Sem.

Mark Joren Sera 2nd Year

Rev. Fr. Richard Bantugan Ecumenism and Interreligious Dialogue
A brief analysis and reflection paper on the Pontifical Council for Interreligious Dialogue

Since the Second Vatican Council, especially after the promulgation of the landmark
document Nostra Aetate, which discusses the Church's relationship with followers of other
religions, the Roman Catholic has been actively engaged in interreligious dialogue. This
secretariat was later renamed the Pontifical Council for Interreligious Discussion and helped the
Catholic church conduct numerous studies and publish a large amount of literature as guidance
for individuals involved in interfaith dialogue. One of their documents that brought importance
is entitled "Attitude of the Church toward the followers of other religions. Reflections and
Orientations on Dialogue and Mission", which is generally called as Dialogue and Mission. It is a
text of considerable importance for understanding the Roman Catholic Church view of
interreligious dialogue. This paper is a brief analysis of the context, purpose, and contents of
what I only understand from the perspective of interreligious dialogue in the Proclamation and
Dialogue, with some critical observations based on experience.

To begin, I was confused by the context's notion of conversion. It stated that one cannot
resist pondering on the spiritual process of conversion when engaging in discourse with
members of diverse faiths. Next, the term 'conversion' is interpreted in two different ways.
First, the biblical and Christian tradition-based definition of the term. In this context, conversion
is defined as a humble and repentant return to God in the desire to more generously submit
one's life to God. In this way, everyone is continuously being urged to repentance. In the
second sense, conversion refers to the voluntary decision to alter one's religious affiliation.
According to the paper, during the discussion process, someone may decide to leave their prior
spiritual or religious environment in order to move themselves toward another. Additionally, it
states that the law of conscience is sovereign during the conversion process, that the primary
agent of conversion is not human beings but the Holy Spirit, and that Christians are merely a
simple instrument and co-worker of God. This interpretation, I believe, misleads other religious
followers into believing that the purpose of dialogue is some "new device" invented to convert
them to Christianity.
According to the above interpretation, I think the document wants to convey that the
dialogue is not about conversion to one’s own religious tradition, but a common deepening of
the partner’s conversation with God. It is a "Metanoia" in the biblical sense. A change in one’s
way of life resulting from penitence or spiritual conversion which is comprehensive enough to
cover all the fundamental aspects of life, personal, and social, which lead to positive changes. In
the sense that conversion is open to all, to whatever religion you may belong.

In terms of converting them to Christianity, I believe it should be done in accordance

with religious liberty, conscience freedom, human rights, and dignity, and without resorting to
coercion. As a result, this dialogue does not serve the purpose of converting others to one's
own religion, as some may believe. Neither of the two definitions of dialogue tends to deceive
them into conversion, but rather assists each individual in a deeper conversion to God. In this
sense, the ultimate goal of this dialogue is for Christians and members of other religious
traditions to be converted to the same God. It is a great effect of the dialogue. Thus, those who
believe that Christians engage in dialogue as a covert means of evoking conversions to
Christianity are mistaken, as this perception arises in large part from their ignorance of the
Catholic Church's position.

The 4 forms of dialogue remind me of how important it is to even if we are just talking
normally to other people, especially those who are not Christians. First, there is the dialogue of
life. It discusses how you should treat one another with consideration, respect, and hospitality.
It allows for the other person's personality, forms of expression, and values to be expressed
without being imposed upon them. It might be considered daily life dialogue since every
follower of Christ is invited to live a life of dialogue in his or her everyday life, regardless of
whether one is in a majority or minority situation. As a seminarian, I ought to bring the Spirit of
the Gospel into any environment in which I live and work, be it in the family, social, educational,
economic, or political. By this, I can somehow participate in the dynamism of the church. In my
status, sometimes I tend to keep silent from posting too much on social media about our
Catholic faith. I will admit that I don’t have enough knowledge to defend or to communicate
with other religions. It is true that you will also study their religion before you say anything else.
We are not doing this in order to identify which of us is telling the truth. Also, we cannot please
everyone. We can be close in on ourselves and ignore the other, especially if that other belongs
to a rather closed community, which apparently does not want to enter into dialogue. It
requires perseverance to overcome the barriers of diffidence and suspicion. So, it should not be
taken for granted. It has to be worked on all the time.

Another thing that I’ve noticed in particular in our diocese is that we have this "Dialogue
of Works." We all know that the goal of this dialogue is to have a humanitarian, social,
economic, or political nature, which are directed towards human liberation and advancement.
For example, it can be for the defence and promotion of social justice, moral values, peace and
liberty. The best example of this that our bishop is currently working off is the "Nomad" issue
that has been a problem for the past few years in our diocese. The tension between the armed
forces and the "Nomads" greatly affects the everyday living of the native people. This is not
only a drill; there are lots of "Nomad" people being killed and being accused of being rebels. It
is sad to see that it is they who are protecting the environment in the forest, but they are the
ones who are being attacked by people with no factual evidence. It is sad to see that it is they
who are protecting the environment in the forest, but they are the ones who are being attacked
by people with no factual evidence. Another thing is they don’t have enough voice to explain
their side and to tell the truth. So see, who will be the one to listen to them? Who will be their
voice? Do you think people will care for them, especially now that we are in a pandemic
situation?

The Diocese of Tandag is currently working on this dilemma. The diocese is trying to
reach out to those people and engage with them in proper dialogue to listen to what is actually
happening in their area. It doesn’t mean that the priests or the bishop itself are against the
government, but rather that they have the right to promote and protect the morals, justice,
peace, and liberty of the Nomad people. It does not end there. The diocese provided the needs
and necessities. It is not enough that we only pray for them, but we do have action and give
practical solutions. We can see here the application of Dialogue then proceed to Mission. It is
hard to go directly to sharing without a proper communion with them. Because of this integral
development of human beings, striving to liberate people from unjust structures of oppression
and poverty is to share with them the Kingdom of God. People who are supporting this are truly
instruments of God’s love, helping to fulfil the prayer of Jesus, "Your kingdom come". Besides,
work for justice and peace is an integral part of the church mission, and has to be carried out at
all levels. I conclude that it needs a great deal of confidence to be able to work harmoniously
together, and this action can truly be considered as a form of dialogue.

There can be no doubt that the Dialogue and Proclamation is the Roman Catholic
Church's most comprehensive, theologically sound, and forward-looking text on interreligious
dialogue. Most importantly, it clarifies the relationship between discussion and declaration, and
so "solves" the theoretical tension that exists between the two. In the statement, interreligious
dialogue is presented as a critical component of the Church's mission, and its validity and
necessity are reaffirmed. It affirms clearly that the Church's commitment to interreligious
dialogue is permanent. Many people have only begun to "scratch the surface" of interreligious
conversation despite the publishing of major documents like Nostra Aetate, Dialogue and
Mission, and Dialogue and Proclamation, as well as the tireless work of the Pontifical Council for
Interreligious Dialog. In order to form Christians in accordance with their spirit and values, local
churches and their leaders, seminaries, Christian educational institutions, and organizations
must make greater efforts to make and apply the content of these writings known and
understood by the public. It's also a good idea to take a close look at the dialogue's techniques.
These appear to be the most significant interreligious dialogue difficulties facing the Roman
Catholic Church today.