CTC 503: Assessment Task 2: Summary and evaluation of Dialogue and Proclamation - Candidate number: V42326

CTC503: Mission and Dialogue

Assessment Task 2: A summary and evaluation of Dialogue and

Proclamation.

υµεις προσκυνειτε ο ουκ οιδατε (Jn 4:22)

Words have primary meanings that are determined by common usage.

Adjustments in meaning presuppose primary meanings as do the stipulative
definitions of academic or technical discussions. Tensions that exist between
concepts at one semantic level can carry over to another, even when
definitions try to mitigate this. Common usage defines dialogue as a
conversation between people with different views who are intent on learning
from one another. It leads to new understanding with the distance between
viewpoints decreasing as common ground is mutually discovered and
affirmed. In contrast, proclamation is a one-sided assertion that something is
the case. Acceptance is invited; discussion is inappropriate.

Given this inherent tension between the concepts, it is germane to consider

Church’s understanding of the relationship between the Christ-given mandate
to proclaim the Gospel to the nations and the post-Vatican II requirement to
enter into ‘dialogue and collaboration’1 with world religions. Does the Church
attempt to hold the terms together by situating them in a broader definition of
its missionary task? Are the relevant philosophical and theological implications
of proclamation made explicit in such a way as to make the two concepts
complementary rather than oppositional? Or does the Church simply give
priority to proclamation and propose an understanding of dialogue shorn of
certain features associated with that concept? In what follows I will present a
summary (printed in italics) of Dialogue and Proclamation: Reflections and
1
Declaration on the relation of the Church to non-Christian religions, (28th October 1965)
Vatican II, Nostra Aetate, 2,

1
CTC 503: Assessment Task 2: Summary and evaluation of Dialogue and Proclamation - Candidate number: V42326

Orientations on Interreligious Dialogue and the Proclamation of the Gospel of

Jesus Christ,2 one of the most important documents issued by the post-Vatican
II magisterium. In the commentary the issue of the coherence (or otherwise) of
DP will be considered. Does the document provide a plausible integration of
the ‘component elements’ or is the overall vision vitiated in some way? Two
further questions will be raised. Given the progression of certain key ideas -
the fundamental unity of humankind, the Word as the single source of
Revelation, the progressive self-communication of God to all humankind
culminating in the Christ-event, the reality of the logos spermatikos – is it
possible to discern in this document the contours of an emerging theology of
religions? Finally what are the implications of the so-called ‘regnocentric’
perspective both for the apparent tensions between proclamation and dialogue
and for the broader question of interreligious dialogue?

The document Dialogue and Proclamation: Reflections and Orientations on

Interreligious Dialogue and the Proclamation of the Gospel of Jesus Christ was
published in 1991, twenty five years after Vatican II’s Declaration Nostra
Aetate, a document that broke new ground by encouraging dialogue and
collaboration with Judaism and other world religions in order to promote
common spiritual and moral values. There have been a number of significant
antecedents to DP, including Pope Paul VI’s encyclical Ecclesiam Suam
(1964) and his apostolic exhortation Evangelii Nuntiandi (1975) and Pope John
Paul II’s encyclicals Redemptor Hominis (1979) and Dominum et Vivificantem,
each anticipating or developing aspects of what would become a more
coherent dialogical approach and attitude. These and other documents, and
the discourses of Pope John Paul II in particular, cumulatively established the
foundations of interreligious dialogue. What remained was for Church to gather
the fragments of these insights into an explicit statement that would harmonise
the need for dialogue with the primordial duty to announce Jesus Christ to the
world. To this end, the first draft of what was to become Dialogue and

Hereafter DP, dated May 1991 and jointly signed by Cardinal Francis Arinze, President of the
Pontifical Council for Interreligious Dialogue and Cardinal Jozef Tomko, Prefect of the
Congregation for the Evangelization of Peoples.

2
CTC 503: Assessment Task 2: Summary and evaluation of Dialogue and Proclamation - Candidate number: V42326

Proclamation was presented to the Plenary Assembly of the Secretariat for

Non-Christians in April 1987.

Document summary

DP consists of three parts sandwiched between an Introduction and a

Conclusion: Interreligious Dialogue (14-54); Proclaiming Jesus Christ (55-76);
and Interreligious Dialogue and Proclamation (77-86).

The Introduction (1-13) states the general aim of the document: to give
further consideration to the two ‘component elements’ (2) of the one
evangelising mission of the Church and to study their mutual relationship.

The principal grounds for the study of the relationship are the reality of
religious pluralism and an imperfect grasp of the significance of dialogue by
the Christian faithful. Further encouragement for study have been provided by
Pope John Paul II who emphasised the complementarity of proclamation and
dialogue and by the extraordinary Day of Prayer for Peace in Assisi in 1986
when the pope met and prayed with leaders of several world faiths. Finally key
terms used in the document are clarified. The Church’s total mission is
evangelization and this is accomplished through a variety of activities including
proclamation (the communication of the Gospel message) and dialogue
(witness and exploration of respective religious convictions).

Interreligious Dialogue (14-54) unpacks the remark made in 53 that ‘the

Church’s commitment to dialogue … flows from God’s initiative in entering into
dialogue with humankind …’ God dialogues (in the broadest sense) with
creation; the Church – who shares the ultimate addressee’s (namely Jesus
Christ’s) self-awareness of the One who dialogues,– is bound to continue that
same dialogue.

Vatican II provided a positive assessment of religious traditions, employing

patristic language to indicate that other traditions (and not just individual
members of traditions) share in the ‘riches that a generous God has

3
CTC 503: Assessment Task 2: Summary and evaluation of Dialogue and Proclamation - Candidate number: V42326

distributed’ (16). God makes a covenant with characters who represent the
whole human race. There is but one, continuous story of God’s involvement
with humankind, one history of salvation for all peoples. Among the nations
Israel is gifted with a special awareness of salvation including an eventual
realisation that salvation is for all. Jesus embodies this realisation by
‘displaying an open attitude towards men and women who do not belong to
the chosen people of Israel’ (21) and by proclaiming a Kingdom that is not
confined to the people of Israel. A positive and generous approach to other
traditions is instanced by St Paul’s Areopagus speech and, in the post-
Apostolic period, in the work of Justin, Irenaeus and Clement of Alexandria
who develop a theology of history that is able to construe all history as
salvation history. Because all (human) awareness is oriented to radical self-
awareness, that is, awareness of man’s rootedness in God, then Christ as the
embodiment of that is both the culmination of history and the latent presence
in human awareness since the beginning of time. ‘Christianity already existed
“at the beginning of the human race”’ (25). This patristic vision helped to
inspire the Council to recognise the presence of the Holy Spirit in other
religions. However discernment is needed to recognise the work of the Spirit in
other traditions and Christians will need to challenge people in a peaceful spirit
with regard to their beliefs.

The Kingdom that Jesus inaugurated in his earthly mission is represented to

the world by the Church. When the members of other religious traditions live in
accordance with their consciences they are oriented to the Church. Indeed the
Church is called to discern the reality of the Kingdom in the lives of other
believers insofar as they are open to the Spirit. While the Church is the sign of
what the fullness of life and truth means for all human beings, her individual
members are not perfect. In order that her sacramental nature may be
experienced as such by others, she must seek reformation and renewal. She
engages in dialogue with other traditions and with humankind generally
because God relates Godself to people dialogically. The forms of interreligious
dialogue are varied and include open sharing with others, working for human
liberation, theological discussion and shared religious experience. Certain

4
CTC 503: Assessment Task 2: Summary and evaluation of Dialogue and Proclamation - Candidate number: V42326

dispositions, including openness to truth, are required of those who engage in

interreligious dialogue.

Proclaiming Jesus Christ (55-76). The mandate to proclaim the Gospel was
given by Jesus to the Church. It is Jesus as the embodiment and realisation of
the Kingdom who is proclaimed. The Church is the ‘seed and the beginning
’ (59) of the Kingdom. (Proclaiming) the word following the prompting of the
Holy Spirit is essential to the Church’s witness to the Kingdom and it is Christ
crucified and risen that forms the principal content of this witness. The
Church’s task is not exercised in a void since believers from other religions
through the sincere practice of their own traditions have already responded
positively to God’s offer of salvation through Christ. There is a pedagogy of
proclamation and the Church must respect the varying capacities of people to
hear the word. Proclamation must be (amongst other qualities) dialogical and
there must be progress from the ‘seeds of the word’ (70).

Interreligious Dialogue and Proclamation (77-86) are not ‘on the same
level’ but they are both ‘authentic elements’ (77) of evangelization. Jesus
Christ is to be proclaimed dialogically – in the Gospel spirit of dialogue with
due sensitivity to the circumstances. While interreligious dialogue promotes
‘truth and life’ (80) proclamation guides people to an explicit knowledge of
what God has achieved in Christ. Dialogue must be oriented towards
proclamation and Christians must be ready to give an account of ‘the hope
that is within them’ (82: I Pt 3:15) when this is called for.

Commentary

In his analysis of DP Dupuis refers to the risk of a ‘juxtaposition of the two

parts [ie dealing with dialogue and proclamation] without a perfect integration
of both’.3 Does DP actually suffer from imperfect integration? If there is
imperfection, how is this to be accounted for? Are the apparent tensions
generated by the conjoining of work by two distinct dicasteries or is there

3
Op. cit. p. 123

5
CTC 503: Assessment Task 2: Summary and evaluation of Dialogue and Proclamation - Candidate number: V42326

something inherent to the two ideas that makes that makes satisfactory
integration impossible? Interestingly Dupuis thinks that ‘to a great extent’ DP
has fulfilled its task. Taken by itself, Interreligious Dialogue seems to establish
a mutuality between dialogue and proclamation. While earlier drafts of the
document implied that the two were essential elements of the Church’s
evangelizing mission,4 the compromise formula in the final draft continues to
describe dialogue as ‘integral’ (9). Proclamation, while being the ‘foundation,
centre and summit’ can also be a ‘conversation’ that can lead to a deepening
of faith (10). The nuanced approach of Interreligious Dialogue to the two
‘component elements’ (2) is to a large extent a corollary of its development of
insights from Nostra aetate and Lumen gentium (16) that variously affirm the
presence of the Word in other religious traditions. A different kind of
background permeates Proclaiming Jesus Christ with its emphasis on the
efficacy of proclaiming Jesus Christ ‘confidently and perseveringly’ (67) when
the occasion presents itself. While both interreligious dialogue and
proclamation remain ‘authentic elements’ they are not considered to be ‘on the
same level’ (77). In spite of this, however, even Proclaiming Jesus Christ
concedes that the exemplar of proclamation, Jesus himself, ‘does not proclaim
by word alone, but with … actions, attitudes and options, indeed by means of
his whole life … (56). Dupuis feels that DP has demonstrated that dialogue
and proclamation are both distinct and necessary.5 It seems to me, however,
that Interreligious Dialogue paints with such a broad brush that any distinctive
contours of proclamation are not easily discernible. On the other hand
Proclaiming Jesus Christ stresses the centrality of proclamation to such an
extent that the sense in which dialogue is necessary is unclear.

To some extent, it could be said that, like Dialogue and Mission6, DP provides
a theological basis on which the practice of dialogue and proclamation could
be grounded. The development of ideas in Interreligious Dialogue – God
dialogues with hearers of the Word (ie all humankind) and the Church,
inspired by the mind the ‘dialoguee’ par excellence (Christ), maintains this

4
See Dupuis, Op. cit. p. 155
5
Op. cit. p. 154
6
Dialogue and Mission, The Secretariat for Non-Christians (1984).

6
CTC 503: Assessment Task 2: Summary and evaluation of Dialogue and Proclamation - Candidate number: V42326

dialogue so that all may experience salvation – seems to me to suggest a

theological position that could open up a vein of ideas and insights for
interreligious dialogue. God is present and active in all creation through the
Word (17). What distinguishes Israel and ultimately Christianity is the quality of
its awareness, its ‘deep awareness,’ (20) of the covenantal relationship that
exists between God and humankind. Deep awareness – or radical self-
awareness – represents a decisive moment in the journey into Word-
awareness (from the Christian perspective, Jesus enjoys this uniquely). In the
story of the Samaritan woman, referred to in DM (21), Jesus tellingly says to
the woman ‘You worship what you do not know; we [ie the Jews] worship what
we do know.’ (Jn 4:22). What is required is not so much conversion to the
Jewish God as a full realisation of what is happening in (Samaritan) worship.
Michael Barnes remarks that the ‘new horizon’ (21) that Jesus opens up is not
just related to his Resurrection but to ‘the possibility of a ‘theology of history’
[…] to be precise, a vision of God’s progressive self-communication to all
humankind.’7 For this to occur all participants in a dialogue of religions would
need to give an ‘account of the hope that is within’ as a necessary condition for
movement towards deeper awareness. An Islamic commentary on DP states
that ‘… Christians should enter into dialogue with people of other faiths by
proclaiming their own faith to them. In our opinion, if it was accepted that
others might do the same, there would be no objection to it.’8

With reference to the question about the possible ‘imperfect integration’9 of

dialogue and proclamation in DP, it has been suggested10 that the tension
between the two reflects the two states of the Church with reference to the
Kingdom of God. Insofar as the Church is the pilgrim Church moving towards
the Kingdom, she dialogues with others. Insofar as she is the sacrament of the
Kingdom already present, she proclaims Jesus Christ in whom the Kingdom
7

Michael Barnes SJ, Discerning the ‘Catholic Instinct’ in Dialogue and Proclamation ten years
on.
8
See Dialogue and Proclamation on www.crvp.org/books/Series02/IIA-13/chapter_two
9
p. 5 supra
10
See Dupuis, op.cit., pp 155ff

7
CTC 503: Assessment Task 2: Summary and evaluation of Dialogue and Proclamation - Candidate number: V42326

has been established. The implication of DP (34-35) is that members of other

religious traditions (can) share in the Kingdom. Such a ‘regnocentric’
perspective enables us to see proclamation, not as a by-product of
‘ecclesiocentrism according to which mission would be intended for increasing
Church membership’11 but as a way of bringing into the open, or making more
explicit, truths to which people are already oriented. In the words of the
Federation of Asian Bishops’ Conference ‘ … the Church’s proclamation meets
the deepest longings and aspirations of the human heart for liberation and
wholeness of life.’12 It is questionable, however, whether, from the perspective
of the other traditions, the sharing of what meets the ‘deepest longings’ can be
distinguished from proclamation as assertion. In such a context the perception
of a relaxation of tension between proclamation and dialogue may be more
unilateral than general.

(2429 words)

Further references

Pilgrimage Re-envisioned: Mission and Culture in the last five General

Congregations:
www.puffin.creighton.edu/jesuit/dialogue/documents/articles/starclof_pilgrimage

Christ, the One Saviour of the World: Reflections on our emerging

Christological question (1997): www.eapi.admu.edu.ph/eapr97/huang

11
Op. cit. p. 157
12
From Some Theological Reflections on the Asian Context of Evangelisation, in Sedos
Bulletin (15th February 1992), pp. 50-55

8
CTC 503: Assessment Task 2: Summary and evaluation of Dialogue and Proclamation - Candidate number: V42326