontifical Council for Interreligious Dialogue) The Attitude of the Church towards the Followers of other Religions, Reflections and Orientations on Dialogue and Mission, Pentecost 1984, nn. 22,23 and 24.
10 Denis Isizoh, “Religions in sub-Saharan Africa: Working and Walking together. A Christian Reflection”, in Pro Dialogo, 114, 2003/3: “The spirit that must animate interreligious dialogue includes: consistency with one’s religious traditions and convictions; openness to understand people of other religious traditions without pretence, prejudice, and close-mindedness; honesty; humility and frankness; renunciation of rigid principles; avoidance of false irenicism, intolerance and misunderstandings; realisation that dialogue leads to inner purification and ongoing conversion”.
11 JOHN PAUL II, Discourse, 16 June 2001, Pro Dialogo, 108, 2001/3, pp.291-293.
12 Ad Gentes, 11; cf. also Nostra Aetate, 2
13 Secretariatus pro Non Christianis (now Pontifical Council for Interreligious Dialogue), The Attitude of the Church Towards the Followers of Other Religions, Reflections and Orientations on Dialogue and Mission, (Pentecost 1984), 29
14 Nostra Aetate, 2; cf also John Paul II, Post-Synodal Apostolic Exhortation Vita Consecrata, n 102
15 JOHN PAUL II, Address to the Roman Curia (22 December 1986), l’Osservatore Romano, English Edition, Jan.5, 1987,3: “The one God in whom we believe, Father, Son and Holy Spirit, the Most Holy Trinity, created man and woman with particular attention, according to the narrative in Genesis (cf. Gn 1:26ff., 2:7, 18-24). This affirmation contains and communicates a profound truth: the unity of the divine origin of the whole human family, of every man and woman, which is reflected in the unity of the divine image which each one bears in himself (Gn 1:26) and per se gives the orientation to a common goal (cf NA 1)… Accordingly, there is only one divine plan for every human being who comes into this world (cf Jn 1:9), one single origin and goal, whatever may be the colour of his skin, the historical and geographical framework within which he happens to live and act, or the culture in which he grows up and expresses himself. The differences are less important element, when confronted with the unity which is radical, fundamental and decisive”.
16 Nostra Aetate 4; cf. also John Paul II, Encyclical Letter Redemptoris Missio, 55: “… God who desires to call all peoples to himself in Christ to communicate to them the fullness of his revelation and love, does not fail to make himself present in many ways, not only to individuals, but also to entire peoples through their spiritual riches, of which their religions are the main and essential ex-pression even when they contain ‘gaps, insufficiencies and errors”; cf also John Paul II, Encyclical Letter Centesimus Annus, 24: “At the heart of every culture lies the attitude man takes to the greatest mystery: the mystery of God”. Cf also Dominus Jesus, A Declaration on the Unicity and Salvific Universality of Jesus Christ and the Church, which is published by the Sacred Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith (6 August 2000): it upholds the equal dignity of all persons, no matter of what religion: “Equality, which is a presupposition of interreligious dialogue, refers to the equal personal dignity of the parties in dialogue, not to doctrinal content, nor even less to the position of Jesus Christ – who is God himself made man – in relation to the founders of the other religions” (n. 22).
17 Cf. also other Biblical texts: Mt. 11:27; Jn 1:18; Col 2:9-10; Jn 3:34; 5:36; 17:4; 14:9; 1 Tim 6:14; Tit 2:13
18 JOHN PAUL II, Encyclical Letter, Redemptoris Missio, 3
19 JOHN PAUL II, homily on Pentecost Day (11 June 2002), 3
20 In his Encyclical Letter Dominum et Vivificantem (18 May 1986) John Paul II refers to the Holy Spirit as the ‘hidden God’ who as love and gift ‘fills the universe’. He invites all Christians to go out to meet the hidden God, a meeting with the Spirit ‘who gives life’ (n. 54).
21 International Theological Commission, Christianity and Religions (30 September 1996), 84
22 Cf. John Paul II, Apostolic Letter Novo Millennio Ineunte (6 January 2001): During the Great Jubilee of the Year 2000 John Paul II invited Christians to do “examination of conscience, aware that the Church, embracing sinners in her bosom, ‘is at once holy and always in need of being purified’ (LG 8)” , 6
23 Ibid., 43
24 Second Vatican Council, Lumen Gentium (21 November 1964), 1
25 Marcello Zago, “The Spirituality of Dialogue” in Pro Dialogo 101, 1999/2, p. 243
26 Ibid., pp. 242-243
27 Cf. JOHN PAUL II, To the Religious Leaders of India in New Delhi (7 November 1999), 2: “(The Church) sees this dialogue (with the religions of the world) as an act of love which has its roots in God himself. ‘God is love’, proclaims the New Testament, ‘and whoever remains in love remains in God and God in him… Let us love, then, because he has loved us first… no one who fails to love the brother whom he sees can love God whom he has not seen’ (1 Jn 4:16, 19-20).
28 PAUL VI, Encyclical Letter Ecclesiam Suam (6 August 1964), 40-48.
29 A recent study by FABC theologians is an example of discernment. Cf. The Spirit at work in Asia Today in FABC papers, n. 81, p. 96
30 Cardinal Francis Arinze, “Letter to Presidents of Bishops’ Conferences on the Spirituality of Dialogue”, Pro Dialogo 101, 1999/2, p. 264
31 Cardinal Francis Arinze, “Letter to Presidents of Bishops’ Conferences on the Spirituality of Dialogue”, Pro Dialogo 101, 1999/2, p.266
THE JESUIT CONTRIBUTION TO CHRISTIAN EDUCATION IN IRAQ
THE JESUIT CONTRIBUTION TO CHRISTIAN EDUCATION IN IRAQ
Joseph Seferta
In 1932 a handful of American Jesuits sailed the seas to Beirut and bussed across the desert to Baghdad. They went in answer to a request by the Chaldean Patriarch Mar Emmanuel II Toma that they start a secondary school for Christian boys. He himself was a graduate of the Jesuit University St. Joseph in Beirut. The Patriarch had made his request known to Pope Pius XI who asked the Jesuit General, Fr. Wladimir Ledechowsky to approach the Jesuits in America because they were (and still are) the most numerous English-speaking Jesuits in the world. The New England Province undertook the project.
Jesuits had passed through Mesopotamia before. St. Ignatius Loyola, their founder, had spent some time in the Holy Land, and dialoguing with Islam was one of his highest priorities. In 1850 two Jesuits were sent from Beirut to Baghdad to determine if the time was ripe for a Jesuit mission there. As their caravan was robbed on the way to and from Baghdad, they decided that the time was not yet ripe.
So in 1932, the same year that Iraq gained its independence, four U.S. Jesuits arrived in Baghdad. Initially they bought two houses by the Tigris and started Baghdad College, a high school for boys, with an enrolment of 120. The students were to increase eventually to 1000 at Baghdad College and 700 at the later Al-Hikma University.
The Jesuits were not missionaries in the classical sense of the term. They preached rarely and proselytised not at all. Cardinal Richard Cushing of Boston once remarked: “This mission has to be the biggest waste of men and money in the history of the Church—not a single convert from Islam!” Although an extraordinary man and a great promoter of Jesuit missions worldwide Cushing failed to see that the Jesuits in Iraq were not trying to? Convert any Muslims, who were actually admitted to the school from the beginning. In fact, if they had tried to proselytise, they would not have lasted more than a few months. Nevertheless, their impact on Christians and Muslims alike as excellent educators and as religious men of great integrity and dedication was extraordinary.
It is true that the primary aim of the Jesuit mission was to educate Iraqi Christians, and this aim was fulfilled magnificently. But they also helped the church of Iraq by their physical presence, moral support, participation in liturgies and devotions, and providing pastoral services. The Christians made up only 5% of the population and were second-class citizens in an overwhelmingly Islamic environment. The Chaldean Catholics made up three quarters of the Christian community, with the rest belonging mainly to other Eastern denominations, both Catholic and Orthodox. Chaldeans and Assyrians originally belonged to the same “Church of the East” in Mesopotamia which, according to legend, was founded by the Apostle Thomas, as well as saints Addai and Mari who gave us what many scholars consider to be the oldest liturgy in the universal church. There are serious attempts now to reunite the Chaldean and Assyrian churches into one again.
Now the Jesuits, as you know, are famous primarily for being educators, and they run some of the best universities in the United States. Ignatius Loyola’s assumption, however, was not that education was an end in itself but rather as a means to lead the student to care about other human beings. This is the outcome of the famous “spiritual exercises” of St. Ignatius which help set the person free from selfishness, strengthen his free will, inform (as well as form) his conscience, and prepare him to see the good in other people in order to bring out the best in them. Hence, the aim of the Baghdad Jesuits was to help mould an active Christian community through a sound Christian education. At the same time, by educating a good number of Muslim young men, they would also encourage greater tolerance and understanding of the faith, which would work to the mutual advantage of Christians and Muslims alike.
In 1932, then, eight American Jesuit universities, headed by Georgetown, sponsored the Iraq project, and this led to the formation of the Iraq American Educational Association, which was duly approved and registered by the Iraqi authorities. The motto used in the advertisement was “an Iraqi school for Iraqi boys”. Such policy and spirit were faithfully maintained thereafter as was also a high standard of academic excellence. This was so high, in fact, that about half of the top ten results in the baccalaureate exams, taken at the age of 18, usually came from Baghdad College alone.
From 1934 to 1969 (when they were expelled), the B.C. Jesuits occupied the 25 acre property in Sulaikh, four miles north of the city centre. Nine major buildings and seven minor ones were constructed. Strict discipline was always maintained and mutual respect all round was emphasised. A variety of sports was encouraged and the boys threw themselves into everything with great enthusiasm. One of the highlights of the year was the annual baseball competition between faculty members and senior students, which always drew large crowds.
A fleet of distinctive yellow buses was acquired to ferry the students back and forth on a daily basis. Gradually Muslim clerics, government officials and others replaced their mistrust of the American Jesuits with enthusiasm for their educational efforts, once they realised they were there not to convert them but to educate them. This change of heart was quickened by the 1942 pro-Nazi coup, when other Americans fled Iraq, while the Jesuits stayed put. Thereafter, even government ministers began sending their sons to the College, realising that the Jesuits were fostering intellectual, spiritual and social benefits that went beyond education.
It was Fr. William Rice, the first superior of the Baghdad Jesuits (and later a bishop) who in 1937 began to construct the school buildings according to the Arabian architectural pattern. But he was followed by the genius of Fr. Leo Guay who, with a Ph.D. in chemistry, also enjoyed the two hobbies of astronomy and architecture. The science building he constructed, for example, was second to none in its ample space, large classrooms, laboratories, and the bright cheerful environment.
A two-hour homework was demanded of the students on a daily basis, and it was closely monitored. New students were accepted only in the first year, because usually those wanting to transfer from other schools into other years were below standard, especially in the English language. To enroll in the first year, an applicant had to pass a strict entrance exam in English. All the subjects were taught in English with the exception of history, geography and, of course, Arabic. As for the composition of the student body, I’ll take a typical example from 1956 (the year I graduated). There were 196 Chaldeans, 57 Assyrians, 59 Syrians (both Catholic and Orthodox), 100 Armenians (Catholic and Orthodox), 6 Melkites (i.e., Arabic-speaking Byzantines), 19 Latins (i.e., Catholics who follow the Latin Rite rather than an Eastern rite), 5 Jews and 263 Muslims: totalling 705.
Every year, beginning in 1934, a magnificent year-book was produced, called Al-Iraqi (“The Iraqi”), which was eagerly read by students, parents and staff. It contained an Arabic as well as an English section, all fully-illustrated and mostly written by the students, with a bit of help from faculty members. Across the road from the college was the boarding school for students from outside the capital, but who were allowed to visit their families during holidays, especially the long summer vacation.
The 1950s and 60s saw some exciting changes taking place. Having put up nine new buildings and devising ingenious methods for keeping them cool in hot weather, Fr. Guay then built a beautiful school chapel that reflected a harmonious blend of Babylonian, Assyrian and Arabian styles of architecture. In 1952, a language house was started in the Sa’dun area of Baghdad. Here the Jesuits were able to concentrate their talents and energy to the study of the Arabic language and culture. The language house was named after St. Joseph, perhaps because 14 out of the 60 men in the mission were named Joseph. (I like the name too). The teaching was conducted mainly by two remarkable scholars: the Chaldean professor Faraj Raffuli and the American Jesuit Richard McCarthy. McCarthy was internationally recognised as an authority on both al-Ash’ari and al-Baqillani.
In the 1950s Baghdad College was having a real impact on education in the capital. Teachers of primary, secondary and college levels showed great interest in the Jesuit school, which they often visited, admiring its ethos, facilities, methods of teaching and academic progress. They also marvelled at the democratic spirit of the school, when attending dramatic productions, debating contests, sporting events and other activities. In the field of sports, the College participated actively in the city’s track and field events, often achieving great results. People complimented the B.C. students for their cheerful, polite and well-disciplined behaviour.
The 1950s and 60s also witnessed serious political upheavals, both in Iraq and the rest of the Middle East. The Iraqi people, however, noticed and admired the fact that the Jesuits stuck to education and never got involved in politics. Whenever trouble or political demonstrations took place, students from other schools left their school premises and took part, while the B.C. students remained on campus and went about their normal studies. In 1958 the monarchy was toppled in a coup that saw all members of the royal family slaughtered and Iraq turned into a republic. In the 1960s a number of other coup d’etats took place, twice resulting in the secular Ba’th Party seizing power.
But the Jesuits always stuck to education. New language laboratories were built, using the latest technology, and this led to enormous enjoyment and rapid learning by the students. In 1964, at the request of the Ministry of Education, seminar courses in English were provided by the College for Iraqi teachers of English. Over 300 applications were received, but only 140 candidates could be accepted. Additional facilities were installed with the help of a grant from the Ford Foundation. Texts were especially written for Arabic speakers, and both male and female teachers participated from the primary, inter-mediate and secondary sectors of education.
Let us now focus our attention on Al-Hikma University, also founded by the American Jesuits of the New England Province. Due to their successful efforts in secondary education, they had long considered an extension to the inviting field of higher education. Their intention was not to compete with the existing and competent colleges in Iraq (there was no university yet), but rather to encourage their B.C. alumni to remain in Iraq. When the Iraqi government was approached, it approved the idea but not the original name, which would’ve been Baghdad University, simply because the government was planning to open one by that name. Hence the Jesuits chose the name Al-Hikma (meaning “wisdom”) which also goes back to the 9th century Beit al-Hikma (“House of Wisdom”) in Baghdad, which was one of the most famous centres of learning in the Arab world, long before European universities flourished in Oxford, Paris and elsewhere.
Various grants made the project possible. Al-Hikma began modestly in 1956 on the campus of Baghdad College, but, soon after, it acquired a piece of land, donated by the government, that was six times larger than the Baghdad College property. It was in Za’faraniya, in the southernmost part of the capital and 14 miles away from the College. Financial help to construct the buildings came from many sources, including the Ford Foundation, the Gulbenkian Foundation and the Jesuit Fairfield University. Al-Hikma’s motto was “All wisdom comes from God”. Its formal curriculum included the physical sciences, engineering, mathematics, astronomy, languages, history, sociology, philosophy and theology. The student enrolment steadily increased to 700 students by 1968, one fifth of whom were women. Like Baghdad College, Al-Hikma too had to charge tuition fees, but a good number of poor bright students were also accepted.
During the 12 years of its existence, many talented teachers lectured at Al-Hikma, most of whom were Americans, but there were some Iraqis and Europeans as well. Students who did not come to it from Baghdad College experienced some difficulties, notably a weakness in the English language, not to speak of the Arab emphasis on memorising. These obstacles were gradually overcome with extra training by dedicated staff, particularly Fr. Joseph Ryan who conducted his famous “Dean’s Hours” every week throughout the first semester of the freshmen year. The student body was roughly half Christian and half Muslim, and the faculty included many more lay men and women than Baghdad College.
The remarkable Fr. Guay continued his architectural wonders on the Al-Hikma campus, and his jewel on the crown was the Oriental Institute, with its exquisite blue dome. Fr. Richard McCathy, the eminent scholar of Arabic and Islamic studies, was the director of the Institute, assisted by Fr. John Donohue. The Institute was a place for pursuing research into Islamics, Oriental languages and the many manuscripts on early Christianity, buried in the monasteries and religious houses of northern Iraq, N.E. Syria and southern Turkey. Al-Hikma impressed the authorities so much that it became a tradition for the president of the republic to attend the annual graduation ceremony and give a brief address. It also impressed the Chaldean patriarch and other bishops to the extent that they wanted an inter-ritual major seminary under the auspices of Al-Hikma.
In the spring of 1968 there was so much optimism in the air, and so many projects were being planned. The prospects for a scholarly Christian-Muslim dialogue looked quite encouraging, a Jesuit novitiate for native Iraqis had already been launched, and retreat events were flourishing. However, it all turned out to be the calm before the storm. A fiercely anti-American element had gained control of the Ba’th regime, and the loudest voice—that of the Interior Minister, Saleh Mehdi Ammash—kept threatening the Jesuits with expulsion. And so it was that in November 1968, the 28 Jesuits based at Al-Hikma University were asked to leave Iraq after just a five days’ notice to leave. In spite of threats, hundreds of students went to the airport to bid farewell to the fathers in a tearful departure.
Nine months later, the other 33 American Jesuits were similarly expelled from Baghdad College. Army tanks came and surrounded the school, officers sealed all entrances to the buildings, and the fathers were allowed to keep only their residence, the chapel and the cemetery (which were later handed over to the Chaldean patriarchate). It was a cruel and shameful operation that ended a remarkable venture. Needless to say, the Christian community felt devastated by what had happened.
All the pleadings by distinguished people, both lay and clerical, Christian as well as Muslim, did not do any good. Both schools were nationalised, as were all other private institutions in the country. The word used was “iraqised” which indicated that the government took control of the institution without offering any compensation. Apart from the Ba’th socialist ideology, a political factor must’ve contributed to such an action, namely, the 1967 Arab-Israeli war, which resulted in disaster for the Palestinians and brought the Ba’th Party back to power in 1968.
Following the expulsion, the Jesuit fathers were reassigned to other posts, mainly in the United States, but also in the Middle East and elsewhere. Most of the Baghdad College and Al-Hikma alumni remained in Iraq, but some went to America, with many settling in Detroit and Chicago. In 1977 they decided to have a reunion, which was attended by 360 Iraqis and Jesuits. Since then, regular annual reunions have been taking place at various locations in the U.S., Canada and even Britain, and attended by ever increasing numbers. These reunions have proved to be very popular and joyous occasions.
It all reflects how intertwined were the lives of the Jesuits, the students and their families. The Jesuits in Baghdad entered the family lives of their students frequently through their visits to celebrate Christian and Muslim feast days. On the campuses, the fathers participated in debates, dramas, contests and athletics almost as much as the students. They found the Iraqi students warm, humorous, imaginative, receptive, hardworking and appreciative of educational opportunities. For their part, the Iraqis found the Jesuits intelligent, generous, fun loving and dedicated. We can truly say that the mission of the Baghdad Jesuits is still continuing, not in the Jesuit fathers (most of whom have died by now) but in their grateful Iraqi alumni.
Joseph Seferta
In 1932 a handful of American Jesuits sailed the seas to Beirut and bussed across the desert to Baghdad. They went in answer to a request by the Chaldean Patriarch Mar Emmanuel II Toma that they start a secondary school for Christian boys. He himself was a graduate of the Jesuit University St. Joseph in Beirut. The Patriarch had made his request known to Pope Pius XI who asked the Jesuit General, Fr. Wladimir Ledechowsky to approach the Jesuits in America because they were (and still are) the most numerous English-speaking Jesuits in the world. The New England Province undertook the project.
Jesuits had passed through Mesopotamia before. St. Ignatius Loyola, their founder, had spent some time in the Holy Land, and dialoguing with Islam was one of his highest priorities. In 1850 two Jesuits were sent from Beirut to Baghdad to determine if the time was ripe for a Jesuit mission there. As their caravan was robbed on the way to and from Baghdad, they decided that the time was not yet ripe.
So in 1932, the same year that Iraq gained its independence, four U.S. Jesuits arrived in Baghdad. Initially they bought two houses by the Tigris and started Baghdad College, a high school for boys, with an enrolment of 120. The students were to increase eventually to 1000 at Baghdad College and 700 at the later Al-Hikma University.
The Jesuits were not missionaries in the classical sense of the term. They preached rarely and proselytised not at all. Cardinal Richard Cushing of Boston once remarked: “This mission has to be the biggest waste of men and money in the history of the Church—not a single convert from Islam!” Although an extraordinary man and a great promoter of Jesuit missions worldwide Cushing failed to see that the Jesuits in Iraq were not trying to? Convert any Muslims, who were actually admitted to the school from the beginning. In fact, if they had tried to proselytise, they would not have lasted more than a few months. Nevertheless, their impact on Christians and Muslims alike as excellent educators and as religious men of great integrity and dedication was extraordinary.
It is true that the primary aim of the Jesuit mission was to educate Iraqi Christians, and this aim was fulfilled magnificently. But they also helped the church of Iraq by their physical presence, moral support, participation in liturgies and devotions, and providing pastoral services. The Christians made up only 5% of the population and were second-class citizens in an overwhelmingly Islamic environment. The Chaldean Catholics made up three quarters of the Christian community, with the rest belonging mainly to other Eastern denominations, both Catholic and Orthodox. Chaldeans and Assyrians originally belonged to the same “Church of the East” in Mesopotamia which, according to legend, was founded by the Apostle Thomas, as well as saints Addai and Mari who gave us what many scholars consider to be the oldest liturgy in the universal church. There are serious attempts now to reunite the Chaldean and Assyrian churches into one again.
Now the Jesuits, as you know, are famous primarily for being educators, and they run some of the best universities in the United States. Ignatius Loyola’s assumption, however, was not that education was an end in itself but rather as a means to lead the student to care about other human beings. This is the outcome of the famous “spiritual exercises” of St. Ignatius which help set the person free from selfishness, strengthen his free will, inform (as well as form) his conscience, and prepare him to see the good in other people in order to bring out the best in them. Hence, the aim of the Baghdad Jesuits was to help mould an active Christian community through a sound Christian education. At the same time, by educating a good number of Muslim young men, they would also encourage greater tolerance and understanding of the faith, which would work to the mutual advantage of Christians and Muslims alike.
In 1932, then, eight American Jesuit universities, headed by Georgetown, sponsored the Iraq project, and this led to the formation of the Iraq American Educational Association, which was duly approved and registered by the Iraqi authorities. The motto used in the advertisement was “an Iraqi school for Iraqi boys”. Such policy and spirit were faithfully maintained thereafter as was also a high standard of academic excellence. This was so high, in fact, that about half of the top ten results in the baccalaureate exams, taken at the age of 18, usually came from Baghdad College alone.
From 1934 to 1969 (when they were expelled), the B.C. Jesuits occupied the 25 acre property in Sulaikh, four miles north of the city centre. Nine major buildings and seven minor ones were constructed. Strict discipline was always maintained and mutual respect all round was emphasised. A variety of sports was encouraged and the boys threw themselves into everything with great enthusiasm. One of the highlights of the year was the annual baseball competition between faculty members and senior students, which always drew large crowds.
A fleet of distinctive yellow buses was acquired to ferry the students back and forth on a daily basis. Gradually Muslim clerics, government officials and others replaced their mistrust of the American Jesuits with enthusiasm for their educational efforts, once they realised they were there not to convert them but to educate them. This change of heart was quickened by the 1942 pro-Nazi coup, when other Americans fled Iraq, while the Jesuits stayed put. Thereafter, even government ministers began sending their sons to the College, realising that the Jesuits were fostering intellectual, spiritual and social benefits that went beyond education.
It was Fr. William Rice, the first superior of the Baghdad Jesuits (and later a bishop) who in 1937 began to construct the school buildings according to the Arabian architectural pattern. But he was followed by the genius of Fr. Leo Guay who, with a Ph.D. in chemistry, also enjoyed the two hobbies of astronomy and architecture. The science building he constructed, for example, was second to none in its ample space, large classrooms, laboratories, and the bright cheerful environment.
A two-hour homework was demanded of the students on a daily basis, and it was closely monitored. New students were accepted only in the first year, because usually those wanting to transfer from other schools into other years were below standard, especially in the English language. To enroll in the first year, an applicant had to pass a strict entrance exam in English. All the subjects were taught in English with the exception of history, geography and, of course, Arabic. As for the composition of the student body, I’ll take a typical example from 1956 (the year I graduated). There were 196 Chaldeans, 57 Assyrians, 59 Syrians (both Catholic and Orthodox), 100 Armenians (Catholic and Orthodox), 6 Melkites (i.e., Arabic-speaking Byzantines), 19 Latins (i.e., Catholics who follow the Latin Rite rather than an Eastern rite), 5 Jews and 263 Muslims: totalling 705.
Every year, beginning in 1934, a magnificent year-book was produced, called Al-Iraqi (“The Iraqi”), which was eagerly read by students, parents and staff. It contained an Arabic as well as an English section, all fully-illustrated and mostly written by the students, with a bit of help from faculty members. Across the road from the college was the boarding school for students from outside the capital, but who were allowed to visit their families during holidays, especially the long summer vacation.
The 1950s and 60s saw some exciting changes taking place. Having put up nine new buildings and devising ingenious methods for keeping them cool in hot weather, Fr. Guay then built a beautiful school chapel that reflected a harmonious blend of Babylonian, Assyrian and Arabian styles of architecture. In 1952, a language house was started in the Sa’dun area of Baghdad. Here the Jesuits were able to concentrate their talents and energy to the study of the Arabic language and culture. The language house was named after St. Joseph, perhaps because 14 out of the 60 men in the mission were named Joseph. (I like the name too). The teaching was conducted mainly by two remarkable scholars: the Chaldean professor Faraj Raffuli and the American Jesuit Richard McCarthy. McCarthy was internationally recognised as an authority on both al-Ash’ari and al-Baqillani.
In the 1950s Baghdad College was having a real impact on education in the capital. Teachers of primary, secondary and college levels showed great interest in the Jesuit school, which they often visited, admiring its ethos, facilities, methods of teaching and academic progress. They also marvelled at the democratic spirit of the school, when attending dramatic productions, debating contests, sporting events and other activities. In the field of sports, the College participated actively in the city’s track and field events, often achieving great results. People complimented the B.C. students for their cheerful, polite and well-disciplined behaviour.
The 1950s and 60s also witnessed serious political upheavals, both in Iraq and the rest of the Middle East. The Iraqi people, however, noticed and admired the fact that the Jesuits stuck to education and never got involved in politics. Whenever trouble or political demonstrations took place, students from other schools left their school premises and took part, while the B.C. students remained on campus and went about their normal studies. In 1958 the monarchy was toppled in a coup that saw all members of the royal family slaughtered and Iraq turned into a republic. In the 1960s a number of other coup d’etats took place, twice resulting in the secular Ba’th Party seizing power.
But the Jesuits always stuck to education. New language laboratories were built, using the latest technology, and this led to enormous enjoyment and rapid learning by the students. In 1964, at the request of the Ministry of Education, seminar courses in English were provided by the College for Iraqi teachers of English. Over 300 applications were received, but only 140 candidates could be accepted. Additional facilities were installed with the help of a grant from the Ford Foundation. Texts were especially written for Arabic speakers, and both male and female teachers participated from the primary, inter-mediate and secondary sectors of education.
Let us now focus our attention on Al-Hikma University, also founded by the American Jesuits of the New England Province. Due to their successful efforts in secondary education, they had long considered an extension to the inviting field of higher education. Their intention was not to compete with the existing and competent colleges in Iraq (there was no university yet), but rather to encourage their B.C. alumni to remain in Iraq. When the Iraqi government was approached, it approved the idea but not the original name, which would’ve been Baghdad University, simply because the government was planning to open one by that name. Hence the Jesuits chose the name Al-Hikma (meaning “wisdom”) which also goes back to the 9th century Beit al-Hikma (“House of Wisdom”) in Baghdad, which was one of the most famous centres of learning in the Arab world, long before European universities flourished in Oxford, Paris and elsewhere.
Various grants made the project possible. Al-Hikma began modestly in 1956 on the campus of Baghdad College, but, soon after, it acquired a piece of land, donated by the government, that was six times larger than the Baghdad College property. It was in Za’faraniya, in the southernmost part of the capital and 14 miles away from the College. Financial help to construct the buildings came from many sources, including the Ford Foundation, the Gulbenkian Foundation and the Jesuit Fairfield University. Al-Hikma’s motto was “All wisdom comes from God”. Its formal curriculum included the physical sciences, engineering, mathematics, astronomy, languages, history, sociology, philosophy and theology. The student enrolment steadily increased to 700 students by 1968, one fifth of whom were women. Like Baghdad College, Al-Hikma too had to charge tuition fees, but a good number of poor bright students were also accepted.
During the 12 years of its existence, many talented teachers lectured at Al-Hikma, most of whom were Americans, but there were some Iraqis and Europeans as well. Students who did not come to it from Baghdad College experienced some difficulties, notably a weakness in the English language, not to speak of the Arab emphasis on memorising. These obstacles were gradually overcome with extra training by dedicated staff, particularly Fr. Joseph Ryan who conducted his famous “Dean’s Hours” every week throughout the first semester of the freshmen year. The student body was roughly half Christian and half Muslim, and the faculty included many more lay men and women than Baghdad College.
The remarkable Fr. Guay continued his architectural wonders on the Al-Hikma campus, and his jewel on the crown was the Oriental Institute, with its exquisite blue dome. Fr. Richard McCathy, the eminent scholar of Arabic and Islamic studies, was the director of the Institute, assisted by Fr. John Donohue. The Institute was a place for pursuing research into Islamics, Oriental languages and the many manuscripts on early Christianity, buried in the monasteries and religious houses of northern Iraq, N.E. Syria and southern Turkey. Al-Hikma impressed the authorities so much that it became a tradition for the president of the republic to attend the annual graduation ceremony and give a brief address. It also impressed the Chaldean patriarch and other bishops to the extent that they wanted an inter-ritual major seminary under the auspices of Al-Hikma.
In the spring of 1968 there was so much optimism in the air, and so many projects were being planned. The prospects for a scholarly Christian-Muslim dialogue looked quite encouraging, a Jesuit novitiate for native Iraqis had already been launched, and retreat events were flourishing. However, it all turned out to be the calm before the storm. A fiercely anti-American element had gained control of the Ba’th regime, and the loudest voice—that of the Interior Minister, Saleh Mehdi Ammash—kept threatening the Jesuits with expulsion. And so it was that in November 1968, the 28 Jesuits based at Al-Hikma University were asked to leave Iraq after just a five days’ notice to leave. In spite of threats, hundreds of students went to the airport to bid farewell to the fathers in a tearful departure.
Nine months later, the other 33 American Jesuits were similarly expelled from Baghdad College. Army tanks came and surrounded the school, officers sealed all entrances to the buildings, and the fathers were allowed to keep only their residence, the chapel and the cemetery (which were later handed over to the Chaldean patriarchate). It was a cruel and shameful operation that ended a remarkable venture. Needless to say, the Christian community felt devastated by what had happened.
All the pleadings by distinguished people, both lay and clerical, Christian as well as Muslim, did not do any good. Both schools were nationalised, as were all other private institutions in the country. The word used was “iraqised” which indicated that the government took control of the institution without offering any compensation. Apart from the Ba’th socialist ideology, a political factor must’ve contributed to such an action, namely, the 1967 Arab-Israeli war, which resulted in disaster for the Palestinians and brought the Ba’th Party back to power in 1968.
Following the expulsion, the Jesuit fathers were reassigned to other posts, mainly in the United States, but also in the Middle East and elsewhere. Most of the Baghdad College and Al-Hikma alumni remained in Iraq, but some went to America, with many settling in Detroit and Chicago. In 1977 they decided to have a reunion, which was attended by 360 Iraqis and Jesuits. Since then, regular annual reunions have been taking place at various locations in the U.S., Canada and even Britain, and attended by ever increasing numbers. These reunions have proved to be very popular and joyous occasions.
It all reflects how intertwined were the lives of the Jesuits, the students and their families. The Jesuits in Baghdad entered the family lives of their students frequently through their visits to celebrate Christian and Muslim feast days. On the campuses, the fathers participated in debates, dramas, contests and athletics almost as much as the students. They found the Iraqi students warm, humorous, imaginative, receptive, hardworking and appreciative of educational opportunities. For their part, the Iraqis found the Jesuits intelligent, generous, fun loving and dedicated. We can truly say that the mission of the Baghdad Jesuits is still continuing, not in the Jesuit fathers (most of whom have died by now) but in their grateful Iraqi alumni.
RELIGIOUS MISSIONARY FORMATION: SUFI MODEL
RELIGIOUS MISSIONARY FORMATION: SUFI MODEL
Pushpa Anbu SVD
INTRODUCTION
There has been a steep progress in the scientific and technological spheres of life. We are in fact living in the world of Information Technology (IT) and Artificial Intelligence (AI). Our human mind is gifted with the ability to accumulate, assimilate and disseminate knowledge and experiences beyond ones imagination. On the one had we are proud of the progress that take place around us and on the other hand we feel disgusted with the decline of the quality of life and unprecedented unpleasant events. We are constantly confronted with religious fundamentalism, wide spread hate campaign, communal violence, social inequality, poverty, unemployment, and misery of people. The existing context of our situation must enable us to think deeply of our priestly religious missionary formation. In the first part of my presentation, I focus on the general views on formation. In the second part, I introduce and present Sufis (Islamic mystics), who by their life and experiences, by their practices and teachings and by their formation continue to inspire, motivate, stir, encourage, instigate and enthuse thousands of people all over the world and in India. In general, I present Sufism and the Sufis as a model for today’s priestly religious missionary formation in India.
FORMATION: SPIRITUALITY & EXCELLENCE
Today a lot of research and study has already been done on priestly formation. One has to be very clear about the objective of the formation. Pope John Paul II in his Post – Synodal Apostolic Exhortation Vita Consecrata, says: “The primary objective of the formation process is to prepare people for the total consecration of themselves to God in the following of Christ, at the service of the Church’s mission” (n.65). In undergoing such priestly formation in a philosophical or theological Institute, one needs to realize that acquiring mere intellectual knowledge is not sufficient. The formator and the formee together should be able to reflect on the basic question, ‘What is the goal of formation?’ The entire scheme of the formation and the curriculum should aim at preparing the seminarians to be a better person, to be able to think logically and act responsibly. Spiritual formation should become part and parcel of the entire formation programme.
Addressing the Presidents of SVD Universities in the world in Papua New Guinea on May 7, 2007, the Superior General of the Congregation said that there is an intimate connection between studies that one should find out – be it philosophy or Secular Degree and Spirituality. In fact study is a spiritual affair. Through our study and research, we try to search for truth and in the meantime we encounter with truth itself. Study is a way to holiness, sanctity. Every Formation house has to be a center of spirituality, a center for spiritual renewal. A culture of spiritual enhancement has to be evolved (Arnoldus Nota, June 2007). The quality of our priestly / religious life would very much depend on our inner, esoteric life.
In pursuing philosophical / theological / secular university studies, one should focus to strive for a culture of excellence – to be an excellent religious, to be an excellent priest not just a mediocre. From the initial stages of formation, the formee are helped to make every effort to be excellent in their priestly, religious missionary life and service, to be excellent in their pastoral service, to be excellent in their proclamation of the Word, as we are the Divine Word Missionaries, to be excellent in their efforts at dialogue with others (fourfold Prophetic Dialogue: with the poor and the marginalized, culture, faith-seekers and religious traditions), and to be excellent in their personal spirituality.
Why do we need to strive at the culture of spirituality and culture of excellence? In what way do the young seminarians differ from the youth of today? What is it that today’s youth long for in a secular world? Today the youth of our time often forget the classical values such as honor, honesty, valor, discipline, respect and reverence, patriotism, principle, commitment, sacrifice of self … We all know what they aspire and compete for - may be comfort, easy life, cell phones, computers, i Pods, MP 3, digital cameras … They are fascinated by what is practical, instant and the relative. By this they lose the very essence of life. That is why Pope Benedict often speaks of ‘dictatorship of relativism’. Relativism is one of the dangers in our society. The youth of today, whom we train in our seminaries, should be different from others. Our formation has to be based on deep reflection, sound knowledge, proper orientation and sincere efforts.
FORMATION: CONTEXT
Today the key concept in the area of formation is ‘contextual’ formation. Contextualization is focused on the context. We need to situate our context in a wider / global context than merely local situation. The world has become a global village. We are to go beyond the context of economic and social levels to local, personal, cultural and religious areas. The Charter of Priestly Formation in India (1988) mentions: “At every stage of their formation the seminarians should be in touch with the societal, cultural and religious realities in which they are.” The way we form ourselves, will help us to find God wherever He is. We are to get out of our parochial and insular mind. We need to gradually strip off our narrow mindedness to be more generous and to be a people-centered priest in future. In the words Rabindranath Tagore: “He is there where the tiller is tilling the hard ground and where the path maker is breaking the stones. He is with them in sun and in shower, and his garment is covered with dust. Put off thy holy mantle and even like him come down on the dusty soil”(1). A formee of today is expected to be at the service of others, not as if sitting on the high pedestals of an elevated high priest. He is to be a servant, a model, and an ideal to others.
Jesus the Risen Lord, constantly guides the Church by his constant presence. As young future priests, we are to keep alive the memory of Jesus, hopes and expectations of others. We need to keep alive the vigor, strength and youthfulness in order to face the challenges and concerns of our priestly life vis-à-vis new age, post-modernism and consumerist tendencies. In the Words of Pope Benendict XVI, “The church is alive. And the Church is youthful. It carries in itself the future of the world and so it shows the way to the future to each one of us. The Church is alive and we see it: we experience the joy that the Risen One has promised to his own” (Homily, April 24, 2006). The Church needs young and vibrant priests, open and elastic. Experiences show that there are elderly who are still young and young who are already old. We are called to sustain the youthfulness of the Church. Lets grow old gracefully in age, which is inevitable, but lets reverse this natural law by becoming more young in our attitudes, aspirations and interests.
Recently some one posed a question, “Is our priestly life a permanent formation or permanent frustration?” As a matter of fact, our life is either permanent formation or permanent frustration. In human life there isn’t any inertia stage, we either move forward or go behind in life. At an individual level there is mental rigidity, attitude of self-sufficiency, fear, regressive phenomena, monotony and boredom. In the young there is certain narcissism, a drop in passion for taking risks, rigidity and less of comprehension (2). This may be one of the serious problems of priestly / religious life today. Constant reflection and inner awakening are important in the priestly formation. Our life has to be a life of constant formation.
SUFISM: ISLAMIC MYSTICISM
In this paper I would like to present Sufis as a model for our priestly formation. Now what is Sufism? Sufism is ‘pearl’ within the shell of Islam. It is the spiritual ‘power house’ of Islam. The doctrines of Sufism involve devotion to Allah, love of Allah and service to mankind. ‘A Sufi is the one who is purified by love, is pure, and he that is absorbed in the Beloved and has abandoned all else’ (3). They are constantly moved by the love of God and all else are only next to God. Their life is a life of constant growth, a life of permanent formation.
Sufi or Sufism comes from the word ‘Suf’ which means wool or woolen garment. So it is said that Sufis are those spiritual people, who wore woolen garments as a mark of simple way of life, embracing voluntary poverty and to distinct themselves as a separate group of people. According to Arabic lexicon, the word ‘Tasawwafa’ means, ‘the donned woolen dress’. One, who wears wool over his purity, gives his lusts the taste of tyranny and having overthrown the world, journeys in the pathway of the chosen one (4). The lives of Sufis help us to look into the past through the eyes of the present situation. In the world of agony and pain, inequality and disparity, turmoil and disturbances they remain a shining example, letting out rays of hope, peace, joy and contentment. Sufis are the role model for the Muslims of the world, and have special place of honour and respect in the lives of the people.
SUFISM: ESSENCE
The essence of Sufism signifies the spiritual quest in people. The stress is on ‘experience.’ ‘One has to leave what one has in his head and give what one has in his hand and not to recoil from whatsoever befalls’ is the rhythm of Sufi life (5). For them there is a valley of quest, valley of love, valley of intuitive knowledge and valley of detachment. The object of Sufism is to speak aright, act aright, and think aright. Their search for Allah, search for wisdom, inclination towards obedience, renunciation, piety, submission, reticence, vigilance and temperance make them wise and perfect. Their entire life revolves around the knowledge of Allah, imitation of Allah, and life in Allah. Our life of formation in no way different from that of the Sufis. The basic end of our formation is to reach these goals.
Their exemplary life, made others to follow them more closely. It is said that example is better then precepts for example comes from the superior and convinced personality. Holy Quran mentions: “Obey God and obey the Prophet and obey those among you, who hold the command / authority” (4:59). In their silence, quietude, tranquility, quintessence and serenity they constantly shed light on the other, spreading the fragrance of spiritual flavor. Their ultimate aim is to live in the presence and pleasure of Allah. Their life is a glory in wretchedness, riches in poverty, Lordship in servitude, satiety in hunger, clothedness in nakedness, freedom in slavery, life in death and sweetness in bitterness. Their life is a life of encouragement adding meaning to the life of the followers.
According to Al-Muzayyin, ‘Sufism is submission to Allah’ (6). Every Muslim is called to surrender oneself to Allah. The word ‘Islam’ means ‘surrender or submission.’ As gold is tested in fire, as the true color of tea leaves are known when boiled well in water, a genuine Sufi undergoes everything possible to surrender himself to Allah. By means of concentration, contemplation, meditation and intensive prayer, Sufi enters into the comprehensive reality of life where he sheds off his “I – ness”. Other principles of Sufism are: striving, retreat and seclusion, fear of Allah, humility, compassion, hope, truthfulness, bountifulness and generosity, love and longing (7). Their rule of life was in having little of food, a little of sleep, a little of rest, a little of talk, and a little of association with the people. It is said that great people do not make noise and noise does not make people necessarily great.
SUFI ROAD: SEARCH
On the way to acquire perfection, Sufis involve in various rigorous practices. Their inner longing and deep quest make them to realize their deep call within. The life of a Sufi can be compared to a journey, a journey into one’s self like our formation programme. There are two technical terms in Sufism, which need our consideration. They are: Hal (state) and maqam (stage / station). State is something that descends from God into man’s heart. It denotes the favour and grace, which God bestows upon the heart of His servant, and which are not connected with any mortification on the latter’s part. It belongs to the category of gift. Station / stage belongs to the category of acts. One has to fulfill the obligation appertaining to that of station and tries to keep it until he comprehends its perfection. One should not quit his station without fulfilling the obligations thereof. There is a description of seven stages / stations, which one has to undergo one by one strictly: repentance, abstinence, renunciation, poverty, patience, trust in God and satisfaction (8). These seven stages lead Sufis to the realization that Allah is the root of everything. It is like peeling out an almond. First comes the shell, then comes the second shell, and then the core and finally the essence of the core, the oil of the almond.
Fana and baqah are two important terminologies in Sufism. Junaid defines Sufism as, “that God should make you die from yourself and should make you live in him.” (9) This clearly defines Fana and Baqa. Fana would mean annihilation or disappearance. It is in connection with one’s self. Baqah means abiding or continuing in God. One has to empty oneself, so as to abide in God. So the purpose of fana and baqah in Sufism is pure unification. In its process, one’s human will which is worldly, individual, selfish, weak and fragile is transformed. It is good to recall the words of St. Paul on the self-emptying nature of Jesus. “Jesus had the nature of God, but did not deem equality with God. He humbled himself and walked the path of obedience, even to death on the cross” (cf Phil 2:6-11)
As Guru – Shishya, Master – disciple system is important in the Indian tradition, so also it is in the Islamic Mysticism. In the formation of a Sufi novice (murid), there is a spiritual head, leader (Pir), who guides and helps the novice to enter into the Sufi life. The Pir is the preceptor, teacher, guide and knower. The Pir leads his murid in his journey from the intellectual perception of Allah to an intimate emotional involvement of ones personal experiences, as companion (10). The murid is ready to leave behind all his self-interests, motives, desires, ambitions and place himself before the pir, as clay in the hands of a potter, as a plant in the hands of a gardener. In the course of time pir helps the murid to shed off all worldly attractions and allurements such as name, fame, power, and prestige and help them to experience the divine by means of meditation, remembrance of God and life in the vision of Allah. Jalaluddin Rumi, a Sufi and a poet philosopher, writes about the need of a pir:
Without an escort you are bewildered (even) on a road
You have traveled many times (before):
Do not, then travel alone on a way that you have not
Seen at all, do not turn your head away from the guide (11)
A formee constantly needs to be guided. Could it be compared to the moderators or spiritual guides / directors?
SUFI KHANQAH
In Sufism gradual formation of tariqah (road or path) developed. It indicates a group of respected, longing dedicated and sincere individuals who are open to the mystical way of life. A tariqah was a practical method to guide a seeker by tracing a way of thought, feeling, and action, leading though a succession of stages to experience the reality (12). At a given period of time, pir gathers murids around him and begins to preach and live together. The murids look up to their pir for guidance. The murids perpetuate their name, their way of preaching, experiences and rule of life. Tariqah paved way for the establishment of Silsilah (Sufi Order). In every silsilah the pir – murid relationship is very important. It is due to this continuous unbroken chain of propagation of Sufi teaching that Sufism today remains a vital spiritual force in the Islamic world. For the growth of silsilah, the need for Sufi abode (khanqah) arose.
It is in Khanqah that the murids and Sufis gathered and lived together with their pir. It served as the center of learning, meeting and as a place of hospitality. They led a simple life, spoke to the people in their own language, and shared the joys and sorrows of the common people in the khanqah. It exercised a deep social, political, economic and cultural influence on the people. The khanqah was a place of spiritual growth, where the Sufis lived together in true spirit, perpetuating and propagating the true spirit of Islam. No profane talk would be encouraged in Khanqah. The inmates are helped to discipline their character.
SUFISM: TOWARDS JUST SOCIETY
Sufis underwent formation in order to involve themselves in the lives of the people. Their contribution to the society will be clear by knowing the socio-religious conditions of the time (12th & 13th Century). In the medieval period Indian society was groaning under the oppressive weight of caste system and the economic exploitation. Principle of equality and fraternity were unknown. Untouchability was in practice. Difference between rich and poor, haves and have-nots were seen clearly. It is at this background that Sufi movement gained its momentum and brought solace to the downtrodden and the suffering. Ordinary people could not enjoy the fruit of their labour. Women were oppressed and could not enjoy a well-placed status in the society.
The door of knowledge was closed to poor and the lower groups. Sufis improved the social condition of the people of the time. In the words of Professor Gibb, “Sufism increasingly attracted the creative social and intellectual energies within the community, to become the bearers of social and Cultural Revolution.” (13) There was religious exploitation too. All could not enjoy religious freedom and practice religious customs. With the Sufis, changes began to take place. Islam as a religious system and the Sufis as religious followers took effective steps to eliminate such differences and religious discriminations.
SUFISM & SCHOLARS
In the Islamic world of academic excellence, it is a known fact that any scholar would always be associated with Sufism or sufistic tendencies. For example, Deoband (founded in 1866 by Maulana Mohammad Qasim Nanautvi) is one of the important centres of religious learning, which has received in recent times greater media attention but unfortunately for the wrong reasons. Historically it is the mother institution for all madrasas of the Indian subcontinent. Even today Deoband remains a center of religious learning, which preserves the Islamic identity though religious education. What made the founders of Deoband movement lovable and even venerable was their academic religiosity and at the same time their sufistic spirituality (14). Their unassuming disposition, ascetic style of life and closer contact with the common people in every day life were their characteristic features. Their sufistic devotion, late-night invocations, and spiritual guidance to the seekers are part of their sufistic tendencies. They dedicate themselves to teach sufistic practices and exertions.
Deoband was in fact a center of religious studies as well as a khanqah. In the process of educating the Muslims, the founders in fact combined academic orders, juridical orders, and Sufi orders. The comprehensive vision of Deoband is manifested through these efforts. So much so one can say that the Institution reflects a synthesis of Sufism. To mention some of the Sufi scholars of Deoband are: Maulana Mahmudul Hassan, Maluana Anwar Shah Kashmiri, Maulana Ashraf Ali Thanvi, Maulana Husain Ahmad Madani and Maulana Muhammad Tayyab. It has now come to the known fact that sufistic tendencies are engraved in the lives of the learned scholars of Islam.
SUFI PRACTICES
On their road to perfection, Sufis had their own spiritual exercises and practices. Zikr is one such form of worship, which means constant remembrance. By this constant remembrance of God, His attributes they are able to expel and drive away all that hinder their intimacy with God as it is in the Quran, ‘Remember God much that you may prosper’ (62:10). It helps them to forget themselves and to be in complete absorption in God. Use of Tasbih or Rosary is common among the Sufis. They rigorously involve themselves in fasting, penance and renunciation. Practice of sama’ is a major characteristic of the Chishtiya Silsilah. Sama is the assembly of Sufis with their master and disciples gathered together to listen to the praises of God and perhaps to dance. The divine message that they listen in sama stirs their hearts to seek God. Qawwali songs help them to reach an ecstatic culmination of mystical experiences.
Another rigorous practice is called chilla, which literally means forty days. In this Sufi spends forty days all alone in a cell, in total silence. They face this solitariness with joy, courage, tranquility and peace. There is also rigorous kind of chilla, in which a rope is fastened to the feet of the Sufi and the other end is tied to the branch of a tree. Then the person is lowered into a well, head downwards. He remains in this position for whole night reciting Holy Quran and remembering the names of Allah. Other Sufi practice is called Hadhra, which literally means ‘presence’. It is a dance associated with zikr, performed as an appeal for the presence of God, his prophets and his angels. Khalwa is another practice, which the Sufis are quite familiar with. It means seclusion or retreat, to be in the presence of Allah and to know the will of Allah in life.
CHISHTIYA & THEIR CONTRIBUTION
Chishtiya is one of the Sufi Orders (other Orders: Qadiriya, Suhrawadiya, Naqshabandiya). This Order was founded by Abu Ishaq (d.940 AD) of Syria. Since it was founded in a small town called Chisht in western Afghanistan, it got its name. Khwajah Moinuddin Chishti is a prominent Sufi of the Chishti Order and was responsible for the spread of Chisht Sufi Order in India. Born in Persia in the year 1142 AD, he had from his childhood a strong inclination towards Sufi way of life. After having undergone spiritual training under Khwajah Uthman Harwani, he established himself as a Sufi Par Excellent in Ajmer, Rajasthan by 1191 AD. He lived a simple life in a hut wearing ordinary clothes. At that time Ajmer was the heartland of Hindu regime, a place of political and religious significance. It was due to the presence of a temple and the lake Pushkar. So he had to encounter stiff opposition from the Hindu kings and fanatics. At that time king Prithviraj tried to drive him out of Ajmer, even with the help of a magician, who brought forth snakes and brought down fire rain, but did not succeed. At the end the magician himself bowed down before the Sufi and pleaded for his blessings and joined the company of the Sufis.
Under the Hindu environment of social evils, caste system, discriminations, physical contaminations, he preached the unity of God and to have faith in One God. His simplicity, piety, sympathy and broad-minded humanism and his religious personality attracted many people to him and also to the Islamic faith. Once he seemed to have given life to a dead person. With a mere look at the Sufi, many have changed their life. Once a man came to kill him, but as he looked at the Sufi, he changed himself, repented and entered into the service of the Sufi.
His whole approach was of humanitarian holistic welfare. He believed in complete renunciation. He abstained from pleasures and riches of the world. He refused to accept any grant or gift from kings and rulers. This enabled him to spend more time with the people freely. By denying political company, he said that he was avoiding an evil company. He was able to do the will of Allah more freely and willingly. He was convinced that emphasizing compassion and kindness and service to humanity is service to God. All those who came to meet him, went back contended, consoled and happy. His khanqah was always full of people of every kind. He is reported to have said that the highest and most sublime form of devotion to God is to redress the misery of those in distress, to fulfill the needs of the needy and the helpless and to feed the hungry (15). He said that a person who is blessed with divine favour possesses affection and kindness like that of the sun, generosity liked that of the river and humility like that of the earth.
When people were concerned about the worldly pleasures of life, he invited them towards life of piety and sincerity. The Holy Quran had been the guiding force for him. As he knew the Quran by heart and knew the meaning of it quite well, he proved himself to be a successful preacher. The impact was so much that even after his death many people, kings and rulers visited his dargah (shrine built around the tomb of a Sufi) in Ajmer. Akbar was the first Mughal Emperor to have visited the dargah of Moinuddin Chishti and considered it as a pilgrim center.
Ever since the death of this Sufi in 1236 AD at the age of 97, thousands of people belonging to various religious traditions, visit the dargah every year, especially during the celebration of urz (death anniversary of Sufi). The Sufi had remained leaven in the society and a lighthouse for the wayward sojourners.
Nizamuddin Auliya was another Chishti Sufi (d.1325). He led an extremely simple and austere life and lived on a frugal diet, remaining a celibate through out his life. He had immense compassion and concern for the poor and the destitute. Once on a hot summer day a fire broke out in the village Ghiyaspur, where the Sufi lived. A number of houses belonging to the poor people were reduced to ashes. On hearing of the fire he rushed barefoot to the rooftop of the khanqah, and stood there in the blazing sun for quite a while, watching the scene of devastation with great anguish and distress. After the disaster, he readily helped those affected poor people (16).
Once Khwajah Nizamuddin saw a poor woman drawing water from a well near the river Yamuna. “Why do you take the trouble of drawing water from the well? Why don’t you fetch water from the river?” he asked the lady. The woman answered, “My husband is very poor and we get very little to eat. The water from the Yamuna whets one’s appetite. That’s why I draw water from the well, so that it may reduce our hunger.” When he heard this, his eyes were filled with tears. When he returned to the khanqah he sent a certain amount of money, which would be sufficient to feed her family. Some of the Sufis literally starved when they found some people dying of hunger and starvation in the streets and lanes of the city.
Once a yogi came to visit Nizamuddin in the khanqah. Nizamuddin asked the yogi about his view on the human self. The yogi replied that in his mystic tradition the self comprises of two realms or spheres, the higher and lower realm. The higher realm stretches from the forehead to the navel and the lower realm from the navel to the feet. Perfection can be attained, he said, by the cultivation of qualities such as truth, moral virtues and kindness in the higher realm and moral chastity and purity in the lower realm. Nizamuddin appreciated the yogi’s view.
There was once a Sufi (Shah Fakhruddin), who set out on the Hajj pilgrimage. When he was about to board the ship, a woman stepped forward and said, “I have to get my daughter married, but I have no provision for it, we are in fact starving. What should I do?” The Sufi immediately got off the ship, handed over whatever cash and provision he had for the journey and returned home. Baba Faridudin Ganj Shakar (d.1265) was another Chishti Sufi. Once some one presented him a pair of scissors. He refused take it and said, “Give me a needle instead, for I do not cut, I join” (17). Though he was a scholar in Arabic and Persian, he wrote poetry in Punjabi. He is now very much respected by the Sikhs and Guru Nanak mentions some of his verses in Adi Granth.
India is known for its pervasive cultural diversity and extensive cultural syncretism. The Church is teaching its followers to adapt inculturation. From the initial stages of formation the students are helped and introduced to inculturation. Sufis have contributed much to the development of composite, syncretistic civilizational ethos. Their enduring contribution to inter-cultural understanding and harmony among the various ethnic groups and religious communities in India in general and between Hindus and Muslims in particular, are remarkable. It is the Sufis who brought about a composite culture in the Indian Society. They tried to assimilate and integrate certain local cultures, customs, and traditions. Sufis maintained a peaceful and cordial relations with the Hindus. One of the Sufis used to fondly recite the following couplet of a Hafiz:
If you desire union with God
Make peace with all and sundry, O Hafiz!
Saying “Allah, Allah” to Muslims,
And “Ram, Ram” to Brahmans!
Some of the Sufis displayed remarkable sensitivity towards the cultural traditions of the Hindu community. Shaikh Nagauri not only lived like a simple peasant but also practiced vegetarianism. Another Sufi saint of Gulbarga who lived in the 16th century, desired that anybody who wished to visit his grave for the purpose of offering fatiha (opening Chapter of the Quran) should abstain from meat a day before the visit. This tradition is still observed (18).
A few Sufis imbibed a great deal of influences from the Hindu tradition. One of them (Muhammad Ghaus of Gwalior – d 1563) even lived like a Hindu ascetic for more than 13 years in the hills near Benaras. He was well versed in Sanskrit and familiar with doctrines and tenets of Hinduism as well as the ascetic practices of Hindu yogis. He also wrote books on the methods of self-discipline and breath control practiced by Hindu yogis (19). The Sufis with their message of love, compassion, tolerance, kindness and service to mankind built bridges of understanding, amity and harmony between Hindus and Muslims. They influenced directly or indirectly the minds of the Hindu and Muslim intellectuals, who played a significant role in shaping the destiny of the country. Raja Ram Mohan Roy for example was greatly influenced by Islamic mysticism. He tried to bring about a synthesis of Vedantic philosophy and Sufism. Rabindranth Tagore’s poetry imbibed a great deal from the Sufi singers of Bengal (20). It is quite interesting to note that the foundation stone of the famed Golden Temple at Amritsar was laid by a Sufi Saint, who was specially invited for this purpose from Lahore (21).
Once a disciple who came to meet Nizamuddin, was found to be very much disturbed and worried. When Nizamuddin asked him for the reason, he said that he had not received salary so far. There upon he narrated the anecdote:
There lived a rich Brahman in a city. For some reason the local magistrate ordered all his property to be seized and thus reduced him to penury. He was hard pressed to make both ends meet. One day he came across a friend, “How are you?” asked the friend. “Well and happy” replied the Brahman. The friend astounded as he was retorted, “How can you be happy, when everything has been taken away from you?” The Brahman replied, “So what, my sacred thread is still with me!” (22)
The Sufi was able to appreciate and recognize the spirituality of a Hindu. At the same time, he was able to be in touch with people of other religious traditions in particular with Hindus. Such was the life of Sufis, who continue to inspire and remain a shining model for the entire humanity.
CONCLUSION
Sufism is not a thing of the past, it is not merely just a movement, but rather it is a way of life. Sufis were convinced of what they did and lived for. Fearlessly they preached what they experienced in life. Our priestly religious missionary formation should transform the formees to be fearless preachers of the Good News, “who are themselves on fire with the love of Christ and burning with zeal to make Him known more widely, loved more deeply and followed more closely” (Ecclesia in Asia: 23)
“He who has the will to live will always find an answer to ‘How?’” The Sufis had tremendous will power to go ahead against all odds. The formees today need this kind of unswerving determination, strong and unshakable will and undisturbed motivation.
Sufism teaches of love-oriented life than merely law-oriented life. Today the world is groping in darkness, in the darkness of hatred, detestation, abhorrence, repugnance, repulsion, jealousy and violence. From the initial stages of formation, we should introduce our formees to this kind of oriented life.
Sufis by their life and example belong to a prominent, distinguished group with conviction and commitment to the cause of the poor, the unfortunate and the marginalized. For them service to humanity was service to God. How do we form our formees to understand such secrets of life? Sufis show us the way.
Most of the Sufis never wanted to associate themselves with the rich, kings and rulers, lest they be carried away by their thinking and wishes. They had their own independent thinking, way of life, guided only by the Divine force. Their life was a dynamic and revolutionary one. The youth of today are affected by globalization, secularism, consumerism, comfort culture and individualism. We need independent thinkers, who can act objectively without being colored by external forces for one’s own benefit and gain.
Today the Church teaches about the need for inter-religious dialogue and ecumenism. Sufis are the harbingers of dialogue in India, which has always been a melting pot of various religious traditions. We look up to the Sufis to learn from them, when we discuss about inter-religious dialogue and ecumenism. A formee needs to understand these teachings of the Church from the initial stages of formation. Sufis have set us an example. The importance of dialogue in the Church in India is clear from the words of late Pope John Paul II. This is what he said when he came to India in 1986: “Inter-religious dialogue is a serious part of your apostolic ministry. The Lord calls you to do everything possible to promote this dialogue according to the commitment of the Church.”
For years we have been discussing about inculturation and Indianization. But the life of the Sufis represent the emergence of composite culture in India. Can we not conclude by saying with conviction that the Sufi model could be one of the models for priestly formation?
END NOTES
Rabindranath Tagore, Gitanjali, (Mumbai: Better Yourself Books, 2001), 11.
Gennaro Cicchese, “Young Religious: Challenges and Hopes,” Charisms in Unity, n1, Vol XIV (January / April 2006): 9
Al – Hujwiri, Kash Al-Mahjub, R.A Nicholson (tr), (Karachi: Darul Ishaat, 1990) 34.
Arthur John Arberry, The Doctrine of the Sufis (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1930) 10
Nicholson RA, The Mystics of Islam (London: Routledge and Kegan Paul Ltd., 1966) 27.
Al-Qushayri, Principles of Sufism, B.R. Von Shlegell (tr), (Berkeley: Mizan Press) 305
Ibid, 1.
Al – Hujwiri, Kash Al-Mahjub, 181.
Ibid, 70-71.
Syyid Athar Abbas Rizvi, A History of Sufism in India (New Delhi: Munshiram Manoharlal Publishers, 1978) 99-100.
Jalaluddin Rumi, The Mathnawi, R.A, Nicholson (tr) (London: vol II, 1925) 160.
Julian Baldick, Mystical Islam (London: I.B.Tauris & Co, 1989) 55.
Gibb, “An Interpretation of Islamic History,” Journal of World History, Vol 1., No.1, (January 1985) 59
Mohammad Azam Qasmi, Sufism and the Founders of Deoband (Bikaner: Konrad Adenauer Foundation, 2003) 2
K.A. Nizami, Some Aspects of Religion and Politics in Inida During the 13th Century (Bombay: Asia Publishing House, 1961) 185
A.R. Momin, The Role of Sufis in Fostering Inter-Cultural Understanding (Bikaner: Konrad Adenauer Foundation, 2003) 3
Ibid, 4
HK Sherwani, Dakhni Culture (Delhi, 1971) 30-31.
M.Mujeeb, The Indian Muslims (London: George Allen and Unwin, 1967) 59.
SAH Abidi, Sufism in India (Delhi: 1992) 81-87
Annemarie Schimmel, The influence of Sufism on Indo-Muslim poetry (Pennsylvania: Pennsylvania State University Press, 1971) 196
A.R. Momin, The Role of Sufis in Fostering Inter-Cultural Understanding, 6.
Pushpa Anbu SVD
INTRODUCTION
There has been a steep progress in the scientific and technological spheres of life. We are in fact living in the world of Information Technology (IT) and Artificial Intelligence (AI). Our human mind is gifted with the ability to accumulate, assimilate and disseminate knowledge and experiences beyond ones imagination. On the one had we are proud of the progress that take place around us and on the other hand we feel disgusted with the decline of the quality of life and unprecedented unpleasant events. We are constantly confronted with religious fundamentalism, wide spread hate campaign, communal violence, social inequality, poverty, unemployment, and misery of people. The existing context of our situation must enable us to think deeply of our priestly religious missionary formation. In the first part of my presentation, I focus on the general views on formation. In the second part, I introduce and present Sufis (Islamic mystics), who by their life and experiences, by their practices and teachings and by their formation continue to inspire, motivate, stir, encourage, instigate and enthuse thousands of people all over the world and in India. In general, I present Sufism and the Sufis as a model for today’s priestly religious missionary formation in India.
FORMATION: SPIRITUALITY & EXCELLENCE
Today a lot of research and study has already been done on priestly formation. One has to be very clear about the objective of the formation. Pope John Paul II in his Post – Synodal Apostolic Exhortation Vita Consecrata, says: “The primary objective of the formation process is to prepare people for the total consecration of themselves to God in the following of Christ, at the service of the Church’s mission” (n.65). In undergoing such priestly formation in a philosophical or theological Institute, one needs to realize that acquiring mere intellectual knowledge is not sufficient. The formator and the formee together should be able to reflect on the basic question, ‘What is the goal of formation?’ The entire scheme of the formation and the curriculum should aim at preparing the seminarians to be a better person, to be able to think logically and act responsibly. Spiritual formation should become part and parcel of the entire formation programme.
Addressing the Presidents of SVD Universities in the world in Papua New Guinea on May 7, 2007, the Superior General of the Congregation said that there is an intimate connection between studies that one should find out – be it philosophy or Secular Degree and Spirituality. In fact study is a spiritual affair. Through our study and research, we try to search for truth and in the meantime we encounter with truth itself. Study is a way to holiness, sanctity. Every Formation house has to be a center of spirituality, a center for spiritual renewal. A culture of spiritual enhancement has to be evolved (Arnoldus Nota, June 2007). The quality of our priestly / religious life would very much depend on our inner, esoteric life.
In pursuing philosophical / theological / secular university studies, one should focus to strive for a culture of excellence – to be an excellent religious, to be an excellent priest not just a mediocre. From the initial stages of formation, the formee are helped to make every effort to be excellent in their priestly, religious missionary life and service, to be excellent in their pastoral service, to be excellent in their proclamation of the Word, as we are the Divine Word Missionaries, to be excellent in their efforts at dialogue with others (fourfold Prophetic Dialogue: with the poor and the marginalized, culture, faith-seekers and religious traditions), and to be excellent in their personal spirituality.
Why do we need to strive at the culture of spirituality and culture of excellence? In what way do the young seminarians differ from the youth of today? What is it that today’s youth long for in a secular world? Today the youth of our time often forget the classical values such as honor, honesty, valor, discipline, respect and reverence, patriotism, principle, commitment, sacrifice of self … We all know what they aspire and compete for - may be comfort, easy life, cell phones, computers, i Pods, MP 3, digital cameras … They are fascinated by what is practical, instant and the relative. By this they lose the very essence of life. That is why Pope Benedict often speaks of ‘dictatorship of relativism’. Relativism is one of the dangers in our society. The youth of today, whom we train in our seminaries, should be different from others. Our formation has to be based on deep reflection, sound knowledge, proper orientation and sincere efforts.
FORMATION: CONTEXT
Today the key concept in the area of formation is ‘contextual’ formation. Contextualization is focused on the context. We need to situate our context in a wider / global context than merely local situation. The world has become a global village. We are to go beyond the context of economic and social levels to local, personal, cultural and religious areas. The Charter of Priestly Formation in India (1988) mentions: “At every stage of their formation the seminarians should be in touch with the societal, cultural and religious realities in which they are.” The way we form ourselves, will help us to find God wherever He is. We are to get out of our parochial and insular mind. We need to gradually strip off our narrow mindedness to be more generous and to be a people-centered priest in future. In the words Rabindranath Tagore: “He is there where the tiller is tilling the hard ground and where the path maker is breaking the stones. He is with them in sun and in shower, and his garment is covered with dust. Put off thy holy mantle and even like him come down on the dusty soil”(1). A formee of today is expected to be at the service of others, not as if sitting on the high pedestals of an elevated high priest. He is to be a servant, a model, and an ideal to others.
Jesus the Risen Lord, constantly guides the Church by his constant presence. As young future priests, we are to keep alive the memory of Jesus, hopes and expectations of others. We need to keep alive the vigor, strength and youthfulness in order to face the challenges and concerns of our priestly life vis-à-vis new age, post-modernism and consumerist tendencies. In the Words of Pope Benendict XVI, “The church is alive. And the Church is youthful. It carries in itself the future of the world and so it shows the way to the future to each one of us. The Church is alive and we see it: we experience the joy that the Risen One has promised to his own” (Homily, April 24, 2006). The Church needs young and vibrant priests, open and elastic. Experiences show that there are elderly who are still young and young who are already old. We are called to sustain the youthfulness of the Church. Lets grow old gracefully in age, which is inevitable, but lets reverse this natural law by becoming more young in our attitudes, aspirations and interests.
Recently some one posed a question, “Is our priestly life a permanent formation or permanent frustration?” As a matter of fact, our life is either permanent formation or permanent frustration. In human life there isn’t any inertia stage, we either move forward or go behind in life. At an individual level there is mental rigidity, attitude of self-sufficiency, fear, regressive phenomena, monotony and boredom. In the young there is certain narcissism, a drop in passion for taking risks, rigidity and less of comprehension (2). This may be one of the serious problems of priestly / religious life today. Constant reflection and inner awakening are important in the priestly formation. Our life has to be a life of constant formation.
SUFISM: ISLAMIC MYSTICISM
In this paper I would like to present Sufis as a model for our priestly formation. Now what is Sufism? Sufism is ‘pearl’ within the shell of Islam. It is the spiritual ‘power house’ of Islam. The doctrines of Sufism involve devotion to Allah, love of Allah and service to mankind. ‘A Sufi is the one who is purified by love, is pure, and he that is absorbed in the Beloved and has abandoned all else’ (3). They are constantly moved by the love of God and all else are only next to God. Their life is a life of constant growth, a life of permanent formation.
Sufi or Sufism comes from the word ‘Suf’ which means wool or woolen garment. So it is said that Sufis are those spiritual people, who wore woolen garments as a mark of simple way of life, embracing voluntary poverty and to distinct themselves as a separate group of people. According to Arabic lexicon, the word ‘Tasawwafa’ means, ‘the donned woolen dress’. One, who wears wool over his purity, gives his lusts the taste of tyranny and having overthrown the world, journeys in the pathway of the chosen one (4). The lives of Sufis help us to look into the past through the eyes of the present situation. In the world of agony and pain, inequality and disparity, turmoil and disturbances they remain a shining example, letting out rays of hope, peace, joy and contentment. Sufis are the role model for the Muslims of the world, and have special place of honour and respect in the lives of the people.
SUFISM: ESSENCE
The essence of Sufism signifies the spiritual quest in people. The stress is on ‘experience.’ ‘One has to leave what one has in his head and give what one has in his hand and not to recoil from whatsoever befalls’ is the rhythm of Sufi life (5). For them there is a valley of quest, valley of love, valley of intuitive knowledge and valley of detachment. The object of Sufism is to speak aright, act aright, and think aright. Their search for Allah, search for wisdom, inclination towards obedience, renunciation, piety, submission, reticence, vigilance and temperance make them wise and perfect. Their entire life revolves around the knowledge of Allah, imitation of Allah, and life in Allah. Our life of formation in no way different from that of the Sufis. The basic end of our formation is to reach these goals.
Their exemplary life, made others to follow them more closely. It is said that example is better then precepts for example comes from the superior and convinced personality. Holy Quran mentions: “Obey God and obey the Prophet and obey those among you, who hold the command / authority” (4:59). In their silence, quietude, tranquility, quintessence and serenity they constantly shed light on the other, spreading the fragrance of spiritual flavor. Their ultimate aim is to live in the presence and pleasure of Allah. Their life is a glory in wretchedness, riches in poverty, Lordship in servitude, satiety in hunger, clothedness in nakedness, freedom in slavery, life in death and sweetness in bitterness. Their life is a life of encouragement adding meaning to the life of the followers.
According to Al-Muzayyin, ‘Sufism is submission to Allah’ (6). Every Muslim is called to surrender oneself to Allah. The word ‘Islam’ means ‘surrender or submission.’ As gold is tested in fire, as the true color of tea leaves are known when boiled well in water, a genuine Sufi undergoes everything possible to surrender himself to Allah. By means of concentration, contemplation, meditation and intensive prayer, Sufi enters into the comprehensive reality of life where he sheds off his “I – ness”. Other principles of Sufism are: striving, retreat and seclusion, fear of Allah, humility, compassion, hope, truthfulness, bountifulness and generosity, love and longing (7). Their rule of life was in having little of food, a little of sleep, a little of rest, a little of talk, and a little of association with the people. It is said that great people do not make noise and noise does not make people necessarily great.
SUFI ROAD: SEARCH
On the way to acquire perfection, Sufis involve in various rigorous practices. Their inner longing and deep quest make them to realize their deep call within. The life of a Sufi can be compared to a journey, a journey into one’s self like our formation programme. There are two technical terms in Sufism, which need our consideration. They are: Hal (state) and maqam (stage / station). State is something that descends from God into man’s heart. It denotes the favour and grace, which God bestows upon the heart of His servant, and which are not connected with any mortification on the latter’s part. It belongs to the category of gift. Station / stage belongs to the category of acts. One has to fulfill the obligation appertaining to that of station and tries to keep it until he comprehends its perfection. One should not quit his station without fulfilling the obligations thereof. There is a description of seven stages / stations, which one has to undergo one by one strictly: repentance, abstinence, renunciation, poverty, patience, trust in God and satisfaction (8). These seven stages lead Sufis to the realization that Allah is the root of everything. It is like peeling out an almond. First comes the shell, then comes the second shell, and then the core and finally the essence of the core, the oil of the almond.
Fana and baqah are two important terminologies in Sufism. Junaid defines Sufism as, “that God should make you die from yourself and should make you live in him.” (9) This clearly defines Fana and Baqa. Fana would mean annihilation or disappearance. It is in connection with one’s self. Baqah means abiding or continuing in God. One has to empty oneself, so as to abide in God. So the purpose of fana and baqah in Sufism is pure unification. In its process, one’s human will which is worldly, individual, selfish, weak and fragile is transformed. It is good to recall the words of St. Paul on the self-emptying nature of Jesus. “Jesus had the nature of God, but did not deem equality with God. He humbled himself and walked the path of obedience, even to death on the cross” (cf Phil 2:6-11)
As Guru – Shishya, Master – disciple system is important in the Indian tradition, so also it is in the Islamic Mysticism. In the formation of a Sufi novice (murid), there is a spiritual head, leader (Pir), who guides and helps the novice to enter into the Sufi life. The Pir is the preceptor, teacher, guide and knower. The Pir leads his murid in his journey from the intellectual perception of Allah to an intimate emotional involvement of ones personal experiences, as companion (10). The murid is ready to leave behind all his self-interests, motives, desires, ambitions and place himself before the pir, as clay in the hands of a potter, as a plant in the hands of a gardener. In the course of time pir helps the murid to shed off all worldly attractions and allurements such as name, fame, power, and prestige and help them to experience the divine by means of meditation, remembrance of God and life in the vision of Allah. Jalaluddin Rumi, a Sufi and a poet philosopher, writes about the need of a pir:
Without an escort you are bewildered (even) on a road
You have traveled many times (before):
Do not, then travel alone on a way that you have not
Seen at all, do not turn your head away from the guide (11)
A formee constantly needs to be guided. Could it be compared to the moderators or spiritual guides / directors?
SUFI KHANQAH
In Sufism gradual formation of tariqah (road or path) developed. It indicates a group of respected, longing dedicated and sincere individuals who are open to the mystical way of life. A tariqah was a practical method to guide a seeker by tracing a way of thought, feeling, and action, leading though a succession of stages to experience the reality (12). At a given period of time, pir gathers murids around him and begins to preach and live together. The murids look up to their pir for guidance. The murids perpetuate their name, their way of preaching, experiences and rule of life. Tariqah paved way for the establishment of Silsilah (Sufi Order). In every silsilah the pir – murid relationship is very important. It is due to this continuous unbroken chain of propagation of Sufi teaching that Sufism today remains a vital spiritual force in the Islamic world. For the growth of silsilah, the need for Sufi abode (khanqah) arose.
It is in Khanqah that the murids and Sufis gathered and lived together with their pir. It served as the center of learning, meeting and as a place of hospitality. They led a simple life, spoke to the people in their own language, and shared the joys and sorrows of the common people in the khanqah. It exercised a deep social, political, economic and cultural influence on the people. The khanqah was a place of spiritual growth, where the Sufis lived together in true spirit, perpetuating and propagating the true spirit of Islam. No profane talk would be encouraged in Khanqah. The inmates are helped to discipline their character.
SUFISM: TOWARDS JUST SOCIETY
Sufis underwent formation in order to involve themselves in the lives of the people. Their contribution to the society will be clear by knowing the socio-religious conditions of the time (12th & 13th Century). In the medieval period Indian society was groaning under the oppressive weight of caste system and the economic exploitation. Principle of equality and fraternity were unknown. Untouchability was in practice. Difference between rich and poor, haves and have-nots were seen clearly. It is at this background that Sufi movement gained its momentum and brought solace to the downtrodden and the suffering. Ordinary people could not enjoy the fruit of their labour. Women were oppressed and could not enjoy a well-placed status in the society.
The door of knowledge was closed to poor and the lower groups. Sufis improved the social condition of the people of the time. In the words of Professor Gibb, “Sufism increasingly attracted the creative social and intellectual energies within the community, to become the bearers of social and Cultural Revolution.” (13) There was religious exploitation too. All could not enjoy religious freedom and practice religious customs. With the Sufis, changes began to take place. Islam as a religious system and the Sufis as religious followers took effective steps to eliminate such differences and religious discriminations.
SUFISM & SCHOLARS
In the Islamic world of academic excellence, it is a known fact that any scholar would always be associated with Sufism or sufistic tendencies. For example, Deoband (founded in 1866 by Maulana Mohammad Qasim Nanautvi) is one of the important centres of religious learning, which has received in recent times greater media attention but unfortunately for the wrong reasons. Historically it is the mother institution for all madrasas of the Indian subcontinent. Even today Deoband remains a center of religious learning, which preserves the Islamic identity though religious education. What made the founders of Deoband movement lovable and even venerable was their academic religiosity and at the same time their sufistic spirituality (14). Their unassuming disposition, ascetic style of life and closer contact with the common people in every day life were their characteristic features. Their sufistic devotion, late-night invocations, and spiritual guidance to the seekers are part of their sufistic tendencies. They dedicate themselves to teach sufistic practices and exertions.
Deoband was in fact a center of religious studies as well as a khanqah. In the process of educating the Muslims, the founders in fact combined academic orders, juridical orders, and Sufi orders. The comprehensive vision of Deoband is manifested through these efforts. So much so one can say that the Institution reflects a synthesis of Sufism. To mention some of the Sufi scholars of Deoband are: Maulana Mahmudul Hassan, Maluana Anwar Shah Kashmiri, Maulana Ashraf Ali Thanvi, Maulana Husain Ahmad Madani and Maulana Muhammad Tayyab. It has now come to the known fact that sufistic tendencies are engraved in the lives of the learned scholars of Islam.
SUFI PRACTICES
On their road to perfection, Sufis had their own spiritual exercises and practices. Zikr is one such form of worship, which means constant remembrance. By this constant remembrance of God, His attributes they are able to expel and drive away all that hinder their intimacy with God as it is in the Quran, ‘Remember God much that you may prosper’ (62:10). It helps them to forget themselves and to be in complete absorption in God. Use of Tasbih or Rosary is common among the Sufis. They rigorously involve themselves in fasting, penance and renunciation. Practice of sama’ is a major characteristic of the Chishtiya Silsilah. Sama is the assembly of Sufis with their master and disciples gathered together to listen to the praises of God and perhaps to dance. The divine message that they listen in sama stirs their hearts to seek God. Qawwali songs help them to reach an ecstatic culmination of mystical experiences.
Another rigorous practice is called chilla, which literally means forty days. In this Sufi spends forty days all alone in a cell, in total silence. They face this solitariness with joy, courage, tranquility and peace. There is also rigorous kind of chilla, in which a rope is fastened to the feet of the Sufi and the other end is tied to the branch of a tree. Then the person is lowered into a well, head downwards. He remains in this position for whole night reciting Holy Quran and remembering the names of Allah. Other Sufi practice is called Hadhra, which literally means ‘presence’. It is a dance associated with zikr, performed as an appeal for the presence of God, his prophets and his angels. Khalwa is another practice, which the Sufis are quite familiar with. It means seclusion or retreat, to be in the presence of Allah and to know the will of Allah in life.
CHISHTIYA & THEIR CONTRIBUTION
Chishtiya is one of the Sufi Orders (other Orders: Qadiriya, Suhrawadiya, Naqshabandiya). This Order was founded by Abu Ishaq (d.940 AD) of Syria. Since it was founded in a small town called Chisht in western Afghanistan, it got its name. Khwajah Moinuddin Chishti is a prominent Sufi of the Chishti Order and was responsible for the spread of Chisht Sufi Order in India. Born in Persia in the year 1142 AD, he had from his childhood a strong inclination towards Sufi way of life. After having undergone spiritual training under Khwajah Uthman Harwani, he established himself as a Sufi Par Excellent in Ajmer, Rajasthan by 1191 AD. He lived a simple life in a hut wearing ordinary clothes. At that time Ajmer was the heartland of Hindu regime, a place of political and religious significance. It was due to the presence of a temple and the lake Pushkar. So he had to encounter stiff opposition from the Hindu kings and fanatics. At that time king Prithviraj tried to drive him out of Ajmer, even with the help of a magician, who brought forth snakes and brought down fire rain, but did not succeed. At the end the magician himself bowed down before the Sufi and pleaded for his blessings and joined the company of the Sufis.
Under the Hindu environment of social evils, caste system, discriminations, physical contaminations, he preached the unity of God and to have faith in One God. His simplicity, piety, sympathy and broad-minded humanism and his religious personality attracted many people to him and also to the Islamic faith. Once he seemed to have given life to a dead person. With a mere look at the Sufi, many have changed their life. Once a man came to kill him, but as he looked at the Sufi, he changed himself, repented and entered into the service of the Sufi.
His whole approach was of humanitarian holistic welfare. He believed in complete renunciation. He abstained from pleasures and riches of the world. He refused to accept any grant or gift from kings and rulers. This enabled him to spend more time with the people freely. By denying political company, he said that he was avoiding an evil company. He was able to do the will of Allah more freely and willingly. He was convinced that emphasizing compassion and kindness and service to humanity is service to God. All those who came to meet him, went back contended, consoled and happy. His khanqah was always full of people of every kind. He is reported to have said that the highest and most sublime form of devotion to God is to redress the misery of those in distress, to fulfill the needs of the needy and the helpless and to feed the hungry (15). He said that a person who is blessed with divine favour possesses affection and kindness like that of the sun, generosity liked that of the river and humility like that of the earth.
When people were concerned about the worldly pleasures of life, he invited them towards life of piety and sincerity. The Holy Quran had been the guiding force for him. As he knew the Quran by heart and knew the meaning of it quite well, he proved himself to be a successful preacher. The impact was so much that even after his death many people, kings and rulers visited his dargah (shrine built around the tomb of a Sufi) in Ajmer. Akbar was the first Mughal Emperor to have visited the dargah of Moinuddin Chishti and considered it as a pilgrim center.
Ever since the death of this Sufi in 1236 AD at the age of 97, thousands of people belonging to various religious traditions, visit the dargah every year, especially during the celebration of urz (death anniversary of Sufi). The Sufi had remained leaven in the society and a lighthouse for the wayward sojourners.
Nizamuddin Auliya was another Chishti Sufi (d.1325). He led an extremely simple and austere life and lived on a frugal diet, remaining a celibate through out his life. He had immense compassion and concern for the poor and the destitute. Once on a hot summer day a fire broke out in the village Ghiyaspur, where the Sufi lived. A number of houses belonging to the poor people were reduced to ashes. On hearing of the fire he rushed barefoot to the rooftop of the khanqah, and stood there in the blazing sun for quite a while, watching the scene of devastation with great anguish and distress. After the disaster, he readily helped those affected poor people (16).
Once Khwajah Nizamuddin saw a poor woman drawing water from a well near the river Yamuna. “Why do you take the trouble of drawing water from the well? Why don’t you fetch water from the river?” he asked the lady. The woman answered, “My husband is very poor and we get very little to eat. The water from the Yamuna whets one’s appetite. That’s why I draw water from the well, so that it may reduce our hunger.” When he heard this, his eyes were filled with tears. When he returned to the khanqah he sent a certain amount of money, which would be sufficient to feed her family. Some of the Sufis literally starved when they found some people dying of hunger and starvation in the streets and lanes of the city.
Once a yogi came to visit Nizamuddin in the khanqah. Nizamuddin asked the yogi about his view on the human self. The yogi replied that in his mystic tradition the self comprises of two realms or spheres, the higher and lower realm. The higher realm stretches from the forehead to the navel and the lower realm from the navel to the feet. Perfection can be attained, he said, by the cultivation of qualities such as truth, moral virtues and kindness in the higher realm and moral chastity and purity in the lower realm. Nizamuddin appreciated the yogi’s view.
There was once a Sufi (Shah Fakhruddin), who set out on the Hajj pilgrimage. When he was about to board the ship, a woman stepped forward and said, “I have to get my daughter married, but I have no provision for it, we are in fact starving. What should I do?” The Sufi immediately got off the ship, handed over whatever cash and provision he had for the journey and returned home. Baba Faridudin Ganj Shakar (d.1265) was another Chishti Sufi. Once some one presented him a pair of scissors. He refused take it and said, “Give me a needle instead, for I do not cut, I join” (17). Though he was a scholar in Arabic and Persian, he wrote poetry in Punjabi. He is now very much respected by the Sikhs and Guru Nanak mentions some of his verses in Adi Granth.
India is known for its pervasive cultural diversity and extensive cultural syncretism. The Church is teaching its followers to adapt inculturation. From the initial stages of formation the students are helped and introduced to inculturation. Sufis have contributed much to the development of composite, syncretistic civilizational ethos. Their enduring contribution to inter-cultural understanding and harmony among the various ethnic groups and religious communities in India in general and between Hindus and Muslims in particular, are remarkable. It is the Sufis who brought about a composite culture in the Indian Society. They tried to assimilate and integrate certain local cultures, customs, and traditions. Sufis maintained a peaceful and cordial relations with the Hindus. One of the Sufis used to fondly recite the following couplet of a Hafiz:
If you desire union with God
Make peace with all and sundry, O Hafiz!
Saying “Allah, Allah” to Muslims,
And “Ram, Ram” to Brahmans!
Some of the Sufis displayed remarkable sensitivity towards the cultural traditions of the Hindu community. Shaikh Nagauri not only lived like a simple peasant but also practiced vegetarianism. Another Sufi saint of Gulbarga who lived in the 16th century, desired that anybody who wished to visit his grave for the purpose of offering fatiha (opening Chapter of the Quran) should abstain from meat a day before the visit. This tradition is still observed (18).
A few Sufis imbibed a great deal of influences from the Hindu tradition. One of them (Muhammad Ghaus of Gwalior – d 1563) even lived like a Hindu ascetic for more than 13 years in the hills near Benaras. He was well versed in Sanskrit and familiar with doctrines and tenets of Hinduism as well as the ascetic practices of Hindu yogis. He also wrote books on the methods of self-discipline and breath control practiced by Hindu yogis (19). The Sufis with their message of love, compassion, tolerance, kindness and service to mankind built bridges of understanding, amity and harmony between Hindus and Muslims. They influenced directly or indirectly the minds of the Hindu and Muslim intellectuals, who played a significant role in shaping the destiny of the country. Raja Ram Mohan Roy for example was greatly influenced by Islamic mysticism. He tried to bring about a synthesis of Vedantic philosophy and Sufism. Rabindranth Tagore’s poetry imbibed a great deal from the Sufi singers of Bengal (20). It is quite interesting to note that the foundation stone of the famed Golden Temple at Amritsar was laid by a Sufi Saint, who was specially invited for this purpose from Lahore (21).
Once a disciple who came to meet Nizamuddin, was found to be very much disturbed and worried. When Nizamuddin asked him for the reason, he said that he had not received salary so far. There upon he narrated the anecdote:
There lived a rich Brahman in a city. For some reason the local magistrate ordered all his property to be seized and thus reduced him to penury. He was hard pressed to make both ends meet. One day he came across a friend, “How are you?” asked the friend. “Well and happy” replied the Brahman. The friend astounded as he was retorted, “How can you be happy, when everything has been taken away from you?” The Brahman replied, “So what, my sacred thread is still with me!” (22)
The Sufi was able to appreciate and recognize the spirituality of a Hindu. At the same time, he was able to be in touch with people of other religious traditions in particular with Hindus. Such was the life of Sufis, who continue to inspire and remain a shining model for the entire humanity.
CONCLUSION
Sufism is not a thing of the past, it is not merely just a movement, but rather it is a way of life. Sufis were convinced of what they did and lived for. Fearlessly they preached what they experienced in life. Our priestly religious missionary formation should transform the formees to be fearless preachers of the Good News, “who are themselves on fire with the love of Christ and burning with zeal to make Him known more widely, loved more deeply and followed more closely” (Ecclesia in Asia: 23)
“He who has the will to live will always find an answer to ‘How?’” The Sufis had tremendous will power to go ahead against all odds. The formees today need this kind of unswerving determination, strong and unshakable will and undisturbed motivation.
Sufism teaches of love-oriented life than merely law-oriented life. Today the world is groping in darkness, in the darkness of hatred, detestation, abhorrence, repugnance, repulsion, jealousy and violence. From the initial stages of formation, we should introduce our formees to this kind of oriented life.
Sufis by their life and example belong to a prominent, distinguished group with conviction and commitment to the cause of the poor, the unfortunate and the marginalized. For them service to humanity was service to God. How do we form our formees to understand such secrets of life? Sufis show us the way.
Most of the Sufis never wanted to associate themselves with the rich, kings and rulers, lest they be carried away by their thinking and wishes. They had their own independent thinking, way of life, guided only by the Divine force. Their life was a dynamic and revolutionary one. The youth of today are affected by globalization, secularism, consumerism, comfort culture and individualism. We need independent thinkers, who can act objectively without being colored by external forces for one’s own benefit and gain.
Today the Church teaches about the need for inter-religious dialogue and ecumenism. Sufis are the harbingers of dialogue in India, which has always been a melting pot of various religious traditions. We look up to the Sufis to learn from them, when we discuss about inter-religious dialogue and ecumenism. A formee needs to understand these teachings of the Church from the initial stages of formation. Sufis have set us an example. The importance of dialogue in the Church in India is clear from the words of late Pope John Paul II. This is what he said when he came to India in 1986: “Inter-religious dialogue is a serious part of your apostolic ministry. The Lord calls you to do everything possible to promote this dialogue according to the commitment of the Church.”
For years we have been discussing about inculturation and Indianization. But the life of the Sufis represent the emergence of composite culture in India. Can we not conclude by saying with conviction that the Sufi model could be one of the models for priestly formation?
END NOTES
Rabindranath Tagore, Gitanjali, (Mumbai: Better Yourself Books, 2001), 11.
Gennaro Cicchese, “Young Religious: Challenges and Hopes,” Charisms in Unity, n1, Vol XIV (January / April 2006): 9
Al – Hujwiri, Kash Al-Mahjub, R.A Nicholson (tr), (Karachi: Darul Ishaat, 1990) 34.
Arthur John Arberry, The Doctrine of the Sufis (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1930) 10
Nicholson RA, The Mystics of Islam (London: Routledge and Kegan Paul Ltd., 1966) 27.
Al-Qushayri, Principles of Sufism, B.R. Von Shlegell (tr), (Berkeley: Mizan Press) 305
Ibid, 1.
Al – Hujwiri, Kash Al-Mahjub, 181.
Ibid, 70-71.
Syyid Athar Abbas Rizvi, A History of Sufism in India (New Delhi: Munshiram Manoharlal Publishers, 1978) 99-100.
Jalaluddin Rumi, The Mathnawi, R.A, Nicholson (tr) (London: vol II, 1925) 160.
Julian Baldick, Mystical Islam (London: I.B.Tauris & Co, 1989) 55.
Gibb, “An Interpretation of Islamic History,” Journal of World History, Vol 1., No.1, (January 1985) 59
Mohammad Azam Qasmi, Sufism and the Founders of Deoband (Bikaner: Konrad Adenauer Foundation, 2003) 2
K.A. Nizami, Some Aspects of Religion and Politics in Inida During the 13th Century (Bombay: Asia Publishing House, 1961) 185
A.R. Momin, The Role of Sufis in Fostering Inter-Cultural Understanding (Bikaner: Konrad Adenauer Foundation, 2003) 3
Ibid, 4
HK Sherwani, Dakhni Culture (Delhi, 1971) 30-31.
M.Mujeeb, The Indian Muslims (London: George Allen and Unwin, 1967) 59.
SAH Abidi, Sufism in India (Delhi: 1992) 81-87
Annemarie Schimmel, The influence of Sufism on Indo-Muslim poetry (Pennsylvania: Pennsylvania State University Press, 1971) 196
A.R. Momin, The Role of Sufis in Fostering Inter-Cultural Understanding, 6.
Reflections on Jewish-Christian Dialogue
Reflections on Jewish-Christian Dialogue
Leo D. Lefebure
I have been involved in Jewish-Christian conversations since a high school religion assignment led me to interview the rabbi at a synagogue near my home on the southeast side of Chicago. As part of our high school religion program, our class also visited a synagogue in Skokie and listened to the rabbi there; I was formed in an atmosphere of respect for Judaism and interest in fostering Jewish-Christian relations. My introductory freshman theology course included Martin Buber’s I and Thou as the first text and was popularly referred to as “the Buber course.” My first Jewish teachers were at the Divinity School of the University of Chicago, where I learned much about the Jewish tradition from Professor Jon Levenson and the late Rabbi Arnold Jacob Wolf. Rabbi Wolf’s pointed lectures on modern Jewish thought and history decisively shaped my fundamental understanding of Judaism and modernity. Later, Professor Levenson read with careful attention my Ph.D. dissertation proposal on the biblical wisdom trajectory, pelted me with probing, critical questions, and acknowledged, “There’s something in it,” noting that not many students of Christian systematic theology could do serious reflection on the Hebrew Bible.
After I finished my doctoral studies I joined the faculty of the University of St. Mary of the Lake in Mundelein, IL, northwest of Chicago. During my first fall on the faculty, there was a Catholic-Jewish priest-rabbi retreat, during which I got to know a number of the rabbis in the Chicago area, including Rabbi Herman Schaalman, who would become a good friend, and his son-in-law, Rabbi Ira Youdovin. What struck me most on this retreat was the extreme sensitivity of the issue of Catholic-Jewish marriages for the rabbis. At the time there was only one Reform rabbi in the Chicago area who would preside at such a marriage; he had already been in many bitter fights with the other rabbis and did not want to go through another; so he and I took a walk in the woods on the beautiful fall afternoon when the topic was to be discussed.
These retreats became cherished annual events, and in time we welcomed Protestant and Episcopal clergy as well. We not only spoke together but we prayed together. I recall standing in a chapel at Mundelein between two rabbis, praying the Psalms and the Lord’s Prayer together. For the rabbis, the prayer that Jesus taught was a perfectly good Jewish prayer. On the last retreat I attended at Mundelein, a Greek Orthodox priest joined us for the first time as part of a new initiative of the Greek Orthodox Archdiocese of Chicago to enter Jewish-Christian dialogue. The Orthodox priest recounted his own experience of earlier studying Hebrew in seminary. A friend of his asked him why he would study Hebrew, and he replied that he wanted to understand Jesus as a Jew and his Jewish heritage. The friend insisted that Jesus was not a Jew; Jesus was obviously a Greek Orthodox because throughout the New Testament, Jesus speaks Greek. The two argued back and forth for a while, and finally the friend conceded, “Well, maybe Jesus was a Jew; but if this is true, don’t tell the Church leaders about it!”
I also became a member of the Chicago Area Jewish-Catholic Scholars Group, where we discussed a wide variety of theological topics, such as covenant and mysticism. At one session I presented a paper on Pope John Paul II’s encyclical, Fides et Ratio (Faith and Reason), discussing the integration of reason in Catholic theology. I stressed the importance of the little word “et” (and). After I finished, Rabbi Hayim Gorem Perelmuter noted analogies to the Jewish tradition, stressing the similar importance of the Hebrew connective “vav” (and) in Judaism. However, Rabbi Schaalman sharply disagreed, arguing that in Judaism philosophical reason has always been marginal—either apologetic or ancillary. At that, the contest was on between two of the most distinguished senior rabbis in the Chicago area, neither of whom would back down; and I, like the other Catholics present, was a happy bystander listening to the vigorous rabbinic debate. As often happened, I learned much about the diversity of the Jewish tradition from the disagreements among the rabbis themselves.
After the Vatican issued the statement, We Remember: On the Shoah, I participated in Catholic Theological Union’s consultation for Edward Cardinal Cassidy, President of the Pontifical Commission for Religious Relations with Jews, attended by about thirty Jewish and Catholic scholars. In response to the many criticisms of the document, Cassidy explained the difficulties in drafting the statement and stressed that it was one moment in an ongoing process. Later, when I taught at Fordham University, I delivered a paper on Martin Buber and interreligious dialogue at the Museum of Jewish Heritage in lower Manhattan, in conjunction with the publication of Rabbi Dennis Ross’s book on Buber (God in Our Relationships: Spirituality between People from the Writings of Martin Buber). I have also collaborated with Jewish leaders in a variety of multi-lateral interreligious organizations.
When I moved to Our Lady of Victory Parish in July 2005, Werner and Marleen Hein immediately invited me to attend the local Catholic-Jewish dialogue, and I have been delighted to participate ever since. Participation in this dialogue has continued to enhance my appreciation of the wisdom of the Jewish tradition, and I appreciate the friendships that have been formed through our discussions. This dialogue has complemented my other experiences of dialogue and has not represented any radical change of mind from my earlier experiences.
For many years, I have come to appreciate the immense significance of the Jewish tradition both for Christian origins and for the ongoing history of Christianity. This relationship, which has frequently been so troubled, is a continuing source of blessing and challenge for Christians. In the historic animosities, I see the worst dangers of Christian triumphalism and a profound failure to understand the teachings of Jesus. In the movement toward reconciliation and understanding in recent decades I see tremendous hope.
Recently, what has most changed my thinking about Jewish-Christian relations has been the historical work of scholars like Daniel Boyarin and others who have explored the close, overlapping relationships between (or dual identity of) Jews and Christians during the ancient and early medieval periods. The boundary lines that were thought to have been clearly established in the first century C.E. turn out to have been either porous or, for many, non-existent for centuries. To my mind, we have barely begun to probe the implications of these discoveries for Christian identity and the relationships between Jews and Christians today.
Leo D. Lefebure
I have been involved in Jewish-Christian conversations since a high school religion assignment led me to interview the rabbi at a synagogue near my home on the southeast side of Chicago. As part of our high school religion program, our class also visited a synagogue in Skokie and listened to the rabbi there; I was formed in an atmosphere of respect for Judaism and interest in fostering Jewish-Christian relations. My introductory freshman theology course included Martin Buber’s I and Thou as the first text and was popularly referred to as “the Buber course.” My first Jewish teachers were at the Divinity School of the University of Chicago, where I learned much about the Jewish tradition from Professor Jon Levenson and the late Rabbi Arnold Jacob Wolf. Rabbi Wolf’s pointed lectures on modern Jewish thought and history decisively shaped my fundamental understanding of Judaism and modernity. Later, Professor Levenson read with careful attention my Ph.D. dissertation proposal on the biblical wisdom trajectory, pelted me with probing, critical questions, and acknowledged, “There’s something in it,” noting that not many students of Christian systematic theology could do serious reflection on the Hebrew Bible.
After I finished my doctoral studies I joined the faculty of the University of St. Mary of the Lake in Mundelein, IL, northwest of Chicago. During my first fall on the faculty, there was a Catholic-Jewish priest-rabbi retreat, during which I got to know a number of the rabbis in the Chicago area, including Rabbi Herman Schaalman, who would become a good friend, and his son-in-law, Rabbi Ira Youdovin. What struck me most on this retreat was the extreme sensitivity of the issue of Catholic-Jewish marriages for the rabbis. At the time there was only one Reform rabbi in the Chicago area who would preside at such a marriage; he had already been in many bitter fights with the other rabbis and did not want to go through another; so he and I took a walk in the woods on the beautiful fall afternoon when the topic was to be discussed.
These retreats became cherished annual events, and in time we welcomed Protestant and Episcopal clergy as well. We not only spoke together but we prayed together. I recall standing in a chapel at Mundelein between two rabbis, praying the Psalms and the Lord’s Prayer together. For the rabbis, the prayer that Jesus taught was a perfectly good Jewish prayer. On the last retreat I attended at Mundelein, a Greek Orthodox priest joined us for the first time as part of a new initiative of the Greek Orthodox Archdiocese of Chicago to enter Jewish-Christian dialogue. The Orthodox priest recounted his own experience of earlier studying Hebrew in seminary. A friend of his asked him why he would study Hebrew, and he replied that he wanted to understand Jesus as a Jew and his Jewish heritage. The friend insisted that Jesus was not a Jew; Jesus was obviously a Greek Orthodox because throughout the New Testament, Jesus speaks Greek. The two argued back and forth for a while, and finally the friend conceded, “Well, maybe Jesus was a Jew; but if this is true, don’t tell the Church leaders about it!”
I also became a member of the Chicago Area Jewish-Catholic Scholars Group, where we discussed a wide variety of theological topics, such as covenant and mysticism. At one session I presented a paper on Pope John Paul II’s encyclical, Fides et Ratio (Faith and Reason), discussing the integration of reason in Catholic theology. I stressed the importance of the little word “et” (and). After I finished, Rabbi Hayim Gorem Perelmuter noted analogies to the Jewish tradition, stressing the similar importance of the Hebrew connective “vav” (and) in Judaism. However, Rabbi Schaalman sharply disagreed, arguing that in Judaism philosophical reason has always been marginal—either apologetic or ancillary. At that, the contest was on between two of the most distinguished senior rabbis in the Chicago area, neither of whom would back down; and I, like the other Catholics present, was a happy bystander listening to the vigorous rabbinic debate. As often happened, I learned much about the diversity of the Jewish tradition from the disagreements among the rabbis themselves.
After the Vatican issued the statement, We Remember: On the Shoah, I participated in Catholic Theological Union’s consultation for Edward Cardinal Cassidy, President of the Pontifical Commission for Religious Relations with Jews, attended by about thirty Jewish and Catholic scholars. In response to the many criticisms of the document, Cassidy explained the difficulties in drafting the statement and stressed that it was one moment in an ongoing process. Later, when I taught at Fordham University, I delivered a paper on Martin Buber and interreligious dialogue at the Museum of Jewish Heritage in lower Manhattan, in conjunction with the publication of Rabbi Dennis Ross’s book on Buber (God in Our Relationships: Spirituality between People from the Writings of Martin Buber). I have also collaborated with Jewish leaders in a variety of multi-lateral interreligious organizations.
When I moved to Our Lady of Victory Parish in July 2005, Werner and Marleen Hein immediately invited me to attend the local Catholic-Jewish dialogue, and I have been delighted to participate ever since. Participation in this dialogue has continued to enhance my appreciation of the wisdom of the Jewish tradition, and I appreciate the friendships that have been formed through our discussions. This dialogue has complemented my other experiences of dialogue and has not represented any radical change of mind from my earlier experiences.
For many years, I have come to appreciate the immense significance of the Jewish tradition both for Christian origins and for the ongoing history of Christianity. This relationship, which has frequently been so troubled, is a continuing source of blessing and challenge for Christians. In the historic animosities, I see the worst dangers of Christian triumphalism and a profound failure to understand the teachings of Jesus. In the movement toward reconciliation and understanding in recent decades I see tremendous hope.
Recently, what has most changed my thinking about Jewish-Christian relations has been the historical work of scholars like Daniel Boyarin and others who have explored the close, overlapping relationships between (or dual identity of) Jews and Christians during the ancient and early medieval periods. The boundary lines that were thought to have been clearly established in the first century C.E. turn out to have been either porous or, for many, non-existent for centuries. To my mind, we have barely begun to probe the implications of these discoveries for Christian identity and the relationships between Jews and Christians today.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)