1. It is 25 years since Nostra Aetate, the declaration of the Second Vatican Council on the church’s relationship to other religions, was promulgated. The document stressed the importance of interreligious dialogue. At the same time it recalled that the Church is in duty bound to proclaim without fail Christ, the way, the truth and the life, in whom all people find their fulfillment.

3. The present document gives further consideration to these two elements. It first puts forward the characteristics of each and then studies their mutual relationship.

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

14. A just appraisal of other religious traditions normally presupposes close contact with them. This implies, besides theoretical knowledge, practical experience of interreligious dialogue with the followers of these traditions. Nevertheless it is also true that a correct theological evaluation of these traditions, at least in general terms, is a necessary presupposition for interreligious dialogue. These traditions are to be approached with great sensitivity on account of the spiritual and human values enshrined in them. They command our respect because over the centuries they have borne witness to the efforts to find answers “to those profound mysteries of the human condition” and have given expression to the religious experience and the longings of millions of their adherents, and they continue to do so today.

15. The Second Vatican Council has given the lead for such a positive assessment... The Council teaches that Christ, the new Adam, through the mystery of his incarnation, death and resurrection, is at work in each human person to bring about interior renewal: “This holds true not for Christians only but also for all persons of good will in whose hearts grace is active invisibly. For since Christ died for all, and since all are in fact called to one and the same destiny, which is divine, we must hold that the Holy Spirit offers to all the possibility of being made partners, in a way known to God, in the paschal mystery.” (Gaudium et Spes)

16. The Council proceeds further. Making its own the vision—and the terminology—of some early church fathers, Nostra Aetate speaks of the presence in these traditions of “a ray of that truth which enlightens all” (2). Ad Gentes recognizes the presence of “seeds of the Word” and points to “the riches which a generous God has distributed among the nations” (11) . Again Lumen Gentium refers to the good which is “found sown” not only “in minds and hearts”, but also “in the rites and customs of peoples” (17).

17. These few references suffice to show that the council has openly acknowledged the presence of positive values not only in the religious life of individual believers of other religious traditions, but also in the religious traditions to which they belong. It attributed these values to the active presence of God through His Word, pointing also to the universal action of the Spirit.

38. The foundation of the Church’s commitment to dialogue is not merely anthropological but primarily theological. God, in an age-long dialogue, has offered and continues to offer salvation to humankind. In faithfulness to the divine initiative, the church too must enter into a dialogue of salvation with all men and women.

40. In this dialogue of salvation, Christians and others are called to collaborate with the Spirit of the risen Lord, who is universally present and active. Interreligious dialogue does not merely aim at mutual understanding and friendly relations. It reaches a much deeper level, that of the spirit, where exchange and sharing consist in a mutual witness to one’s beliefs and a common exploration of one’s respective religious convictions. In dialogue Christians and others are invited to deepen their religious commitment, to respond with increasing sincerity to God’s personal call and gracious self– gift, which, as our faith tells us, always passes through the mediation of Jesus Christ and the work of His spirit.

41. Given this aim, a deeper conversion of all toward God, interreligious dialogue possesses its own validity... Sincere dialogue implies, on the one hand, mutual acceptance of differences, or even of contradictions, and on the other, respect for the free decision of persons taken according to the dictates of their conscience. The teaching of the Council must nevertheless be borne in mind: “All peoples are bound to seek the truth, especially in what concerns God and his church, and to embrace it and to hold on to it as they come to know it.”

42. There exist different forms of interreligious dialogue. It may be useful to recall those mentioned by the 1984 document of the Pontifical Council for Interreligious Dialogue. It spoke of four forms, without claiming to establish among them any order of priority.

• The dialogue of life, where people strive to live in an open and neighborly spirit, sharing their joys and sorrows, their human problems and preoccupations.
• The dialogue of action, in which Christians and others collaborate for the integral development and liberation of people.
• The dialogue of theological exchange, where specialists seek to deepen their understanding of their respective religious heritages and to appreciate each other’s spiritual values.
• The dialogue of religious experience, where persons, rooted in their own religious traditions, share their spiritual riches, for instance with regard to prayer and contemplation, faith and ways of searching for God or the absolute.

43. One should not lose sight of this variety of forms of dialogue. Were it to be reduced to theological exchange, dialogue might easily be taken as a sort of luxury item in the church’s mission, a domain reserved for specialists. On the contrary, guided by the pope and their bishops, all local churches and all the members of those churches are called to dialogue, though not in the same way. It can be seen, moreover, that the different forms are interconnected. Contacts in daily life and common commitment to action will normally open the door for cooperation in promoting human and spiritual values; they may also lead to the dialogue of religious experience in response to the great questions which the circumstances of life do not fail to arouse in the minds of people. Exchanges at the level of religious experience can give more life to theological discussions. These in turn can enlighten experiences and encourage closer contacts.

44. The importance of dialogue for integral development, social justice and human liberation needs to be stressed. Local churches are called upon, as witnesses to Christ to commit themselves in this respect in an unselfish and impartial manner. There is also need to stand up for human rights, proclaim the demands of justice and denounce injustice not only when their own members are victimized, but independently of the religious allegiance of the victims. There is also need to join together in trying to solve the great problems facing society and the world, as well as in education for justice and peace.

45. Another context in which interreligious dialogue seems urgent today is that of culture. Culture is broader than religion. According to one concept religion can be said to represent the transcendent dimension of culture and in a certain way its soul. Religions have certainly contributed to the progress of culture and the construction of a more humane society. Yet religious practices have sometimes had an alienating influence upon cultures. Today, an autonomous secular culture can play a critical role with regard to negative elements in particular religions. The question is complex, for several religious traditions may coexist within one and the same cultural framework while, conversely, the same religion may find expression in different cultural contexts. Again, religious differences may lead to distinct cultures in the same region.

47. Dialogue requires on the part of Christians as well as of the followers of other traditions, a balanced attitude. They should be neither ingenuous nor overcritical, but open and receptive. Unselfishness and impartiality, acceptance of differences and of possible contradictions, have already been mentioned. The will to engage together in commitment to the truth and the readiness to allow oneself to be transformed by the encounter are other dispositions required.

48. This does not mean that in entering into dialogue the partners should lay aside their respective religious convictions. The opposite is true: The sincerity of interreligious dialogue requires that each enter into it with the integrity of his or her own faith. At the same time, while remaining firm in their belief that in Jesus Christ, the only mediator between God and man (1 Timothy 2:4–6), the fullness of revelation has been given to them, Christians must remember that God has also manifested himself in some way to the followers of other religious traditions. Consequently it is with receptive minds that they approach the convictions and values of others.

49. Moreover, the fullness of truth received in Jesus Christ does not give individual Christians the guarantee that they have grasped the truth fully. In the last analysis truth is not a thing we possess, but a person by whom we must allow ourselves to be possessed. This is an unending process. While keeping their identity intact, Christians must be prepared to learn and to receive from and through others the positive value of their traditions. Through dialogue they may be moved to give up ingrained prejudices, to revise preconceived ideas and even sometimes to allow the understanding of their faith to be purified.

50. If Christians cultivate such openness and allow themselves to be tested, they will be able to gather the fruits of dialogue. They will discover with admiration all that God’s action through Jesus Christ in his Spirit has accomplished and continues to accomplish in the world and in the whole of humankind. Far from weakening their own faith, true dialogue will deepen it. They will become increasingly aware of their Christian identity and perceive more clearly the distinctive elements of the Christian message. Their faith will gain new dimensions as they discover the active presence of the mystery of Jesus Christ beyond the visible boundaries of the Church and of the Christian fold.

51. Already on a purely human level it is not easy to practice dialogue. Interreligious dialogue is even more difficult. It is important to be aware of some of the obstacles which may arise. Some would apply equally to the members of all religious traditions and impede the success of dialogue. Others may affect some religious traditions more specifically and make it difficult for a process of dialogue to be initiated. Some of the more important obstacles will be mentioned here.

52.

• Insufficient grounding in one’s own faith.
• Insufficient knowledge and understanding of the belief and practices of other religions, leading to a lack of appreciation for their significance and even at times to misrepresentation.
• Cultural differences, arising from different levels of instruction or from the use of different languages.
• Socio-political factors of some burdens of the past.
• Wrong understanding of the meaning of terms such as conversion, baptism, dialogue, etc.
• Self-sufficiency, lack of openness leading to defensive or aggressive attitudes.
• A lack of conviction with regard to the value of interreligious dialogue, which some may see as a task reserved to specialists and others as a sign of weakness or even a betrayal of the faith.
• Suspicion about the other’s motives in dialogue.
• A polemical spirit when expressing religious convictions.
• Intolerance, which is often aggravated by association with political, economic, racial and ethnic factors, a lack of reciprocity in dialogue which can lead to frustration.
• Certain features of the present religious climate, e.g. growing materialism, religious indifference and the multiplication of religious sects which creates confusion and raises new problems.

53. Many of these obstacles arise from a lack of understanding of the true nature and goal of interreligious dialogue. These need therefore to be constantly explained. Much patience is required. It must be remembered that the church’s commitment to dialogue is not dependent on success in achieving mutual understanding and enrichment; rather it flows from God’s initiative in entering into dialogue with humankind and from the example of Jesus Christ whose life, death and resurrection gave to that dialogue its ultimate expression.

54. Moreover, the obstacles, though real, should not lead us to underestimate the possibilities of dialogue or to overlook the results already achieved. There has been a growth in mutual understanding, and in active cooperation. Dialogue has had a positive impact on the church herself. Other religions have also been led through dialogue to renewal and greater openness. Interreligious dialogue has made it possible for the church to share Gospel values with others. So despite the difficulties, the church’s commitment to dialogue remains firm and irreversible.

77. Interreligious dialogue and proclamation, though not on the same level, are both authentic elements of the church’s evangelizing mission. Both are legitimate and necessary. They are intimately related, but not interchangeable: True interreligious dialogue on the part of the Christian supposes the desire to make Jesus Christ better known, recognized and loved; proclaiming Jesus Christ is to be carried out in the Gospel spirit of dialogue. The two activities remain distinct but, as experience shows, one and the same local church, one and the same person, can be diversely engaged in both.

80. The church encourages and fosters dialogue not only between herself and other religious traditions, but even among these religious traditions themselves. This is one way in which she fulfills her role as “sacrament, that is, a sign and instrument of communion with God and unity among all people”. She is invited by the Spirit to encourage all religious institutions and movements to meet, to enter into collaboration and to purify themselves in order to promote truth and life, holiness, juice, love and peace, dimensions of that kingdom which, at the end of time, Christ will hand over to the Father (I Corinthians 15:24). Thus, interreligious dialogue is truly part of the dialogue of salvation initiated by God.

89. Dialogue and proclamation are difficult tasks, and yet absolutely necessary. All Christians, according to their situations, should be encouraged to equip themselves so that they may better fulfill this twofold commitment. Yet more than tasks to be accomplished, dialogue and proclamation are graces to be sought in prayer. May all continually implore the help of the Holy Spirit so that he may be the divine inspirer of their plans, initiatives & activity.