|
|
Dilatato Corde 6:1
January - June, 2016 
The zendo at Abdij Maria Toevlucht, a Trappist monastery in Zundert, Holland
INTER-MONASTIC TRANSMUTATIO Abstract Résumé Among the manifold aspects of modernity—or, maybe more exactly, post-modernity—that challenge Christianity are religious diversity and religious pluralism. As the Indian theologian Felix Wilfred recently put it, one urgent call for Christians in our times is “becoming Christians inter-religiously.”[1] The same also holds true for Christian monks,[2] who are called to become more and more “monks inter-religiously.” This consciousness, which is shared by ever more Christian monks around the world (but comparatively still much more in Western countries than elsewhere), is also shared by an increasing number of monks following other religious and spiritual paths. This means that monks—at least some of them—belonging to all religious traditions are experiencing a transformation, a sort of alchemical transmutatio in their respective monastic identity as a response to the multi-religious context in which they live and as a result of their personal contacts, at different levels, with spiritual seekers walking in different religious ways. This is well expressed in the words of a French Benedictine monk engaged in monastic interreligious dialogue when he says that “by opening one’s own heart and mind to an effort to understand more deeply the religious universe in which the partner in the dialogue is progressing, a secret alchemy happens in the one who tries to open himself to the other in this way.”[3] The dialogical transmutatio of the Church and the birth of an interreligious dialogue at the level of spiritual experience In the last decades different forms of contact, exchange, and exploration among the representatives of the various traditions brought Christian monks into a closer and deeper contact with Hindu and Buddhist ascetics. However, in the case of Christianity, this would not have been enough for them to find themselves in an ‘interreligious monastic transmutatio’ if a major shift in the theological approach towards other religions had not happened, namely the Church’s shift towards a more positive attitude to other religions inaugurated by the Second Vatican Council. Actually, we could apply also to the Church in dialogue the same image of transmutatio for describing its process of a new self-understanding vis-à-vis the world and “otherness.” In relation to other religions, the openness and sensitivity of Vatican II towards diversity or pluralism resulted in the establishment of the Secretariat for Non-Christians on May 14, 1964, during the Council and prior to the promulgation of the conciliar decree Nostra ætate on October 28, 1965. This document is really a sort of charter for dialogue because it has altered forever the Church’s attitude toward and relationship with other religions. It has set the Church and these religious traditions firmly on the path of mutual influence and enrichment. The Church has yet to realize the full implications of Nostra ætate 2: The Church has this exhortation for her sons: prudently and lovingly, through dialogue and collaboration with the followers of other religions, and in witness of Christian faith and life, acknowledge, preserve, and promote the spiritual and moral goods found among these men, as well as the values in their society and culture. Not only does this statement admit to the presence of truth in the other traditions, it also opens the door to the assimilation of these very values into the one universal tradition of the Church, which is always growing and acquiring new insights. In other terms, this document paved the way for a Christian transmutatio that is based on the blessed “discovery of the sacrament of otherness”[4] and deep “esteem of the other’s faith."[5] In 1984 the Secretariat for Non-Christians was able to draw up a precise text about interreligious dialogue, in which dialogue at the level of religious experience[6] was formally outlined and promoted: “At a deeper level, persons rooted in their own religious traditions can share their experiences of prayer, contemplation, faith and duty, as well as their expressions and ways of searching for the Absolute.”[7] Referring to this paragraph of the document Dialogue and Mission, Pope John Paul II added in a speech in the same year: “Here I think especially of inter-monastic dialogue.”[8] The dialogical transmutatio of Christian monasticism: foundations, development, and inspiring figures This evolution of openness of the Church to other religions officially stimulated Catholic monks and nuns “to make contact with another’s inmost experiences” in “a fruitful dialogue that monks alone are suited to undertake with their brothers, non-Christian spiritual seekers.”[9] Against the background of the Church’s transmutatio, a simultaneous transmutatio was developing inside the Christian monastic world, an openness to other monastic experiences. Two monastic meetings held in Asia, the conferences in Bangkok in 1968 and Bangalore in 1973, contributed to bringing this awareness to light and laid the foundation for the future self-understanding of Christian monasticism, not only in Asia.[10] For these reasons the Bangkok conference of 1968 is referred to as the one that drew “a new charter for monasticism”,[11] while the Bangalore conference of 1973 as “the Pentecost of the monastic world.”[12] Interestingly, this new reorientation of monasticism emerged when Christian monasticism dared to expose itself to a “different similarity,” represented by non-Christian monasticism.[13] The meetings in Bangkok and in Bangalore offered Catholic monks their first opportunity to meet and listen to Hindu and Buddhist monks and to be brought into a deeper contact with Eastern spiritualities. Among the most appreciated results in terms of transmutatio was the way these meetings helped the participants to recover the contemplative and charismatic essence of Christian monasticism. More generally, the Bangkok conference took seriously the need in Christian monasticism of a transmutatio in its cultural forms, namely, the need of a “de-Hellenization” of monasticism and an integration of new cultural and religious patterns: Monasticism must be prepared to contribute to the integration of new cultures and new religions in Christianity. . . . Especially to the degree that monasticism is present among other cultures . . . it must see openness to these cultures as one of its functions. It will also have to modify its structures and its conceptions if these prevent it from adopting what is good, valid for itself, in the monasticism of the countries where it happens to be.[14] A new consciousness that non-Christian monastic life could enrich and reorient Christian monastic training was another great outcome of the Bangkok conference, as one of the participants, a Trappist monk, underlined: Our [Christian] monastic life should grow under the enriching presence of our non-Christian brethren, and this mainly at three levels: study, friendly relations and dialogue, and ultimately an actual sharing in the experience of the monastic life as it is lived by our [Asian] people.[15] The dimension of interreligious dialogue between monks belonging to different religious traditions that emerged from the inter-monastic conferences in Asia was later further developed and gave birth to a new institution, namely the DIMMID, Dialogue Interreligieux Monastique/Monastic Interreligious Dialogue.[16] From the late 1970s onward, DIMMID commissions have spread all over the world and their activities have grown in different directions. The “experiential” character of the dialogue promoted by DIMMID found its main realization in initiatives of dialogue between monks belonging to different religious traditions on a local level. Together with this, since 1979 the so-called “East-West Spiritual Exchanges” have brought alternatively Japanese Zen Buddhist monks to experience Christian monastic life in European monasteries and Western Christian monks to experience Zen monastic training in Japanese monasteries.[17] In 1981 a North American “Inter-Monastic Hospitality Program “began, promoting exchanges between American Christian and Tibetan Buddhist monks. As professor Noboru Anzai’s sociological studies of these encounters reveal, the vast majority of the participants on both sides came out of these intense encounters with a vastly deeper respect for and admiration of their host’s tradition.[18]The first general secretary of the DIMMID and main organizer of the “East-West Spiritual Exchanges,” the Belgian Benedictine monk Pierre-François de Béthune, describes them in the following terms: It became clear that this kind of meeting, much of it devoted to silence and held in a setting dedicated to the spiritual life, allowed for a deep level of communion. . . . Participants . . . understood that exchanges like this could not be “limited to concrete questions.” It was not enough simply to enter the house of the other; one had to enter their spirituality as well, making a serious attempt to understand and appreciate their reasons for following a monastic way of life. In order to do this, a high level of reciprocal trust is essential.[19] This experience of immersion for a certain period of time in a “foreign” spiritual milieu is eye-opening for both guests and hosts. In this sense, monastic interreligious dialogue is a “dialogue of contemplative immersion,” “a silent and prayerful partaking in the risks, temptations, joys, and sufferings of fellow monks in their quest of the Absolute.”[20] The long tradition of monastic hospitality offers “a setting wherein a meeting of mind and heart can take place.”[21] Being together in the physical space of a monastery engages both guests and hosts in a process of mutual hospitality in the spiritual space of their monastic life, and this often provokes a deep, sometimes shocking, inner transmutatio.[22] But those who follow new paths need “visionaries” to open them and to inspire others. The inspiring visions and experiences of monks such as Henri Le Saux OSB (Abhishiktananda) (1910-1973), Bede Griffiths OSB (Dayananda) (1906-1993), Francis Mahieu OCSO (Francis Acharya) (1912-2002),[23] whose personal experiences and those of the ashrams they founded or led gave birth and shape to what Wayne Teasdale calls ‘sannyasic monasticism’,[24] as well as Thomas Merton (1915-1968) and Christian de Chergé (1937-1996) opened the monastic world to the new horizon of monastic interreligious dialogue. The personal witness of these and other figures shows how the practice of interreligious dialogue contributed to make them conscious of the need to reconsider their Christian monastic identity or even brought them to reshape some aspects of their Christian monastic practice. The Trappist monk Thomas Merton can be considered the very pioneer of monastic interreligious dialogue conceived as an “explorational dialogue” in the other’s spiritual deepness from an “insider perspective.”[25] His spiritual and monastic life was deeply influenced by the exposure, through readings and personal encounters, to different spiritualities of other religions.[26] In 1964 Merton wrote in his journal: “Asia, Zen, Islam, etc., all these things come together in my life. It would be madness for me to attempt to create a monastic life for myself by excluding all these. I would be less a monk.”[27] In other pages of his writings we find clear statements of his desire and openness to learn from Eastern spiritual traditions. Among them, the most important pages, even though the latest in terms of time of composition, are the notes taken for a document to be presented in Calcutta in October 1968: “I speak as a Western monk who is preeminently concerned with his own monastic calling and dedication. I have left my monastery to come here . . . to drink from ancient sources of monastic vision and experience. I seek . . . to become a better and more enlightened monk.”[28] Among the manifold interests that moved Thomas Merton eastward, the first is, thus, a need of refreshing and deepening his own monastic life and a renewal of the contemporary monastic tradition.[29] It was a longing for a spiritual and structural monastic transmutatio. In the same draft document to be presented in Calcutta in 1968, Merton writes: I think we have now reached a stage of religious maturity at which it may be possible for someone to remain perfectly faithful to a Christian and Western monastic commitment, and yet to learn in depth from, say, a Buddhist or Hindu discipline and experience. I believe that some of us need to do this in order to improve the quality of our own monastic life and even to help in the task of monastic renewal.[30] We must understand the renewal Merton hoped for in the right sense. It should be not an abstract transformation or formal adaptation of monastic and ascetical practices, but a deep transmutatio of the monastic’s spiritual life as a result of a sincere contact with the spiritual richness hidden in other monastic lives. Speaking at the monastic conference in Bangkok in 1968 in front of a monastic audience, Merton concluded his speech saying without hesitation that Eastern monastic values can be a complement to Western Christian monasticism: If you once penetrate by detachment and purity of heart to the inner secret of the ground of our ordinary experience, you attain to a liberty that nobody can touch, that nobody can affect. . . . Somewhere behind our monasticism, and behind Buddhist monasticism, is the belief that this kind of freedom and transcendence is somehow attainable. . . . I, as a monk – and, I think, you as monks – can agree that we believe this to be the deepest and most essential thing in our lives, and because we believe this, we have given ourselves to the kind of life we have adopted. I believe that our renewal consists precisely in deepening this understanding and this grasp of that which is more real. And I believe that by openness to Buddhism, to Hinduism, and to these great Asian traditions, we stand a wonderful chance of learning more about the potentiality of our own traditions, because they have gone, from the natural point of view, so much deeper into this than we have.[31] Incidentally, more than forty years later, I found a similar voice, but coming from the Buddhist side, calling for a reinterpretation of monastic life and affirming the potential help that can be offered to this endeavor by interreligious dialogue. A German Zen Buddhist nun engaged in the monastic interreligious dialogue recently wrote that “this issue of reinterpreting the monastery, beyond every specific religious tradition, [is] urgent and has a place in the dialogue between Christian and Buddhists. [Therefore,] the reinterpretation of the monastery as a living religious setting in the twentieth-century world is to be undertaken” by Buddhists and Christians together.[32] Echoing John E. Bamberger, we may therefore conclude that Merton’s exploration of Eastern religious traditions undoubtedly influenced the evolution of his vision and practice of monastic life, prayer, and contemplation.[33] Ekman P. C. Tam confirms this transmutatio in the field of contemplation when he recognizes five major areas in Merton’s spiritual journey that were influenced by Zen and Taoism in the last years of his life (1959-1968): First, Zen-Taoism motivated Merton to move away from a dogmatic framework and turn towards an experiential approach. Second, Zen-Taoism affirmed Merton’s positive worldview and concern for the well-being of humanity. Third, Zen-Taoism expanded Merton’s understanding of God. Fourth, Zen-Taoism influenced Merton’s understanding of the Christian experience of self-realization. Lastly, Zen-Taoism affected Merton’s view of contemplative prayer and spiritual itinerary.[34] Three decades of monastic interreligious dialogue: features, experiences, and results At this point we wish to make a preliminary attempt to note the main features, experiences, and results of this “dialogue of spiritual experience” carried on by monks (mainly Christian and Buddhist) around the world in the last three decades. Our aim is to assess the first steps of this process, in which monastic identity, both personal (the monk or the nun) and common (the monastic community), is changing through the practice of interreligious dialogue. Unfortunately, available materials that give witness to relevant experiences in this field are still very scanty. It is only in 2011 that a journal titled Dilatato Corde was launched by DIMMID with the main purpose of collecting “the contributions of spiritual practitioners and scholars from different religious traditions who wish to report, reflect on, and examine the many ways this form of interreligious dialogue can expand the hearts of all spiritual seekers.”[35] Since its very beginning, monastic interreligious dialogue, following Thomas Merton’s insights, has been characterized as a “dialogue of spirituality”[36] and a “silent dialogue,”[37] above all because monastic spiritual life has silence as its fundamental environment and because monastic spiritual life has the “heart” or the “spirit” as the main space of this dialogue. It is a dialogue that happens at the level of the inner spiritual life of each of the partners in the dialogue, namely an “interior dialogue,” or “intra-religious dialogue,” as Raimon Panikkar used to say.[38] In this sense, this kind of dialogue is extremely engaging because it concerns the very identity of a monk. Intra-religious dialogue inevitably requires, and at the same time produces, a spiritual conversion, an inner transformation. Therefore, what is at play here is precisely a transmutatio of monastic identity that happens in the process of dialogue with the “monastic other” and as a result of a concrete experience. In the words of Raimon Panikkar, whom the DIMMID regards as a source of learning and inspiration, the dialogue requires welcoming in oneself the other’s experience, also the “monastic other,” since meeting with him or her is an experience of revelation. That is why interreligious monastic dialogue is a “dialogue of experience,” as the same Raimon Panikkar wisely pointed out in a conference given to a DIMMID group in 2004, namely the experience of “immersion” into the spirituality of another religion: The particular characteristic of the interreligious dialogue of monastic men and women is that it is a “dialogue of experience.” . . . Every form of dialogue that is not merely intellectual is an experience, a common experience. . . . This kind of dialogue takes time, many years. Those who sense that they are called to become more deeply involved in the work of interreligious dialogue will have to become immersed in another religion.[39] In the Trappist community in Tibhirine, Algeria, we find the most evident and brilliant example of this “existential dialogue” that “is the fruit of a prolonged ‘living together,’ and of shared concerns, sometimes very concrete”, a dialogue – in this case with Muslims – that “is both manual and spiritual, both of the everyday and of eternity.”[40] This practice of existential dialogue was also based on the consciousness of the astonishing closeness between the essential observances of monastic life and the pillars of Islam.[41] If these Muslim essentials worked as stimulation for a deepening of Christian practices in the Tibhirine Trappist community, we know that the main practice that undoubtedly underwent a real transmutatio in the life of its prior, Christian de Chergé, as a result of his existential and spiritual dialogue with his Muslim friends was that of lectio divina, i.e., the prayerful reading of the holy Scriptures.[42] Frère Christian was convinced of the possibility of a “hospitality of lectio divina,” since “there is a possible “monastic reading” of the other’s spiritual tradition and, firstly, of the Qur’an itself.”[43] Doing lectio divina on the Qur’an became a common practice for Frère Christian and we find a few precious echoes of it in his writings.[44] This issue leads us to consider major field of transmutatio, namely, prayer, meditation, or contemplation. Several meetings for monastic dialogue directly focusing on or including this subject were organized by DIMMID.[45] More importantly, several Christian monks involved in interreligious dialogue have taken up the way of dialogue by carefully adopting or, more properly, integrating a contemplative form of prayer that has been elaborated in another religion. In the last years some Christian monastic communities even began to offer Zen meditation courses or Buddhist-Christian retreats in the setting of their monastery. Sometimes Catholic monks themselves, trained in zazen, lead the groups, sometimes Buddhist monks are invited as teachers. This can also be considered a transmutatio of the monastic space to offer hospitality to spiritual practices other than the traditional forms of Christian meditation. The DIMMID dossiers of 1993 (Contemplation et dialogue interreligieux. Repères et perspectives puisés dans l’expérience des moines)[46] and 2003 (Monastic Experience of Interreligious Dialogue)[47] provide a precious documentation of these monastic experiences of dialogue and show that Buddhist Zen and Vipassana meditation or yoga have helped monks to live a more embodied spirituality. This kind of spirituality involves a rediscovery of the body, sexuality, and subtle psycho-physiological energies — in other words, the rediscovery of unknown or neglected aspects of the work of salvation as it has generally been understood in Christianity.[48] We can, therefore, speak of a transmutatio of the form of meditation, a “meditation without an object,” and of the way of meditating, in which the body has a significant place and in which silence has a greater role.[49] Echoing Fabrice Blée, we can also speak of a transmutatio of the monastic call to the desert as a new, unprecedented call to the “desert of otherness”: The adoption of a contemplative path worked out in another religion is central to the development of the dialogue practiced by monks. . . . It promotes access to what we have called the “desert of otherness.” . . . Monks engaged in dialogue show us the way into this desert and in so doing reveal an unusual dimension of the contemporary monastic vocation. Entering into relation with the other, the one whose deepest beliefs are radically different from ours, can be seen as the desert where the monastic vocation . . . is to be lived out.[50] A last, final example of how monastic interreligious dialogue has put in action a transmutatio of understanding of the Christian monastic identity concerns monastic celibacy. A Buddhist-Christian monastic dialogue specifically devoted to this subject took place at Saint John’s Abbey in Collegeville, Minnesota, in October 2006; it was the second meeting of “Monks in the West.”[51] One of the participants, the American Benedictine monk William Skudlarek, who in 2007 became the second general secretary of DIMMID, developed the insights coming from that meeting into a book titled Demythologizing Celibacy, in which he shares his “effort to demythologize, reevaluate, and reflect on the meaning and practice of . . . Catholic monastic celibacy in the light of some Buddhist teachings and practices as they were heard and understood by a Catholic participant.”[52] Its conclusions bear witness to that kind of monastic transmutatio that every true and deep interreligious dialogue produces, namely a stimulation to walk forward on the path of humanization: A demythologized celibacy is not a devalued celibacy. Rather, it is a way of life whose value can be more clearly understood when it is seen not as some kind of angelic life that is possible only for a privileged few, nor as an unrealizable ideal, but as an option that, for any number of reasons, ordinary people may be attracted to. . . . For these people . . . celibacy is not so much a “charism” as a “skillful means” for realizing their humanity and their destiny, which ultimately consists in becoming free from self-centered desire in order to draw nearer to lasting peace and happiness.[53] Notes [1] See Felix Wilfred, “Becoming Christian inter-religiously” in Concilium, XLVII:2 (2011), pp. 59-67. See also Peter C. Phan, Being Religious Interreligiously. Asian Perspectives on Interfaith Dialogue (Maryknoll NY: Orbis Press, 2004). [2] Throughout this article I will use the term “monks” to include both monks and nuns. [3] Antoine Desfarges, “Un engagement pour le dialogue interreligieux monastique” in Chemins de dialogue, 39 (2012), p. 171. [4] I borrow this motto from Alberto Melloni, “Nostra Aetate e la scoperta del sacramento dell’alterità” in Norbert J. Hofmann, Joseph Sievers, Maurizio Mottolese, eds., Chiesa ed ebraismo oggi. Percorsi fatti, questioni aperte (Roma: Pontificia Università Gregoriana, 2005), pp. 153-179. [5] This is the title of a recent French volume on interreligious dialogue from the Catholic point of view: Henri de la Hougue, L’estime de la foi des autres (Paris: Desclée de Brouwer, 2011). [6] On this peculiar form of interreligious dialogue, see: Pierre-François de Béthune, “Le dialogue interreligieux au foyer de la vie spirituelle” in Nouvelle Revue Théologique, 121 (1999), pp. 557-572; Idem, “Les enjeux du dialogue de l’expérience spirituelle” in La vie spirituelle, 731 (1999), pp. 239-251; Gregory Perron, “Dwelling in the Heart of the Desert. On the Dialogue of Religious Experience and Monastic Interreligious Dialogue” in Dilatato Corde, II (2012), pp. 123-157. Articles from Dilatato Corde can also be found on-line at www.dimmid.org At the end of the year, the main contents are brought together and made available as a book. [7] Secretariat for Non-Christians, “Dialogue and Mission. Attitudes of the Catholic Church towards the Followers of Other Religions” in Acta Apostolicae Sedis, 84 (1984), pp. 816-828. See also Pontifical Council for Inter-religious Dialogue & Congregation for the Evangelization of Peoples, “Dialogue and Proclamation” in Pro Dialogo, 77 (1991), pp. 210-250. This and other official Church documents, as well as papal speeches, etc., can be found on the website of the Holy See: www.vatican.va [8] John Paul II, “Address to the Plenary Assembly of the Secretariat for Non-Christians”(3 March 1984), § 4, in Bulletin. Secretariatus pro non Christianis, 56 (1984), pp. 122-123. [9] Piero Rossano, “Dialogue between Christian and Non-Christian Monks. Opportunities and Difficulties” in Bulletin. Secretariatus pro non Christianis, 46 (1981), pp. 68-74. [10] The proceedings of the Bangkok conference are published in John Moffitt, ed., A New Charter for Monasticism. Proceedings of the Meeting of the Monastic Superiors in the Far East, Bangkok, December 9 to 15, 1968 (Notre Dame IN: University of Notre Dame Press, 1970). The proceedings of the Bangalore conference are published in Cistercian Studies, IX:2-3 (1974): “Christian Monks and Asian Religions. Proceedings of the Second Asian Monastic Congress, Bangalore, October 14 to 22, 1973.” [11] John Moffitt, ed., A New Charter for Monasticism, op. cit., p. xiv. [12] Cornelius Tholens, quoted in Fabrice Blée, The Third Desert. The Story of Monastic Interreligious Dialogue (Collegeville MN: Liturgical Press, 2011), p. 25. [13] As said at a recent Buddhist-Christian monastic meeting in the United States, it seems accurate to say that Buddhist and Christian monks “are all on the same (or, at least, very similar) path, but moving toward different destinations” (William Skudlarek, “Monks in the West III” in Dilatato Corde, II (2012), p. 226). For a critical survey of the similarities in Buddhist and Christian monks’ lifestyle and practice, see, for instance: Môhan Wijayaratna, Le renoncement au monde dans le bouddhisme et dans le christianisme. Une étude comparée sur le monachisme bouddhique et sur le monachisme chrétien du désert (ive siècle) (Paris: Lis, 2002); Patrick G. Henry & Donald K. Swearer, For the Sake of the World. The Spirit of Buddhist and Christian Monasticism (Minneapolis MN: Fortress Press; Collegeville MN: Liturgical Press, 1989); Morris J. Augustine, “Zen and Benedictine Monks as Mythopoeic Models of Nonegocentered Worldviews and Lifestyles” in Buddhist-Christian Studies, VI (1986), pp. 23-49; Roger J. Corless, “The Dialogue of Silence. A Comparison of Buddhist and Christian Monasticism with a Practical Suggestion” in Gary Wayne Houston, ed., The Cross and the Lotus.Christianity and Buddhism in Dialogue (Delhi: Motilal Banarsidass, 1985), pp. 80-107; Idem, “Sense and Nonsense in Buddhist-Christian Intermonastic Dialogue” in Monastic Studies, 19 (1991), pp. 11-22. [14] Jean Leclercq, “Present-Day Problems in Monasticism” in John Moffitt, ed., A New Charter for Monasticism, op. cit., p. 38. [15] Francis Acharya, “Reorientation of Monastic Life in an Asian Context” in John Moffitt, ed., A New Charter for Monasticism, op. cit., p. 116. [16] On the history and spirituality of DIMMID, see Fabrice Blée, The Third Desert, op. cit.; Pierre-François de Béthune, “Monastic Inter-Religious Dialogue” in Catherine Cornille, ed., The Wiley-Blackwell Companion to Inter-Religious Dialogue (Chichester: John Wiley & Sons, 2013), pp. 34-50; Idem, “Monastic Interreligious Dialogue. A History“ in Anthony O’Mahony & Peter Bowe, eds., Catholics in Interreligious Dialogue. Studies in Monasticism, Theology and Spirituality (Leominster: Gracewings, 2006), pp. 3-9; Matteo Nicolini-Zani, “I monasteri luoghi di incontro e dialogo. Il dialogo interreligioso monastico” in L’Ulivo, n.s. XLIII:2 (2014), pp. 85*-100*; Idem, “Quando l’‘uno’ incontra l’‘altro’. Storia e spiritualità del dialogo interreligioso monastico” in Ora et Labora, LXIX:1 (2014), pp. 1-17; Peter Bowe, “Contemporary Witness, Future Configuration. Monastic Interfaith Dialogue” in Anthony O’Mahony & Peter Bowe, eds., Catholics in Interreligious Dialogue, op. cit., pp. 10-25; Bernard de Give, “Une enterprise féconde: le dialogue interreligieux Monastique” in Studia Missionalia”, 43 (1994), pp. 95-113. [17] See Pierre-François de Béthune, “Note sur les échanges spirituels est-ouest depuis les origins” in Dilatato Corde, II (2012), pp. 59-65. In addition to several reports and reflections contained in the DIM/MID International Bulletinalong the years, see also Benoît Billot, Voyage dans les monastères zen (Paris: Desclée de Brouwer, 1987); Bartomeu Ubach, “The Violent Are Taking the Kingdom of Heaven by Storm” in Buddhist-Christian Studies, X (1990), pp. 189-196; Gensho Hozumi, “From a Spanish Monastery” in Buddhist-Christian Studies, X (1990), pp. 196-200; Genkai Sugimoto, “Japanese Buddhists in the Monastery of Montserrat” in Buddhist-Christian Studies, X (1990), pp. 200-208; Roger Corless, “Fourth East-West Spiritual Exchange” in Buddhist-Christian Studies, XI (1991), pp. 283-285; Michiko Ishigami-Iagolnitzer, Dialogue interreligieux monastique bouddhistes-chrétiens au Japon et en Europe (Paris: Sciences et Lettres, 1992); Daniel Pont, “Dans les monastères zen du Japon. Sixième Échange Spirituel du D.I.M., 4 octobre – 8 novembre 1998” in Chemins de dialogue, 13 (1999), pp. 53-65; “The Twelfth Spiritual Exchange Program (Japan, eptember 17 – October 5, 2011). Testimonials” in Dilatato Corde, II (2012), pp. 13-55. [18]See Noboru Anzai, Tōzai reisei kōryū no seika. Bukkyō to Kirisutokyō no kyōmei (Tokyo: Heiwa Kenkyujo, 1983). [19]Pierre-François de Béthune, “Monastic Inter-Religious Dialogue,” op. cit., pp. 38-39. [20] Gilbert G. Hardy, Monastic Quest and Interreligious Dialogue (New York: P. Lang, 1990), p. 255. [21] John Paul II, “Address to the Participants in the ‘East-West Spiritual Exchange’”(9 September 1987) in Bulletin. Secretariatus pro non Christianis, 67 (1988), p. 6. [22] On the subject of monastic inter-religious hospitality, see: Pierre-François de Béthune, By Faith and Hospitality. The Monastic Tradition as a Model for Interreligious Encounter (Leominster: Gracewings, 2002); Idem, Interreligious Hospitality. The Fulfillment of Dialogue, trans. Robert Henrey (Collegeville MN: Liturgical Press, 2010); Fabrice Blée, “Hospitality as a Condition for Dialogue. The Monastic Interreligious Experience” in Tianzhujiao yanjiu xuebao (Hong Kong Journal of Catholic Studies), 4 (2014), pp. 231-248. [23] India is undoubtedly the Asian country that has witnessed the deepest, most interesting, and most fruitful encounter between Christian monasticism and Asian asceticism, in this case Hindu sannyāsa. These three figures produced numerous writings concerning their attempt to “translate” Benedictine monasticism into a sannyasic form in order to find an existential synthesis or convergence between them. [24]Wayne Teasdale, Bede Griffiths. An Introduction to His Interspiritual Thought (Woodstock VT: SkyLight Paths, 2003), p. 42. Judson B. Trapnell confirms that “sannyāsa is . . . an orientation to the world, to the self, and to the divine that both Griffiths and Le Saux adopted from Indian culture to redefine their identities as monks.” See Judson B. Trapnell, “Monastic Interreligious Dialogue in India. Henri Le Saux, OSB (Abhishiktananda) and Bede Griffiths OSBCam” in Anthony O’Mahony & Peter Bowe, eds., Catholics in Interreligious Dialogue, op. cit., pp. 193-216: 193. The available literature on ‘sannyasic monasticism’ is scarce. See Emmanuel Vattakuzhy, Indian Christian Sannyāsa and Swami Abhishiktananda (Bangalore: Theological Publications in India, 1981); Wayne Teasdale, Bede Griffiths, op. cit., pp. 17-42, 157-171; William Skudlarek, “Abhishiktananda’s Understanding of the Monk: Essentially Contemplative, Ideally Eremitic, Naturally Dialogic” in Dilatato Corde, I (2011), pp. 132-145. [25] See: Colin Albin, “Thomas Merton and Inter-Faith Dialogue. Exploring a Way Forward” in Paul M. Pearson, Danny Sullivan, & Ian Thomson, eds., Thomas Merton. Poet, Monk, Prophet (Abergavenny: Three Peaks Press, 1998), pp. 154-168; Roger Corless, “The Christian Exploration of Non-Christian Religions. Merton’s Example and Where it Might Lead Us” in The Merton Annual, 13 (2000), pp. 105-122; Charline Vanbalberghe, “Thomas Merton: mystique et pionnier du dialogue interreligieux” in La vie spirituelle, 759 (2005), pp. 313-327. [26] See Cyrus Lee, Thomas Merton and Chinese Wisdom (Erie PA: Sino-American Institute, 1994); Rob Baker & Gray Henry, eds., Merton & Sufism. The Untold Story (Louisville KY: Fons Vitae, 1999); Edward K. Kaplan & Beatrice Bruteau, eds., Merton & Judaism. Holiness in Words (Louisville KY: Fons Vitae, 2003); Bonnie B. Thurston, ed., Merton & Buddhism. Wisdom, Emptiness, and Everyday Mind (Louisville KY: Fons Vitae, 2007); Cristóbal Serrán-Pagán y Fuentes, ed., Merton & the Tao. Dialogues with John Wu and the Ancient Sages (Louisville KY: Fons Vitae, 2013). See also William Apel, Signs of Peace. The Interfaith Letters of Thomas Merton (Maryknoll NY: Orbis Press, 2006). [27] Thomas Merton, A Vow of Conversation (New York: Farrar, 1988), p. 62. [28] Idem, “Monastic Experience and East-West Dialogue” in Naomi Burton et alii, eds., The Asian Journal of Thomas Merton (New York: New Directions, 1968), pp. 312-313. [29] See Bonnie B. Thurston, “WhyMerton Looked East” in Living Prayer,XXI:6 (1988), pp. 43-49. [30] Thomas Merton, “Monastic Experience and East-West Dialogue,” op. cit., p. 313. [31] Idem, “Marxism and Monastic Perspectives” in John Moffitt, ed., A New Charter for Monasticism, op. cit., p. 81. [32] N. Reimyo Tierelinckx, “Une moniale zen chez des moniales chrétiennes. À propos d’une expérience de dialogue” in Voies de l’Orient,121 (2011), pp. 2-14, passim. [33] See John Eudes Bamberger, Thomas Merton. Prophet of Renewal (Kalamazoo MI: Cistercian Publications, 2005), p. 63. [34] Ekman P. C. Tam, Christian Contemplation and Chinese Zen-Taoism. A Study of Thomas Merton’s Writings (Hong Kong: Tao Fong Shan Christian Centre, 2002), p. 221. [35] William Skudlarek, “Introduction” in Dilatato Corde, I (2011), p. 1. [36] See Pierre-François de Béthune, “Le dialogue des spiritualités” in Chemins de dialogue, 13 (1999), pp. 67-79. [37] See: Idem, “Le silence, chemin de dialogue. Réflexions sur l’expérience des moines en dialogue” in Chemins de dialogue, 6 (1995), pp. 201-207; Fabrice Blée, “Aux frontières du silence. Exploration du dialogue interreligieux Monastique” in Théologiques,VII:2 (1999), pp. 79-94. [38] See Raimon Panikkar, The Intrareligious Dialogue (New York: Paulist Press, 1978). See also Kenneth P. Kramer, “A Silent Dialogue. The Intrareligious Dimension” in Buddhist-Christian Studies, X (1990), pp. 127-132. [39] Raimon Panikkar, “Some Observations on Interreligious Dialogue” in DIM/MID International Bulletin, E.29-30 (2010), p. 30. [40] Christian de Chergé, “Chrétiens et musulmans. Pour un projet commun de société (1989)” in L’invincible espérance (Paris: Bayard – Centurion, 1997), pp. 168-169. [41] See ibid., p. 179. About the practice of monastic interreligious dialogue carried on by the community of Tibhirine, see Christian de Chergé, “Dialogue monastique et islam(1995)” in L’invincible espérance, op. cit., pp. 205-212; Christian Salenson, “Monastic Life, Interreligious Dialogue, and Openness to the Ultimate. A Reflection on the Tibhirine Monks’ Experience” in The Way, XLV:3 (2006), pp. 23-37. [42] See Christian Salenson, “Christian de Chergé, lecteur du Coran” in Isabelle Chareire & Christian Salenson, eds., Le dialogue des Écritures (Brussels: Lessius, 2007), pp. 17-26. [43] Christian de Chergé, “Dialogue monastique et islam (1995),” op. cit., p. 211. [44] See, for example, Idem, “Chrétiens et musulmans,” op. cit., pp. 177-178. See also Frère Christian’s conference to the general chapter of the Trappist order of 1993, in which he says: “I think possible a true lectio divina of the Koran.” (Quoted in Christian Salenson, “Christian de Chergé, lecteur du Coran,” op. cit., p. 18). [45] See, for example: Bruno Barnhart & Joseph Wong, eds., Purity of Heart and Contemplation. A Monastic Dialogue between Christian and Asian Traditions (New York – London: Continuum, 2001); Donald W. Mitchell & James A. Wiseman, eds., The Gethsemani Encounter. A Dialogue on the Spiritual Life by Buddhist and Christian Monks (New York: Continuum, 1997), pp. 34-67 (ch. 3: “Prayer and Meditation”). [46] This document is published in Bulletin. Secretariatus pro non Christianis, 84 (1993), pp. 250-270. [47] The English version of this document is published in Bulletin of Monastic Interreligious Dialogue, 70 (2003), pp. 21-60. [48] For more details about the features, history, and development of the adoption of Eastern meditation practices by Christian monks, see Fabrice Blée, The Third Desert, op. cit. [49] Among the many witnesses of the personal reasons that drew Christian monks to zazen, I suggest the reading of William Skudlarek, “Zazen. A Path from Judgment to Love” in Bruno Barnhart & Joseph Wong, eds., Purity of Heart and Contemplation, op. cit., pp. 137-150. [50]Fabrice Blée, The Third Desert, op. cit., pp. 175-176. [51] See the report by Thomas Ryan, “Buddhist and Catholic Monks Talk about Celibacy” in Buddhist-Christian Studies, XXVII (2007), pp. 143-145. [52] William Skudlarek, Demythologizing Celibacy. Practical Wisdom from Christian and Buddhist Monasticism (Collegeville MN: Liturgical Press, 2008), p. viii. [53] Ibid., pp. 92-93. |
_Web.jpg) |