Homilies and Addresses of Cardinal Mahony

The Spirit of Dialogue in the Church Today

Cardinal Roger Mahony, Archbishop of Los Angeles

Diocesan Ministry Congress, Colorado Springs, Colorado
October 16, 1998

I am grateful to Bishop Richard C. Hanifen and to the priests, religious and lay leaders of the Diocese of Colorado Springs, Colorado for the invitation to participate in this annual Diocesan Ministry Congress.

These days are devoted to the theme Ut unum sint, "That All May be One." This theme was selected in the hope of gaining further insight about the attitudes and skills needed if Catholics are to enter into genuine dialogue with one another about important issues and concerns about Catholic faith and life. Not long before his death, Cardinal Joseph Bernardin issued a challenge at the heart of what is now commonly referred to as the Catholic Common Ground Initiative:

"American Catholics must reconstitute the conditions for addressing our differences constructively – a common ground centered on faith in Jesus, marked by accountability to the living tradition, and ruled by a renewed spirit of civility, dialogue, generosity, and broad and serious consultation" (Called to be Catholic: Church in a Time of Peril [August 12, 1996]).

Our tradition is rich with insight about the indispensable role of dialogue in the life of the Church. Many of these insights pertain more directly to the need for dialogue with nonbelievers (Secretariat for Unbelievers, On Dialogue with Unbelievers [28 August 1968]), or with people in the modern world at large (Pope Paul VI, Ecclesiam suam), or with Christians of other traditions and communions (Pope John Paul II, Ut unum sint). But, sad to say, the record on our dialogue with people in the modern world, with those of other religions and other Christian traditions, is quite a bit better than the record on our dialogue between and among ourselves--especially in recent years. I believe that the insights from our tradition of dialogue with others can provide a rich resource for understanding and developing the attitudes and skills necessary for authentic dialogue among Roman Catholics within the Church, which in recent years has become an even more pressing task than dialogue with those outside the Church.

We live in a world that often appears to be breaking down and coming apart, and in a Church that seems increasingly divided. There is a strong tendency to think of ourselves and one another in terms that can be terribly divisive: "conservative" or "liberal," "traditionalist" or "progressive," "pre-Vatican II Catholic" or "post-conciliar Catholic." In such a milieu, dialogue is not simply desirable, but required. And it can be difficult. What’s more, it is required not only of those who are in positions of leadership in the Church, but of all who are baptized into Christ’s Body, the Church. As Pope John Paul II has written, dialogue "has become an outright necessity, one of the Church’s priorities" (Ut unum sint, # 31).

In the time that I have been given to address the important topic "The Spirit of Dialogue in the Church Today," I will take three steps: First, I shall explain what I mean by "dialogue," and lay some theological foundations that will help to understand why dialogue is a necessary part of the Christian vocation. Second, I shall point out a few difficulties that seem to frustrate the spirit of dialogue. And third, I shall describe those dispositions or attitudes we need to cultivate if we are to enter into dialogue, and if dialogue is to bear fruit. It is my sincere hope and fervent prayer that these remarks will further a spirit of dialogue in which truth is wedded to charity and understanding to love.

Let me give you just a few examples of some kinds of issues that tend to divide people in our Church and in our parishes—this list is certainly not exhaustive, but it does illustrate the great need for the spirit of dialogue to take hold in the Church:

1. Differing Views of Catechesis/Religious Education:

View #1 Doctrinal: emphasis on revealed truths, the content of our faith;
View #2 Narrative: emphasis on human experience, life story as the place of God’s presence and action;
View #3 Biblical: emphasis on the life of Christ in the Gospels, Scripture as basis of all religious education;
View #4 Sacramental: the liturgy itself is the source of catechesis.

The Point: there is value in all four approaches to Religious Education, and sound catechesis includes elements of each one. But it often happens that we may have this view or that view of religious education, as if catechesis is only about passing on the doctrines of the Church, or about sharing our stories, or . . . .

2. The Increasing Role of Lay Ministers in the Church:

Sadly, there are some tensions in parishes when one group of people perceive that lay ministers have too much authority or positions of leadership; while others are frustrated that the involvement of lay people is going too slowly.

3. Liturgical Renewal of the Church Worship Space

few issues in a parish evoke as much heat, with little light, than the renewal of the Church’s worship space; hardened positions seem to become impossible to overcome, and various groups struggle and fight over the location of the tabernacle, the baptistery, the ambo, and the like;
These are just three very simple, but common, areas of disagreement, dispute, and where a lack of civility in our parish communities can result. You can readily think of several more from your own experience.

As I proceed now to flesh out some ideas about dialogue and some important steps to make dialogue possible, I would ask you to be thinking about your own reality: what are those issues and concerns that are important to you—in your family, parish, workplace, community—where dialogue is very much needed.

I. Theological Foundations of Dialogue

What exactly is dialogue? And why is it one of the Church’s priorities? First and foremost, dialogue is not argument. Nor is it contention or controversy. Its hallmark is not conflict. It is not about coming out on top, or winning a debate. It is not about negotiating away, or diluting, the teachings of our Church. And it is not a contest in which we engage an opponent in intellectual or doctrinal "strong-arming." Dialogue is more akin to a real conversation, in which there is an exchange of gifts.

For the Christian, authentic dialogue is rooted in the Great Dialogue in which God enters into relationship with humanity (Ecclesiam suam, #70), speaking a Word of life, of light, and of love. In the Incarnate Word of God, Jesus Christ, God enters into conversation, offers a gift, and waits to be received by human beings, welcomed by the human heart. Indeed the whole of Divine Revelation can be looked upon as God’s entry into dialogue, staying faithful in a conversation with humanity. In this perspective, the dynamics of sin and grace may be understood as a movement from deafness and hard-heartedness to listening, openness, and receptivity to a gift.

Our response to Gods’ initiative in the conversation is, in the first place, prayer. Prayer is dialogue. It is conversation. But prayer is not so much a conversation in which there is an exchange of words as it is an exchange of gifts: The gift of God’s own life in Christ and the Spirit, and our gift in response to such a great gift – our being conformed to the person of Christ through the Spirit, becoming a living sacrifice of praise to the glory of God the Father.

A necessary condition for authentic dialogue among us is our willingness to participate in yet another, even more important, conversation. This is a "dialogue of conversion" that is not just horizontal but vertical, directed toward God as the source of reconciliation and rooted in an awareness of our own sinfulness (Ut unum sint, #35). Thus, "dialogue does not extend exclusively to matters of doctrine but engages the whole person; it is also a dialogue of love" with roots long, deep, and strong in the love of God poured out in Christ and Spirit (Ut unum sint, 47). Unless we are willing to dive into this dialogue of conversion, that great mystery where the only answer is mercy, our efforts at dialogue between and among ourselves will likely come to little practical effect.

In the Great Dialogue, God opens the conversation. God first speaks the Word. Because the divine initiative in the Great Dialogue makes it possible for us to enter into relationship with God, the spirit of true Christian dialogue demands that we then make the first move toward others (Ecclesiam suam, 72). Created in the very image of God, it is our gift and task to open the conversation, to initiate the relationship, to begin the dialogue with others who may be quite different from ourselves, who hold contrary positions, who challenge our deeply held values, our cherished convictions, our central beliefs. Our willingness to make the first move is only possible if we undergo a "change of heart which is the essential condition for every authentic search for unity." And this conversion of heart "flows from prayer and its realization is guided by prayer . . ." (Ecclesiam suam, # 26).

Not only is our entry into dialogue required because of God’s first Word toward us and for us, it is also called for because of our conviction that every human person is created in the image of God, worthy of care, attention, and respect, even and especially those with whom we may disagree – even in fundamentals. "The capacity for dialogue is rooted in the nature of the person and his [or her] dignity. . .Dialogue is an indispensable step along the path to human self-realization, the self-realization both of each individual and of every human community" (Ut unum sint, #28). Indeed, our unwillingness to enter into the dialogue at the heart of human life, history, the world, and the Church, may signal an inability or refusal to respond to that grace by which we grow to full stature in Christ, as individual persons and as a community of people.

II. Difficulties in Dialogue

What are those attitudes and dispositions, those bad habits that block our entry into real dialogue? Or, what are those negative "habits of the heart" that prevent us from being taken up into the Great Dialogue in which the Word beneath and beyond all words is never-ending Love?

First, it must be recognized that differences in culture and language, race and class can pose real difficulties on the path to authentic dialogue. There are also barriers brought on by economic factors, by socio-political realities. And then there are differences shaped by religion. Without underestimating the real challenges to the spirit of dialogue raised by such factors, they are not my principal concern in these remarks. As I see it, it is our deeply engrained personal attitudes and dispositions that constitute the real challenge to our dialogue in the Church. What are some of these "bad habits" of the heart?

Often unwittingly, we are caught up in the self-absorption, self-preoccupation, and self-fixation so characteristic of our times. The self is so often viewed as the first and final arbiter of what is real, true, and good. In a climate such as this, a real wintry season of the human spirit, do we have room enough for others? Is there a place, a space, in us for a point of view that may challenge us to reconsider our tightly knit worldview?

We are also a people short on patience. Many of us have lost the knack for following a line of thinking to its conclusion, or the course of a conversation to completion. Rather then stay with a television program from start to finish, we "channel surf" from this station to that, looking for momentary, constant, "sound bite" stimulation. We are hungry for experience, moving from one thing to the next. We are unable to really hear the other make a statement because our mind is racing to figure out what we think we should say in response. For many of us, we have the answer before the other says "hello!" Listening is a real art. And, unfortunately, there appears to be a short supply of those schooled in its practice.

For so many people, the world in which we live is a harsh place. So many are affected by negative factors that bring about such depersonalization, dehumanization, such massive suffering. Many have been hurt in ways beyond counting, and in a manner beyond telling. As a consequence, so many of us are inclined to be suspicious of others. Often, and very understandably, we are reluctant to give the other the benefit of the doubt. If the truth be told, we sometimes lack generosity of spirit. We can become "mean-spirited" and aggressive toward others within the Church as well as those in the world at large.

Another serious obstacle to real dialogue is our lack of tolerance. Not only can we be intolerant of the perspectives and positions of our partner in dialogue; we can also find the sometimes very painful process of real dialogue to be utterly intolerable. We want it to be over! When it goes on too long, there is a defensiveness that can set in. We may find ourselves appealing to authority in order to end the conversation. We may be inclined to "close the question" when what is called for is yet more dialogue.

Or, it may be that what is called for is silence – an end to words. In our day, there is too much "stuff" and so much noise. Our lives are cluttered. A cacophony surrounds us. This too affects us, and can bear negatively on our ability to enter into dialogue. Because we are inclined to think that we must always have something to say in a conversation! We may feel compelled to put in our "two cents." And then conversation is reduced to chatter, and dialogue becomes drivel.

Sometimes for the good of the dialogue it is better to say nothing -- because there is simply nothing to say. For it is only in silence and receptivity that we can make room for the other, to really hear the Word beneath and beyond the words of our partner in dialogue.

III. Dispositions for Dialogue

What does it take to enter into the spirit of dialogue? What are the dispositions, attitudes, or "habits of heart" we need if we are to move from contention and controversy to a conversation in which there is an exchange of gifts between persons and parties who at times appear so different as to be irreconcilable?

At the outset there must be a clear recognition that dialogue is both gift and task; dialogue can be a great blessing, but it is not a free and easy ride. Real differences cannot be glossed over in a spirit of "forced chumminess." Dialogue can be very difficult; it takes commitment and perseverance. It can be painful, because "by engaging in frank dialogue, communities help one another to look at themselves together in the light of the apostolic tradition" (Ut unum sint, #16). In the course of dialogue, we may learn truths about ourselves, as human and as Christian, that we would rather not face. A commitment to dialogue thus calls for confidence and courage to go on, a firm intention to stay in the conversation – come what may.

Entering into dialogue also demands that we accept the fact there are no quick results, and rarely are there easy answers to the highly complex issues and concerns we face in the Church today. Dialogue is a process, one that takes a good deal of time for a real exchange of gifts. It entails a willingness to understand the questions and concerns of the other, sometimes listening long and lovingly enough to hear the "question behind the question," and discern the underlying "issue beneath the issue" on the agenda. We often use the same or similar words, especially when it comes to matters of Catholic faith and life, but we may mean very different things reflective of very different experiences. So we must develop the capacity to hear with the ear of the heart, and cultivate the skill of paying attention – long and lovingly.

When we are engaged in dialogue, each person must presuppose that the other does have a desire for reconciliation, for unity in truth (Ut unum sint, #29). The fact that each "thinks that he [or she] is in possession of the truth" does "not invalidate dialogue" and each may come to a fuller knowledge of the truth in the process (On Dialogue with Unbelievers). Real dialogue enriches by way of mutual exchange, even if each party goes back to positions previously held with greater vigor. There must be a clear recognition from the outset, then, that dialogue does not always lead to agreement. It has great value nonetheless in clarifying disagreements, which can then be faced and embraced with charity, respect, humility, and love for the truth. And in the process, each one may be changed personally by virtue of the gifts exchanged.

It is also true, however, that when there is openness and willingness to listen to the other in a spirit of respect and charity, and when there is humility in the face of the truth which may come to light in dialogue, this may "require a review of assertions and attitudes" (Ut unum sint, #36).

At the heart of any understanding of dialogue lies this central question: How do I react, or respond, to difference? How do I relate to those who disagree with me? Through the presence and power of the Holy Spirit we are enlightened, enlivened, guided, and healed so that we may approach even those "at the opposite end of the spectrum" with a balanced attitude--neither ingenuous nor overly critical, with openness and receptivity. This calls for enormous reserves of respect for the mystery of the other person, as well as an appreciation for their sincerity and integrity. It also demands a willingness to admit the possibility that we may have our own "blind spots!" Insofar as we are able, we must seek to be impartial and unselfish, and be willing to relinquish what the truth demands of us so that we might stand ready to be transformed in grace and by truth.

In entering into dialogue, we must speak the truth in love – freely, without constraint or fear of condemnation. In the simplest of terms, we must state what we mean, and state it clearly. And we must try to do so in light of the needs and capacities of our partner(s) in dialogue. But our words must be offered in a spirit of humility, a virtue that often seems in short supply in our own day. The antithesis of humility is arrogance. Humility does not take offense, nor does it offend. It is not at home with rancor or bitterness. It does not demand having its own way. It is not smug or self-reliant. Rather, humility is expressed in healthy self-effacement, so that there is room enough for the other – even when the other makes a claim on us that we would rather not hear. In dialogue, humility is expressed in the avoidance of peremptory language, in tranquillity, in patience under contradiction, in gentleness, in generosity toward the other. Along with respect for the other, humility is a sine qua non of the spirit of dialogue.

All this does not imply that we should enter into dialogue ready to abandon our Catholic tradition nor to dilute or diminish the full teachings of the Catholic Church. Indeed, along with respect and humility, what dialogue also requires is confidence and prudence. We must be confident not only in the integrity and plausibility of our own convictions and positions, but also confident in the good will and integrity of the other in the dialogue. If we are suspicious of the motives of the other, or so overly confident in the plausibility of our positions that we think they are above scrutiny, then in fact we may be unable or unwilling to enter into the spirit of dialogue. But if there be mutual respect and confidence, then dialogue may promote genuine friendship, indeed intimacy on both sides of a gap which sometimes seems so wide as to appear that it cannot be bridged.

Consequently, dialogue demands deep reserves of prudence. In mature and responsible dialogue, prudence is expressed in knowing and putting into practice what is possible. It recognizes what is essential and what may, indeed sometimes must, be left aside in a shared quest for truth and reconciliation. It moves ahead guided by the truth that comes to light in dialogue. It does not linger in resentment, feeling shortchanged by the riches and truth of the other disclosed in the conversation. To put it plainly: Prudence is the art of the possible learned through a long apprenticeship in the workshop of careful and considered compromise.

Conclusion

Truth, for the Christian, is not a thing we possess, but rather a Person by whom we must allow ourselves to be possessed. The great Dominican theologian Yves Congar, peritus at the Second Vatican Council, named Cardinal by Pope John Paul II, captured this insight so beautifully when he once remarked: "I have come to know the Truth, and the Truth is a Person."

For us, the purpose of dialogue is to arrive at a greater measure of fidelity to the God revealed in Jesus Christ in the presence and power of the Holy Spirit – to be seized by the grace of Christ and Spirit so that we may respond with our whole mind, heart, and soul to the Word of Love first spoken and spoken for all.

A Task

In light of my remarks this evening, I would now like to invite you to make your own commitment to dialogue more real—and therefore, more grace-filled. I suspect that most of you are seated with friends and collaborators from your own parish. Please take five minutes now to chat with the person or persons near you, and use the following questions as a guide: 1) What situation exists in our parish where genuine dialogue needs to be employed so that we can move forward as a parish community filled with the Spirit and the gift of unity and harmony? 2) What concrete, practical steps do I need to take in order to move our parish forward along a path of dialogue?

Thank you very much!

The Spirit of Dialogue in the Church Today

I. Theological Foundations of Dialogue

II. Difficulties in Dialogue

III. Dispositions for Dialogue

Conclusion

A Task

Pastoral Regions

Search This Site

Popular Pages

Page Tools