A Jesuit Community in Ankara

Jean-Marc Balhan, SJ

Short history

The Society of Jesus has been present in Turkey since its beginnings. Jesuits established a residence in the Ottoman capital in 1583. They served Christian convicts and were also entrusted with a school. From Istanbul, they spread from the Greek islands to Persia. At that time, they understood their mission as that of strengthening the Catholic community and of working “for the unity of Christians" in the mentality of the time. After the suppression of the Society in 1772, the majority of the houses were closed and it was not until 1881 that the Jesuits came back to Turkey, working mainly at the service of Armenian Christians. New residences or schools were then established especially in Central Anatolia. After the First World War and the War of Independence that followed, the Jesuit houses closed progressively, with the exception of that of Istanbul which continued until 1983.

In 1985, academic exchanges started between the theological faculty of the University of Ankara and the Gregorian University in Rome. In this context, Jesuit academics regularly visited Ankara to give lectures and seminars, while Turkish academics came to teach at the Gregorian University, an initiative that continues to this day. These meetings having proved successful, the idea was born to have in Turkey, a place from which we could deepen these initial contacts and start again a presence of the Society in this country for the sake of interreligious dialogue. This happened in October 2000.

Parish work and interreligious dialogue

Started especially in view of interreligious dialogue, the Jesuit community is first of all in charge of the only Catholic parish of the Turkish capital. Indeed, in March 2006, our previous General, Fr. Kolvenbach, told us during his visit to Ankara, that our main mission was to be a Jesuit parish, which means open to the world, with a strong emphasis on interreligious dialogue, spiritual, by paying a special attention to the accompaniment of people, and social, by paying attention to the most disadvantaged.

In this country gathering 75 million people, Turkish Christians are a very small minority (around 0.15%, that is 100,000 people), half of them being Armenians. They live mainly in Istanbul, Izmir and in the South. In Ankara, they are only a few hundreds, plus the foreigners working mainly in embassies, universities, business as well as some migrants. The Ankara Parish is part of the Apostolic Vicariate of Istanbul, a city situated 450 km from Ankara, which means that the Jesuits are very far from their “colleagues”.

The Ankara Parish is made of two communities: national and international. The Turkish speaking community gathers in the chapel situated at the first floor of the residence. It is open during the week and welcomes everyone. Christians and Muslims come to pray, to lighten a candle, to ask questions, visit the church, speak about their problems and even to be delivered from “a curse”. We are visited also by Muslim students and by imams who come to our church for a formation before being sent to some European countries. We are also invited from time to time for a lecture for the sake of “dialogue. As for the international community, coming from all around the world (Philippines, Americas, Europe and more recently Africa), it gathers in the church linked to the Apostolic Nuntiature, and celebrates mainly  in English. It is made of expatriates who live in Turkey for a short period of time. Some more variety has been added to it recently as African countries have opened embassies in the Turkish capital and as African students have started receiving scholarships for studies in Turkey. Indeed Turkey has recently started business relations with many countries in Africa.

The main challenges of the Turkish speaking congregation are communion and  formation. Indeed, made of several different rites, some Catholics others not, we are a very ecumenical community. Indeed there are no Eastern church in the region. As far as formation is concerned, the Catholic Church being very small and with a clergy  made mainly of foreigners, it is not always easy to find nor produce material in Turkish.

At the service of refugees

A service to refugees was started in Ankara in 2009 in response to the increasing needs of vulnerable urban refugees coming mainly from Iraq, Iran, Afghanistan and Somalia. A small program had already started in 2002, with the help of the international community of the Ankara Parish lead by the newly arrived Jesuit community. However the necessity was felt to professionalize the work by offering a stable structure. That is how the Jesuit Refugee Service (JRS) got into the picture in October 2009, working in collaboration with Kader, a local NGO. There is now in Ankara a small core team of three people.

Thanks to the international Catholic parish, we have a good operating centre, offering space for welcoming and gathering people for registration or education purposes as well as a repository to store goods to be distributed. It puts Kader/JRS in touch with the international community from where a good number of volunteers is recruited. Moreover, being the administrative capital of the country, Ankara hosts the UNHCR and other organizations with whom Kader/JRS is in regular contact for advocacy, fund raising and awareness rising activities purposes.

The parish program was started as a monthly “distribution Sunday” where emergency help  was provided to vulnerable urban refugees, whatever their culture or religious background. Kader/JRS develops the program mainly in three areas: it continues emergency aid for the most vulnerable, offers an education program based mainly on language teaching (Turkish for first integration in Turkey, and English for future resettlement, for approximately 50 people) and develops a referral system allowing refugees in need to be heard because of their vulnerability. Outside of that it also provides psycho-social activities (sports, counseling, etc.). Both emergency help and education program are implemented in Ankara with the help of international and local volunteers. In 2011, JRS started a second center in Kırıkkale, a city situated 80 km from Ankara. These last year, thousands of Afghans have arrived in Turkey without almost any means; seven hundreds of them were sent to Kırıkkalle and are living in very poor conditions. Kader/JRS runs there its full program (emergency help, education, psycho-social activities, legal information and referral).

Conclusion

Started mainly in view of interreligious dialogue, the Jesuit community in Ankara has also seen itself more and more involved with pastoral and social work.  Regarding pastoral work, it looks now for means to improve Christian formation in Turkish. As far as Kader/JRS is concerned, with the Syrian crisis and the presence in Turkey of tens of thousands of Syrians, it looks now for means to be of some help for the most vulnerable among them, when continuing to help the other refugees. 

Development of Virtuous Circles:  the Building Bridges Seminar under

Rowan Williams

Lucinda Mosher, Th.D.

In April 2012, Rowan Williams convened a Building Bridges seminar for the tenth and final time as Archbishop of Canterbury. Stewardship of the project has been transferred to Georgetown University, with that institution’s Berkley Center for Religion, Peace, & World Affairs providing support. At this point of transition, it is fitting, therefore, to review the history of this annual meeting of Christian and Muslim scholars, with special attention to the legacy of Williams’ leadership. 

The inaugural meeting of the Building Bridges Seminar was a two-day colloquium at Lambeth Palace, London, in January 2002, in response to the 9/11/01 attacks on the United States of America. Its outcomes included affirmation that an ongoing Christian-Muslim dialogue was possible and desirable, and generation of topics meriting further exploration in such a dialogue. Going forward, seminar venues would alternate between Muslim- and Christian-majority locations. Meetings were called for three days rather than two, as had been the case in 2002. This project became an immediate and ongoing priority for Dr. Williams when he succeeded George Carey in 2003.

Under Rowan Williams, Building Bridges convened in Doha, Qatar (2003 and 2011); Washington, DC (2004, 2006, 2010); Sarajevo (2005); Singapore (2007); Rome (2008); Istanbul (2009); and London and Canterbury (2012). Each year, a particular theological theme was the focus of deliberations: scriptures (2003); prophecy (2004); the common good (2005); divine justice, political authority, and religious freedom (2006); humanity (2007); the interpretation and translation of revelation (2008); science and religion (2009); tradition and modernity (2010); prayer (2011); and death, resurrection, and human destiny (2012). Participants are provided with a booklet of materials to be read in preparation for the seminar: usually, passages from the Bible and the Qur’an, plus other items from the Christian and Islamic traditions. Occasionally, participants are asked to write short essays which become part of the resource booklet. For example, in preparation for Building Bridges 2003, attendees wrote on when, where, how and with whom they read scripture; in 2011, they wrote on what prayer meant to them personally; and in 2012, on resources their own religion had given them for responding to the deaths of others or the prospect of their own death.

The Building Bridges pattern is to have three pairs of public lectures; pairs of shorter lectures in closed plenary; and many sessions of intense conversation in pre-assigned small groups which remain constant throughout a given meeting. An exception was the Rome meeting (2008), at which all lectures were given in closed plenary; there were no public sessions. Generally, small-group time was spent in close reading of texts—usually, scripture. An exception was the Sarajevo meeting, at which small-group discussions were driven by questions emerging from lectures on topics related to faith and national identity, governance and justice, and ecological concerns. 

During Rowan Williams’ decade as convenor of Building Bridges, 133 scholars (63 Muslims; 70 Christians) have attended. In a given year, the circle of participants numbered from 22 (in 2008) to 31 (in 2010). True dialogue is a process more so than an event. Therefore, a consistent roster is an asset. However, with changing topics comes the need for participants with particular expertise; and with changing venues comes the desire to include scholars from the host institution or country. Thus Building Bridges has developed a core of scholars who have been invited numerous times; eight scholars were present at seven of the ten seminars convened by Rowan Williams. However, most on the total list have participated only once or twice. 

A diverse roster enriches a formal dialogue. Building Bridges organizers have always desired an equal number of Christians and Muslims at the table; in years when this was not achieved, factors such as illness or difficulty in obtaining a visa were the typical reasons. Nearly a quarter of the participants have been women; furthermore, each year the list of lecturers included at least one woman—and often, several. Theologically, each circle has been varied. Every year, the group of Muslims has included Shi‘i as well as Sunni. In addition to Anglican Christians, Roman Catholics were involved from the beginning; Coptic, Lutheran, Methodist, Orthodox, and Reformed Christians have also attended. Participants have hailed from some 28 countries—many more, if we factor in country of origin as well as country in which they were working at the time.

Gillian Stamp, who facilitated the first Building Bridges seminar in 2002, described the project in terms of “appreciative conversation”—exchange during which one remains rooted in one’s background “whilst at the same time reaching beyond it,” all the while demonstrating “courage, grace, imagination and sensitivity in addressing and retreating from painful issues.” Such conversation’s goal is not arrival at “consensus or compromise;” rather, its purpose is “to sustain relationships of mutual respect.”[1] Her description still obtains; the Building Bridges Seminar has indeed been an exercise in appreciative conversation year after year. Because it is a dialogue which combines academic rigor with religious conviction, Building Bridges is, as Rowan Williams has explained, an ongoing project of “working together, studying sacred texts together, and above all learning to listen to one another speaking to God and also to watch one another speaking to God. It is a style which has been patient, affirming, and celebrating.”[2] What develops as a result, he suggests, is “a virtuous circle,” rather than a vicious one.[3]

The Building Bridges Seminar has been compared to other ongoing dialogical projects, particularly The Societies for Scriptural Reasoning, Groupe de Recherches Islamo-Chretien, the annual International Theology Conference sponsored by the Center for Religious Pluralism of the Shalom Harman Institute, and the work of the Elijah Interfaith Institute. While methodologies do overlap, the Building Bridges Seminar differs from some of these in that it is a dialogue of Christian and Muslim scholars only, and from at least one of them as it is conducted in English.

What of the legacy of Building Bridges? Its impact, insist several of the repeat participants, has been wide-ranging—albeit indirect. Participants have invited each other to conferences they have planned; they have endorsed each other’s books; they have incorporated insights gained from this dialogue into their teaching and writing; they have required their students to read from the volumes of Building Bridges proceedings.

In fact, the book-series spawned by the Building Bridges Seminar is an important aspect of the project’s legacy to date. The first volume, The Road Ahead, allows the reader to overhear much of what transpired in the inaugural, exploratory meeting of the seminar, for which a framework was provided by five general themes: the place of Christians and Muslims relative to each other, to the world, and to God; learning from 1000-plus years of Christian-Muslim interaction; problems and opportunities each community faces in a pluralistic world; challenges which transformations in societies pose to each religion; and setting a joint agenda for future Christian-Muslim dialogue and common action.[4]

Where The Road Ahead provides excellent foundational information about Christian-Muslim interaction, succeeding volumes are more on the order of handbooks for text-based dialogues on specific topics.[5] Beginning with the proceedings of the 2003 seminar in Qatar, each book provides the agenda of that seminar, the roster of participants, information about the seminar context, transcripts of public and closed-plenary lectures, the texts discussed, and in some cases, summaries of small-group discussions. Beginning with the 2003 meeting, a hallmark of Building Bridges seminars has been appreciative conversation about often-challenging pairs of scripture passages. However, where several well-received textbooks on dialogical reading of the Bible and the Qur’an focus on major personalities such as Abraham, Moses, or Mary, Building Bridges most often brings Bible and Qur’an passages together around a theological concept. Here, for example, are the texts for the six small-group discussions during the 2004 seminar:

1) The Calling of Prophets:  Suratu Tā Hā  (No. 20):1-36 and Exodus 3:1-14;

2) The Calling of Apostles: Suratu’l-Muzzammil (No. 73) and Acts 9:1-22;

3)  Prophecy and Conflict: Suratu Hūd (No. 11): 25-49 and Jeremiah 26;

4) Prophecy and Society: Suratu’sh-Shu‘ara’ (No. 26): 25-49 and 1Kings 21;

5) Mary and Jesus: Bearing the Word: Suratu Maryam (No. 19): 16-36 and Luke 1:26-38;

6)  The End of Prophecy: Suratu’l-Ahzāb (No. 33): 40 with Suratu’l-Mā’idah (No. 5): 3 and Hebrews 1:1-4.

For the Rome seminar (2008) on Communicating the Word: Revelation, Translation, and Interpretation in Christianity and Islam, close reading of scripture was the focus of five sessions. The constellation of scripture verses for discussion of “Revelation in Israel” joined Deuteronomy 7:1-11 and Isaiah 49:1-6 with Suratu’l-Baqarah (2) 47-57 and Suratu’l-Mā’idah (No. 5) 44-48; for consideration of revelation in Christ versus revelation in the Qur’an, 1 John 1:1-4, Matthew 28:16-20, and John 16:12-15 were in conversation with Suratu’l-An‘am (6) 91-92, Suratu’l-Furqān (25) 32, Suratu’l-Anbiyā’ (21) 107, Suratu Sād (38) 87; and Suratu’l-Ahzāb (33) 40.

Paperback editions of the proceedings of seminars from 2002 through 2009 are now in print; those for 2010, 2011, and 2012 will be forthcoming in 2013 and 2014. Many will find it helpful that portions (or, in some cases, the entirety) of the books in print have been made available for free download as PDFs from the Berkley Center website: http://berkleycenter.georgetown.edu/resources/networks/building_bridges. Several volumes have been formatted for e-readers; over time, Georgetown University Press has made some of these e-editions available free-of-charge through Amazon.com. In addition, some of the seminar sourcebooks are downloadable as PDFs as well. Therefore, because of the Building Bridges initiative, a significant body of literature on Christian-Muslim dialogue is now easily accessible worldwide, readily available to scholars, institutions, or congregations interested in mounting their own dialogues.[6]

At least as important is that the books on the seminars 2003–2012 (once those for years 2010, 2011, and 2012 are released) offer a window on a decade of Rowan Williams’ thinking about and contribution to Christian-Muslim dialogue. All feature items by Rowan Williams himself: introductory or summary remarks from a particular seminar; a preface or afterword penned later; or the transcript of a seminar lecture, such as his “Christian Theology and Other Faiths” found in Scriptures in Dialogue: Christians and Muslims studying the Bible and the Qur’an together;[7] or his “Analysing Atheism: Unbelief and the World of Faiths,” which opens Chapter One of Bearing the Word: Prophecy in Biblical and Qur’anic Perspective.[8] In short, the book series records Rowan Williams’ legacy as convenor of Building Bridges seminars for an entire decade.

When asked why they make time for Building Bridges, Muslim participants often cite the uniqueness of the opportunity to dialogue with the Archbishop of Canterbury himself. The full participation of the holder of that office has been a sign of the seriousness of the project. For ten years, Rowan Williams—who himself embodies deep knowledge of and commitment to his own religious tradition while simultaneously demonstrating commitment to learning about the tradition of others—invited scholars “to encounter one another not simply as scholars, but as readers and hearers of the word.”  When they do so, he explains, they “meet the other person not as a scholar, not as the representative of some alien set of commitments, but as someone seeking to open their mind and their heart to the self communication of God. And to meet another person in that light and in that way is to meet them at a very deep level.”[9] In such deep meetings, a virtuous circle has been formed and nurtured. With the 2013 meeting in Qatar, the Building Bridges Seminar begins a new phase, no longer associated with the office of the Archbishop of Canterbury and without the presence of Rowan Williams at the table of dialogue. Be that as it may, facilitating appreciative conversation for the purpose of sustaining a virtuous circle of Christian and Muslim scholar-believers will remain the goal.

Lucinda Mosher is the Assistant Academic Director of Building Bridges Seminar and a Faculty Associate for Interfaith Studies at Hartford Seminary (USA).

---

[1] Gillian Stamp coined the term “appreciative conversation” in commenting on the first Building Bridges seminar; see her “And they returned by another route,” in The Road Ahead, 112, 113.

[2] Rowan Williams, Preface to Prayer, op. cit.

[3] Dr. Rowan Williams, “Remarks at dinner to mark the Fifth Building Bridges seminar,” 28 March 2006. http://rowanwilliams.archbishopofcanterbury.org/articles.php/1275/justice-and-rights-fifth-building-bridges-seminar-opening-remarks. Last accessed: 27 January 2013.

[4] Michael Ipgrave, editor, The Road Ahead (London: Church House Publishing, 2002).

[5] Proceedings of the 2003 and 2004 seminars were published by Church House Publishing (London); digests of seminars 2005-2012 have been published by, or are forthcoming from, Georgetown University Press.

[6] With the transition to Georgetown University’s stewardship, with Professor Daniel Madigan as seminar convenor, Building Bridges proceedings will be published online only.

[7] Michael Ipgrave, editor; Church House Publishing, 2004.

[8] Ibid.

[9] Rowan Williams, Remarks at the Opening Session of the 6^th Building Bridges Seminar, 4 December 2007, National University of Singapore.

Emmanuel Crowther:  a little bird that announced a new spring in Christian-Muslim relations in India

Victor Edwin SJ

Introduction

Emmanuel Crowther (d. 1990) was a Sri Lankan Jesuit. He studied theology at St Mary's College of Theology (Kurseong) from 1925 to 1928. An interesting essay on Islamic Mysticism written by him in 1925 is found in the Indian Academy Records of St Mary's College, Kurseong.  These Records are now preserved at the Vidyajyoti Jesuit School of Theology Library (Delhi). His essay reveals him as one of the Jesuits in the early decades of the 20^th century in South Asia who talks positively of Islam and Muslims even before the pioneer in Christian Muslim relations in India, Victor Courtois, appears on the scene. Courtois was missioned to study Arabic in West Asia In 1932. He learnt to read the Qur’an and commentaries in their original language Arabic. He acquired a thorough knowledge about Muslim thinking.  He was sent to Kurseong for theology in 1938.

The purpose of this article is to remind the South Asian Jesuits about Crowther and his reflection on Islam and Muslims. In the first part, we simply say why his short article has to be given prominence in the context of his times. In the second part, we shall narrate what he said and the significance of his reflection in the context of our times.

Indian Academy

Indian Academy (here after Academy) was a forum for Jesuit students of Theology at St Mary’s College, Kurseong where they presented their research findings, critical reflections and considered theological opinions on a number of topics related to India, her peoples and their cultures and religions. These presentations in the form of research papers were carefully recorded and preserved in bound volumes. Many of the presentations/essays preserved in these volumes are hand written documents, while some others are typed transcripts. While most of the essays are fully written, some of them provide only outline of the essay with an accompanying note saying that it was improvised while the lecture was delivered. Perhaps it was a sign of greater grip a particular Jesuit had on the matter that was presented in that lecture!

Academy Essays on Islam

There are thirty essays (presented as lectures) on topics related with Islam found in the Academy records. A wide range of subjects on Islamic Studies are covered in these presentations. These studies include revelation as understood in Islam, the Qur'ân, dogmas of Islam, Islamic theology, Muhammad and his life, Hadith, Islamic mysticism, Sufi orders, Muslim mystics, Muslim spirituality, Prayer, Muslim way of life, success of Islam, and conversion of Muslims to Christianity.

A quick survey of these documents shows that they were written neither as responses to Muslim polemics against Christians and their faith nor an effort to elicit a response from Muslims. Then, what are these documents written for? They are documents in which the Jesuit theology students articulate their understanding of Islam and the presence of Muslims in India.  It should be said that they were hypercritical of Islam and its prophet Muhammad. They disparagingly used very strong negative language against the Qur’an.

At this negative context where Islamic revelation and its holy Book were attacked relentlessly by Christian scholars and especially his Jesuit colleagues, Crowther explores the spirituality of the Muslim mystic al-Hallaj. In contrast to the views of his colleagues he judges the spirituality lived out by al-Hallaj as genuine. He affirms that these spiritual fruits are from the source of Islamic faith the Holy Qur'an. When a number of his colleagues charge the Qur'an with a strong polemical language, Crowther finds streaks of light that guided al-Hallaj to deep mysticism. This assertion of Crowther is significant because it signals a new approach. Crowther's approach invites for a new and discerning way in relationship with Muslims. He calls the Jesuits to carefully discern the spiritual life of Muslims. In other words, he indicates vicious attack on Islam or its prophet is neither fruitful nor desirable. 

Crowther and his essay: Al-Hallaj- a Martyr of Islam

Crowther studied carefully the works on al-Hallaj as rendered in Louis Massignon. He considered the mystical experiences of al-Hallaj as 'invasion of God'.  He recognised that the summit of all sanctity of a saint is to be consummated in the love of God, which is a divine union. In this union the saint perfectly bends his/her will to the will of God and participates in the divine life. Crowther has no hesitation to accept that al-Hallaj strove to do the will of God in his life.

Crowther recognized that Al-Hallaj emphasised the importance of practicing the interior dimension of religion. Love perfects this interior religion. He tells his readers that al-Hallaj recognised Jesus Christ as his model. The reason is this. Jesus lived out the interior religion to perfection. In other words, Jesus' interior sanctity was powered by love. Interior sanctity is superior to adherence to mere legal prescriptions. Jesus attained union with God through this interior sanctity. Thus Jesus was the best model of union with God. In al-Hallaj's mind this union was only a mystical union and not the hypostatic union, as Christians understand. Jesus accepted the fiat of God. As Jesus lived out with complete interior sanctity and harmonising his will with the will of God every act of him became really divine. When the divine union is perfected the ego is transformed into divine essence so that it can say "I am the truth". al-Hallaj uttered these very words in a mystical ecstasy. His coreligionists accused him of blasphemy. They persecuted al-Hallaj and crucified him. Though, al-Hallaj considered Jesus as the best model for union with God, he remained within the borders of Islam fully affirming the transcendence of God. The mystical union is the result of a life of interior sanctity.  

For Crowther, Al-Hallaj is an illustration of a doctrine and a type of sanctity that can be evolved from the Qur'an. Al-Hallaj interpreted the prescription of the Qur'an in such a way that is in harmony with the un-prescribed needs of interior worship. Crowther writes:  "thus he [al-Hallaj] provides us with a method of approaching the Muslims through the Koran or at least a possibility of our doing so". The Qur'an should not be simply dismissed with a negative frame of mind, affirms Crowther. He indicates that a lot of good could come from the spiritual teachings of the Qur'an and al-Hallaj is the model. The implication is that Christians should carefully look at the life of Muslims and recognise all that is good in them comes from the Qur’an.

Further Crowther writes: "his [al-Hallaj's] life and doctrine also show that Mahomeddanism [sic] is not a religion whose soul [sic] doctrine is polygamy as is commonly believed, but that much good can be drawn out of it, and utilised for evangelisation”.   He indicates a new method of apostolate. What is the new method? He suggests that “the noblest aspirations are satisfied in Catholic faith. He writes: “in Catholicism is found in all its fullness what is found only partially in other religions”. He affirms that a Muslim convert to Christianity need not reject what is holy and beautiful in his/her religion. He writes that a new Christian will “see the old familiar objects in a new and divine light. He [a Muslim] has not to restrain his thoughts but to give them their fullest expression. He will see that Christ has come not destroy his law but to fulfil it."

Conclusion

A few things should be gleaned from this short essay of Crowther. First, St Ignatius in the Spiritual Exercises instructs his sons, the Jesuits to put a positive interpretation on what others say or explain. Crowther is a shining example of one who follows the teaching of Ignatius with a discerning prudence. He carefully read the life of al-Hallaj from an authentic source, that is Louis Massignon an authority on al-Hallaj and interpreted it for his times and mission of Jesuits among Muslims. He expresses his appreciation and adds how what is holy in the faith Islam may come to fulfilment in Christian faith.

Many theologians, in the past, have seen Christianity as the fulfilment of the aspirations of individuals and religions. It should be noted that the fulfilment theory will be challenged by a number of theologians. Their challenge is not out of tune in the present 21^st century realities and emerging theology of dialogue among religious believers. However it should not be denied that in the early decades of the last century that was a pioneering approach.

Second, his emphasis that the al-Hallaj has perfected interior sanctity of life based on the teachings of the Qur'an is a momentous insight at a time when polemics flew thick and hard.  The deepest expressions of life and thirst for God from the Muslim side are not left unanswered by God. It is obvious from what Crowther writes; he definitely considers the spirituality of al-Hallaj is rooted in the spiritual foundations of the Qur'an, and it is authentic. The authenticity of the spirituality could be seen from its fruits: a deeper desire to do the will of God and an ongoing effort to bend one's will to the Will of God. The implication is that God in ways known to Him alone is forming and shaping the lives of Muslims like al-Hallaj. Crowther's interfaith thinking definitely ahead of his times.

Thirdly, it is important to point out the difficulties people like Crowther, and later Courtois experienced before the clear, enlightened teaching of Vatican II. Paul Jackson writes about the struggles of Courtois in the following words: “Fr Courtois ploughed a lonely furrow.  Initially he had a companion a man who had lived with the Bedouin and gained a remarkable mastery of Arabic, but who subsequently felt called to a work which brought more immediately tangible results and sense of accomplishment.  His departure must surely have compounded Fr Courtois’ sense of isolation. Perhaps he did not speak about his work in his community because he realized that others were not interested in what he had to say. If this were so, it would have added another dimension to his sense of isolation”.

Jesuits scholars on Christian Muslims relations like Christian W Troll and Paul Jackson have assessed Courtois as a pioneer in Catholic relations with Muslims in India. If it is to be said that Courtois broke new grounds in the Catholic relations with Muslims in India, Crowther should be acknowledged as someone who has commented positively on the spirituality of Muslims. If Courtois was the spring in Catholic relations with Muslims in India, then it is not an exaggeration to say Crowther was a little sparrow that sang a little spring song before Courtois! 

Streams of Spirituality for Interfaith Thinking

Fr. Tom Kunnunkal, S.J.

Saint Francis Xavier Movement (Italy), Henry Martyn Institute (Hyderabad) and Interfaith Coalition for Peace (New Delhi) organized an international conference on the theme: Streams of Spirituality for Interfaith Thinking at Henry Martyn Institute, Hyderabad on 3-4 January, 2013. A number of scholars and students of Religious Studies presented papers on the theme from different religious perspectives. 

The two day conference went well beyond being just an occasion to present well-written papers on various aspects dialogue, however useful and necessary this is. In fact, it provided a forum that opened our mental horizon to see the deeper dimensions of dialogue and see it as an essential constituent of our life and of every life. The focus shifted from religion to spirituality. Everyone has a spirituality to live one’s life, which is a paradigm or a map, which gives one guidance, direction and power and the norms for decision-making. Spirituality is one’s specific way of seeing the total reality, (God, self, others and the contexts and conditions of life) interpreting it, accepting it for oneself and then living it in one’s day-to-day life situations. On the other hand, religion, with its focus largely on the external, the ritual, the prescribed practices etc, can and indeed often does prove a distraction and has resulted in several confrontations and conflicts among persons, both within the same faith tradition and among inter-faith members. Owning and then living a spirituality is a lifelong process of internalization and then making it a paradigm for one’s life and living in the real. We all have borders and identities and will continue to have; but narrow borders, when over-stressed, make us less and less human. This has been fully demonstrated in our religious histories. Hence the way forward is through adopting the spirituality of dialogue, which is the spirituality of communion or a spirituality of love and forgiveness.  In joyful discovery, we realized that there are so many items that are common between various faiths, which we saw as the point for stress and appreciation.

     Like many other nations, India too has had such a long history of evolution. None of us would claim that the present status and accomplishments of India have come from any single religion or ethnic group or region. In fact, we would readily accept that it is the result of the numerous and significant contributions of a very large number of culture groups. It is the strength of India, as also of other large countries, that we are multi-ethnic, multi-religious and multi-cultural.  India is the home of several world religions.

     Every religion, culture or region wants to preserve its identity. This is indeed its right. But in the current contexts, wide open spaces are emerging in the modern world of today, spaces created by reason and by scientific research no less than by the inner search and spiritual quest that many seriously engage in. As a result, we see that religion and science, at odds earlier, are beginning to engage in serious dialogue. Today, Science and Spirituality, Physics and Metaphysics, Religion and Reason are seen as bipolar realities of a dialectic that seeks a new synthesis. We need borders and identities, surely. But when we push borders and identities too hard and are not willing to cross some of these borders, we become less and less human. It was heartening to learn of the several movements initiated by different religious leaders who are currently searching for new answers for our times so that religion continues to hold meaning for today’s life and living, especially for today’s educated young, many of whom have professional training and updated competences and want to base their faith with some support from reason as well.

    Therefore, in our modern world of today, to be religious is to be also inter-religious, to be cultural is to be also inter-cultural and to be human is to be inter-human. “In the name of God” so many horrendous atrocities have been committed in the past and still continue to be done in today’s world as well. That is why, modern man’s behavior continues to mirror the behavior patterns of the Animal Planet, with this difference that we use very sophisticated weapons that we have developed to destroy others. It is in that context that every religion needs to engage in a critical and scientific evaluation of its own practices and prescriptions and actions to see if these humanize or dehumanize persons and communities and take appropriate steps to bring about needed reform, where we find we are becoming less and less human or more and more exclusive. Similarly, each religious community needs to engage in the study of other religions, in order to understand its basic ethos and perspectives and appreciate these, as a necessary step to be a good citizen of today’s world. Such study will help remove several of the myths, prejudices and stereotypes we often nurture about persons of other faiths and traditions. In the present day work places, whether in business or industry or in many service institutions, like a school, college or hospital, we will often encounter work-mates, class-mates and staff-mates from different cultures and religions. Developing the ability to engage in warm and friendly interaction between the members of these groups and the ability to function well in that mixed group are important life skills for personal growth and for one’s own promotion as well as for the proper functioning of the institution or business.

   Therefore, the obvious agenda for the human family and in fact, the only agenda, is to engage in Cross Border Community Building (CBCB), namely to build human communities across those borders that presently divide us and which make us less and less human. To become more human and humane we must find a place in our hearts for the “other”, for those who are from other religious or cultural traditions and so become truly sons and daughters of the one God and Lord, who holds all whom He has brought into life as persons precious to Him. 

     Dialogue was seen as a call, as a vocation and essentially as relational, inviting respectful listening and collaborative and cooperative actions. God has been manifesting Himself to humans throughout our human history in diverse ways, not only establishing His own relationship with humans, but also inviting us humans to engage in stable relationships across the faith-based borders. God is seen as a power source to nurture such relationships, among all humans, inviting them to see all as members of His one global family. The mystery and reality that every human person is unique and that God makes no duplicates means that, accepting this mystery, we seek unity in diversity. We appreciated the many faith-motivated acts of service as demonstrated by the different faith traditions and we heard beautiful examples of such deeds of light in terms of setting up large service institutions such as hospitals, schools, universities, homes for widows and orphans etc. Through these inputs, we renewed our commitment to become active contributors to build a new world, across the present many borders that divide us and which make us so unlike God who has no borders and has no outsiders.  

Christian Muslim Dialogue: A Call for Greater Solidarity

M.A.Leo Anand SJ

Introduction

The Indian multi religious, multicultural and plural context is a diverse society with its unique heritage. This context it is an imperative factor for facilitating dialogues and for building up positive relationships. The much appreciated plurality of the Indian context allows us to have our individual space and enriches us in various spheres of life.  Society at large is universal and exhibits various modalities and specifications in each individual and in groups. And harmony is not only the key word but also an essential phenomenon which pervades our context and which makes us find meaning in our living together. Our coexistence with different faiths and beliefs must sustain and nourish our lives and faiths so that we respect and foster the growth of the other. Harmony comes from the Greek word Harmonica, which means “to join”. To join means to be related and not to oppose, to join hands, to come together, to be united. Unity being the outcome, dialogue is the means by which this unity is promoted, strengthened and propagated. Christian Muslim dialogue in the Indian subcontinent has its own distinctive advantages necessities as minority religions.

The Indian Context

The multicultural Indian soil with its rich traditions, cultures and religious realities make it a unique model of harmonious living in the East. Philosophy and theology go hand in hand here and the people of various traditions have learned to live by appreciating the difference but at the same time have not lost the identity of their own beliefs. This brings with it a whole question of unity in universality which blooms with the acceptance of the other and remaining faithful to  rich local traditions. People are very much acclimatized with this scenario of being rooted in ones tradition. This plurality is still a surprise for the West which tries to make things uniform. Plurality in India emerges with religions and cultures and emanates in various forms, in languages, ethnic groups and in all walks of life. India being a cradle of many religions has always nurtured them with learning and understanding with harmony as its principle. Thus India stands as an apt example for the embodiment of pluralism in the global scenario. The plurality which is experienced in India is an expression of richness and open-mindedness in respecting both the self and the other. It speaks of the nature which is in harmony, the cosmos in rta, the life in its flow of energy showing the symbol of integration with its diversity. The law of nature brings in a balance to promote life and thus sustains and propagates the very nature which is growth and evolution.

Christians and Muslims in this context have the duty to build up the bond of cordiality and transcend from each one’s boundaries and build peace as there is deterioration of this stable amity. Many recent narrow minded dividing forces have poisoned people with their ruthless and inhumane ideologies. Thus there is a greater threat for India’s harmony which has been preserved for ages in a very unique way. As there is greater danger of fundamentalism to democracy and religious freedom we need to be aware of the situation and take necessary proactive steps to safe guard the long preserved integrity by ancient wisdom. As there are more  antagonistic and hate campaign arising and promoted by some anti harmony miscreants we have  the very urgent need for promoting dialogue. Dialogue is not a crime to be condemned but a healthy attitude and indispensable disposition which need to be cultivated and strengthened in our present generation citizens.  Dialogue is one such wisdom which has helped our subcontinent to relate with one another in a more civilized way. Dialogue makes us more enlightened and will lead us forward to abundant peace and harmony in our land of super diversity. Though there is a lot of communication taking place in today’s world with advanced media technologies yet all communications are neither ethical nor working for the welfare of people. Dialogue is one such means by which we communicate with the other in a more meaningful way by sharing the insights we gained through our faith and readily listening to others’ experience as well.

Solidarity in Relationality

Community belongingness is seen in Christianity and in Islam and in other religions too. No one is isolated or alienated when it comes to religion. Religions always speak about the well being of the fellow human beings and even of nature and the cosmos. This notion affirms the primacy of God Who created everything. This community bond is expressed as Koinonia in Christianity and Ummah in Islam. This principle of solidarity which binds all the faithful of the respective religions does not sideline the others; it only starts with the faithful and the solidarity is extended to others in the human family at large. “The individual responsibility is continuously linked with the well-being of the whole”. Living in a multi religious and a multicultural scenario like the Indian subcontinent, the whole is not only defined in terms of faith or a particular group but the whole human family which needs a greater solidarity. This solidarity if not expressed in terms of wholeness, it may lead to a collective selfishness and thus fermenting fundamentalism and discord. As we aim at harmony and overall well-being, greater solidarity with the fellow humans becomes the starting point of dialogue and development for the welfare of the entire human family- the creation of God.

When we think of community we think in terms of the close affinity bond which exists among the members of any community. Here it is the faith or the common belief which binds the entire community as one entity.  Ummah brings in a concept of transnational bond existing among the Muslims like that of the Koinonia which also shows a similar type of faith relationship. Consanguinity in faith is to nurture, promote and propagate one’s own faith and the faith of the larger faithful. When we see a group of people united it may be for a cause and for many reasons. Insecure feeling is also a part of such coming together when the group is living in a minority situation. The coming together in terms of faith and religions also needs a wider perspective of brotherhood which in turn focuses on the interrelations and the proactive interactions which has to happen among the peoples. Relationality is not something which is restricted only within religions and within subgroups but has to find its root in the reality of the basic human existence. In and through relationality we expand our interactions to the larger community. No one is alone and cannot be an island. All have to be in relation to one another. That is where we strike the chord of one human family. We are indeed bound by the responsibility towards our fellow co-humans as we journey in time and space and thus we share in the collective vision of the one humanity created by God.

A Light to Guide: Oneself and Others

Every community seeks for some guidance and a common principle- an orientation, to which it would allow its members to live peacefully.  Individual persons too need to be enlightened to guide one’s own self. An effective and discerning leadership animates the community with the fresh air which brings joy to the community- the others. Leadership makes this possible by pastoral guidance by the priests in Christianity and by Imams or elders in Islam. The holy rules are interpreted according to the signs of times by the enlightened leaders who could make the community enlightened. Leading the community is a responsible task by which the community could be enriched with positive interactions and effective and innovative humanizing responses. The leaders of different communities come together and also induce and inspire others to work for a common or greater cause which facilitates the greater good of the wider community by our liberative outlook. Leadership within the community and with other communities helps us to build a new world of progressive community. Leadership interactions and representations are also part of the dialogue. Leadership makes a change and with that change it is possible to march forward for a liberative collaboration in guiding and leading the flock. We do find some leaders who come forward to take such a lead to bring about peace among people of good will.

Reaching Out

Our dialogue between Christians and Muslims in India brings about a better understanding about our perspectives and prepares us to collaborate in our concerns. Our collaboration in talks has to lead us to deeds by which we have the opportunity to concretely express our ideals more tangibly. Very often our discussions remain as theoretical ideologies and there is no praxis which could take shape from our good-will. We may have grand desires and intentions but if there are no actions then our dialogue will only be a mere bombastic socializing. Dialogue has to be taken ahead with the coming together of practical and possible interventions for greater needs which would alleviate human pain in all possible ways. With constructive collision our solidarity within our communities could be extended meaningfully to those in need. Dialogue is a call to share our richness and enrich others. Sometimes dialogue is seen in terms of mutual coexistence. A dynamic dialogue will rather build bridges and facilitate and promote more and more of harmony.

Humanizing Harmony

Living in harmony primarily presupposes the harmony within one’s self and in the wholeness of life.  Shalom- over all well being, could be another word for harmony. This harmony springs up from the inner self in silence, in awareness, in interiority, in freedom, in acceptance, in love and in creativity. We also see harmony outside of us as a result of harmony within ourselves. The external harmony is an extension or an arising from the inner acceptance.. When individuals strive for this harmony, there is always a by-product of this quest affecting the other and the whole of society at large as the whole is interrelated. The butterfly effect shows that all realities are interrelated. This relatedness, in a way, means that we are responsible for the other. Harmony is not a situation without conflict but a belongingness which brings in the human family much closer to one another and to the ultimate reality- God. If harmony is a situation then dialogue is the necessary condition which would vaccinate us to resist the infection of isolation, alienation and fundamentalisms. 

The Indian context of pluralism with its higher degree of tolerance shows us a harmony which exists similar to that of biodiversity and cosmic harmony which exists in nature by itself. Faith has to consider the culture and context of people. It should also take into account the people of other faiths who are with us. Our way of life, which reflects our faith has to take into account the situation of the surroundings.  Christians and Muslims as minority religions have already added essence to the lives of the rest of the Indians in so many ways. As responsible citizens of India we need to dialogue with an open mind more to spread ripples of peace and harmony to us and to others for a better future of unlimited joy.                                                               Human dignity as an image of God becomes a basic synthesis of harmony and unity. With this initial foundation we begin to relate with others as agents of God. Though religions may be of different nature, the human element pervades the whole approach and thus becomes more humane. Religious freedom is a gift in the plural context and has to be maintained with enriching dialogue and collaboration for the common good of all.  The inter cultuality and the interreligious dialogue have to enable us for a better understanding for a harmonious living. 

Conclusion

It is the open mindedness and the deep grounding in faith which help us to deepen our faith and to appreciate the goodness in others by the process of dynamic dialogue. Unity in diversity is the hallmark of our Indian nation. We know that unity is strength. Fundamentalism, superficiality, regional affinity, caste driven attitude and closed minds will not help us to be interiorly free either as individuals or as a society of cultured human beings. Life of faith needs works of faith too. Joining hands and reaching out to the needy always brings in the joy of sharing.  When we join hands for the works of faith we strike the chord with harmony as the foundation which echoes Rta in the cosmos and Shalom in the lives of all human beings who share in the image and likeness of God. Thus through dialogue and coming together for common good we would be able to create a new world with harmony as the language which everyone could understand and everything will be like music and dance with perfect synchronization and resonance which will always fill the entire world with peace, joy, happiness and contentment to its fullest fullness. 

Dear Readers:

Welcome to January 2013 issue of Salaam.

Thanks for your encouragement and support.

Pushpa Anbu SVD editor

Victor Edwin SJ managing editor