Indian Contribution Towards Ecumenical Dialogue

P resent ed To: Dr. IyR obi nson | By: Vi bi n Wi l son K

1. Introduction
Religious pluralism is an ancient phenomenon and Christians from the beginning have been living
in such pluralistic context. But since the last half of the 20th century, there has been growing
worldwide awareness of religious pluralism. Particularly in the sphere of Ecumenical concerns of
protestant churches towards the people of other faiths like WMC, WCC, IMC, CWME etc… developing a
positive attitude among Christians towards non-Christians.
In this presentation an attempt had been made to look at some of the major contributions of the
Indian Theologians towards Ecumenical Dialogue, and gives and bird view on the conferences held
regarding the dialogue.
2. What is meant by Dialogue?
Dialogue stands for an attempt on the part of Christians in a post colonial and pluralistic society to
build up new relationship with their neighbours of other faith. It gives them a call to discard the old,
negative, exclusive and triumphalistic attitude, which have resulted in negative consequences.
According to WCC and Vatican II dialogue means, “the inter-faith dialogue is understood as an
encounter between people who live by different faith traditions, in an atmosphere of mutual trust and
acceptance. Dialogue did not need for giving up, hiding or seeking to validate one’s own religious
conviction. Dialogue was seen not only as a way to become informed about the faith of others but also
as a means of rediscovering essential dimensions of one’s own faith tradition.
3. Historical Development in Ecumenical Dialogue
The WCC at Edinburgh 1910 is commonly accepted as marking the beginning of the modern
ecumenical movement. The question of Christian understanding of and relationship to other religious
traditions became one of the important issues of that conference, and the section that dealt with the
missionary message in relation to non Christian, religions was by common consent, the finest of all
reports produced at Edinburgh. It spoke of the Christian encounter with the religious traditions of
Asia.1
The Edinburgh discussions stimulated scholarly interest both in comparative religion and in
exploring the Christian relation to other faith traditions. An influential book of the period was
J. N. Farquhar’s The Crown of Hinduism, which argued that Christ fulfilled the longings and aspirations
of Hinduism. By the time of next international Missionary Conference (Jerusalem 1928) there was
considerable controversy within the missionary movement over the approach to other religious
traditions. There was also deep concern that what was consider “syncretistic thinking” with regard to
Asian religions was undermining the importance and urgency of Christian mission. 2
The report by W. E. Hocking after the Jerusalem council made much controversy and debate
among missionaries. Thus Hendrik Kraemer – a well-known Dutch missionary and missiologist was
called up to write a book on the biblical and theological basis of the Christian attitude to other faiths.
Kraemer’s The Christian Message in a Non Chritsian World became the preparatory study book for the
1938 International Missionary Council in Tambaram, Madras, India. Kraemer, following Karl Barth,
insisted that the biblical faith based on God’s encounter with humankind, is radically different from all
other forms of religious faith. A. G. Hogg, H. H. Farmer, T.C. Chao and others challenged Kraemer’s
view that the gospel was in discontinuity with other religious traditions. 3
Devanandan’s address to the New Delhi assembly of WCC (1961) challenged the churches to take
seriously the experience of the younger churches in the newly independent countries, where they had
to work and struggle together with different people of different religious traditions in nation building.
This pave the concept of dialogue emerged as a way of speaking about Christian relations with people
of other faith traditions and became part of the New Delhi assembly statement. At this assembly the
IMC was integrated into the WCC as the Division on World Mission and Evangelism (CWME). 4
The concept of dialogue received further consideration at the first meeting of the CWME at Mexico
City in 1963. A more significant discussion took place at the assembly of the East Asia Christian
Conference at Bangkok in 1964. Its statement on Christian encounter with men of other beliefs
1
S. Wesley Ariarajah, “Dialogue Interfaith”, Dictionary of the Ecumenical Movement, eds. Nicholas Lossky, (1991): 281-282.
2
Ibid., 282.
3
Ibid.
4
Ibid., 283.
1
incorporated much of the rethinking in Asia in relation to other faiths. This was an important
contribution to ecumenical thinking on other faiths. After the assembly the CWME called Stanley J
Samartha to pursue with greater intensity the study on “The Word of God and the Living Faiths of
Men”. A turning point in the development of this study was the convening of the first multi-faith
dialogue under WCC auspices. Hindu, Buddhist, Muslim and Christian participants came to Ajaltour,
Lebanon in 1970, not only to consult about inter-religious dialogue, but also actually to engage in it.
The WCC central committee, meeting in Addis Ababa in 1971, created a new sub unit as Dialogue with
People of Living Faiths and Ideologies with Samartha as its director.5
4. The Response of World Missionary Conference and International Missionary Council
Some important issues discussed in Edinburgh 1910 conference were- Need for Evangelisation of
the World in this generation in order to fulfil the commandment of Christ. Regarding Christian
approach to other faith the report of the 4 th commission of the conference, “the missionary message in
relation to non-Christians religions” focused on the challenges facing Christian missionaries from other
religions in a multi-faith context.
In discussing the relation of Christianity to other faiths two aspects developed. The first one was –
how should Christians understand other religions. The commission suggested that – “the true attitude
and sympathy of the Christians missionary to the non-Christians religions should be one of
understanding.” The second aspect related to affirm the universal and emphatic witness to the
absoluteness of Christianity.
4.1. IMC, Jerusalem 1928 - This conference acknowledged the values of the other religions and
made significant reference to the people of other faiths. Christians were asked to reject any
imperialistic attitude towards other faith.
4.2. IMC, Tambaram 1938 – This conference dealt with disputes and tensions regarding the
relation of Christianity with other faith. This conference also affirmed the positive values of non-
Christians religions and called Christians for positive relations and encouraged them to co-operate with
people of other faith in good social and community movements.
Due to II World War there was no serious discussion on this topic in later conferences on IMC
1947, WCC 1948, and IMC 1952.
5. Response of the Commission on World Mission and Evangelism
5.1. Mexico 1963 – This conference gives importance towards the development of pluralistic
awareness by the opening address of M. M. Thomas on “the world in which we preach Christ” and of
S. Kulandaran with his strong presentation on “meeting with men of other faiths.” These addresses
strongly influenced the members to move towards a relevant Christian witness in a multi faith context.
5.2. Bangkok 1973- It paved way for further discussion and action on the approach of
“dialogue”. S. J. Samartha was asked to study on, “the word of God and living faiths of Men.”
Christian responsibility is to identify the saving activity of God among the people of other faiths too.
Christians needs to understand God’s will is salvation of all human being and primary concern of
dialogue is to remove misunderstandings between people of different faiths. At this conference
mission and evangelism were also understood in terms of a dialogue. So dialogue were to work
together with people of different faiths, to meet human needs, to relieve human suffering, to establish
social justice and to share in the struggle for peace.
5.3. Melbourne 1980 - Though there was not much discussion on “inter faith relation”, but this
meeting urged to see that, “God may be seen to be at work whenever a religion enhances human
dignity, human rights and brings justice, liberation and peace for all.” Therefore, Christians were
called to re-examine their attitudes towards people of other faiths and suggest that dialogical
approach was not in contradiction with mission and evangelism.
5.4. San Antonio 1989 – Main theme –“Witness among people of other living faiths.” The report
gives further clarification on, “witness and dialogue.”
6. Response of World Council of Churches (WCC) to Inter Faith Dialogue
6.1. Amsterdam 1948 – The first Assembly was held a few years after the end of the II World
War. The Tambaram, 1938 IMC debate on other faiths was continued here but there was not much
serious discussion on religions.

5
S. Wesley Ariarajah, op.cit., 285.
2
 6.2. Evanston1954 – Renaissance of non-Christian religions and development of new ideologies
was taking place in different countries. This was a major concern in the 2 nd WCC Assembly. The
Christians were challenged to rethink approached to evangelistic tasks and to maintain more humility
in Christian relations with neighbours of other faiths.
6.3. New Delhi 1961 – The concept of Dialogue appeared in the New Delhi Assembly as a way of
speaking about Christian relations with people of other faith traditions. P.D. Devanandan gave a
thought provoking address, “Called to Witness.” The main focus of this assembly was recognizing the
new situations of different countries and using appropriate positive methods in witnessing to Christ
and improving social relations with others. This Assembly also acknowledges God’s active presence
among people of non-Christians too.
6.4. Kandy, Sri Lanka 1967 - This meeting affirmed dialogue as the most appropriate approach
in inter-faith relation and after Uppsala Assembly 1968, the CWME engaged S.J. Samartha of India to
pursue with greater intensity, a study begun some years earlier. In this study was the first multi-faith
dialogue convened under WCC auspices: Hindu, Buddhist, Muslim, and Christian participants came to
Ajaltoun, Lebanon in 1970, not only to consult about inter religious dialogue, but also actually to
engage in it.6
6.5. Uppsala 1968 – The 4th Assembly emphasized “God’s saving work in all of human history.”
Inter religious dialogue was acknowledged to be a legitimate part of the process of evangelical
proclamation. There is no need to dilute one’s faith commitment but there should be respect for others
faith experience and commitment. It was understood that it is through dialogue Christians would join
together with others to fight the problems related to the struggle for peace and justice.
6.6. Nairobi 1975 – For the first time, 5 persons of other faiths were invited as guest to WCC
Assembly and took part in discussions relating to the dialogue issue. There was a strong disagreement
within the Church. Fear regarding syncretism, compromise of faith in the uniqueness and finality of
the revelation in Christ we expressed. However, Asians stood firm saying that dialogue was the most
appropriate way for the church to live in a pluralistic world. The Assembly encouraged Christians to
engage in dialogue and gave reasons why it should be done. There was a search for a community of
multi-faiths or all humanity.
6.7. Chiang Mai Consultation 1977 – A major theological consultation was organized which met
in Chiang Mai, Thailand in 1977 with the theme “Dialogue in Community.” As a result the ‘Guidelines
on Dialogue’ was formulated was adopted by the churches. The consultation affirmed that dialogue is
neither a betrayal of mission nor a secret weapon of proselytism but a way in which Jesus can be
confessed in the world today.
6.8. Vancouver 1983 – Here, the number of guests of other faiths increased to 15. Inter-faith
dialogue was an integral part of the assembly. People accepted the necessity for inter faith dialogue
but there was much controversy over ‘theology of religions’. Whether other religious traditions are
vehicles of God’s redeeming activity became a hotly debated issue. One of the important themes
discussed in this assembly was on ‘witnessing in a divided world’. The participants agreed that they
recognize God’s creative work in the seeking for religious truth among people of other faith.
6.9. Canberra 1991- There was a major consultation on the theology of religions proceeding this
Assembly in 1990 at Bar. Representatives of other religious and indigenous traditions played a
significant role in the Canberra programme creating controversy and new interest both in gospel and
culture and in the theological understanding of other religious traditions.
6.10. Harare 1998 – This provided additional opportunities for wider participation of person of
other faiths in an assembly. There was succession of interfaith encounters between Christians and
people of other faiths to be organized within the context of the assembly itself.
The WCC has given profound importance to dialogue and inter faith relations. It summons the
church to seek a new self-understanding in its relation to other religions. It calls the church to new
approaches to mission and witness.7

6
S. Wesley Ariarajah, op.cit., 285.
7
“Ecumenical Responses to Other Faiths: In the Mission Conference, WCC and Roman Catholic Church”, Paper Presentation, pp.1-4.
3
7. Indian Contributors to the Ecumenical Dialogue
One of the landmarks in the WCC’S dialogue journey was the first inter-faith dialogue meeting held
in Ajaltoun, Lebanon in March 1970, organized by S. J. Samartha with the approval of the meeting of
the WCC central committee on (1969). It was an inter-faith dialogue on “ dialogue”. It brought
together three Hindus, Four Buddhists, three Muslims and several Christians to explore the meaning
and significance of “ dialogue” as a new basis for relationship among the religious traditions. 8 With the
founding of a separate sub-unit on dialogue in 1971 two words came to the forefront namely,’
dialogue ‘ and ‘community’. The word ‘dialogue’ expressed a new understanding of the nature of our
attitude and life with persons of other faiths. The word ‘community’ described the goal. 9
7.1. P. D. Devanandan
Devanandan was the first director of the “Christian Institute for the Study of Religion and Society”
in Bangalore (with Newbigin as Chair of the governing body). He attempted a careful analysis of
Hinduism and gave considerable impetus to Protestant concerns for dialogue - but without
surrendering what might be called a ‘churchly orthodoxy’ in matters of Christian belief. Moreover he
remained indebted to and in agreement with most aspects of Kraemer's theology; in fact Kraemer was
for Devanandan “the revelation of what it means to be a theologian”. 10
Devanandan was, then, able to offer substantial reasons both practical and theological for a
Christian commitment to dialogue with Hindus and to do so in a way that fully recognised a new
theological context after Kraemer and a new national context after Independence - and Newbigin’s
understanding of Hinduism and the inter-religious encounter in India is weakened by his failure to
interact with Devanandan.11
At the third assembly of the World Council of Churches in New Delhi, P.D. Devanandan who spoke
on "Called to Witness", raised the question of witness in a world of other faiths. 12 At New Delhi,
referring to the new ferment in other religions, Devanandan said, "There can be sociological and
psychological explanations for this phenomenon of the renaissance of other religions. But if religious
faith is to be regarded also in terms of response it would be difficult for Christians to deny that these
deep, inner stirrings of the human spirit are in response to the creative activity of the Holy Spirit" 13
He defines the church as “the fellowship of those who endeavour in community. This include not
only the kerygma or proclamation or evangelism but also diakonia i.e., service of the community
around, and koinonia fellowship with another.14 His great contribution to the mission of the church is
his interpretation of the task of evangelism and of the whole relationship between Christianity and
Hinduism in term of dialogue. Devanandan says inter-faith dialogue: 1) To annihilate differences by
insisting that all leads to the same goal and that there is no difference that matter where religious
faith is concerned. 2) Attempts to reconcile differences by setting them in the larger framework of an
evolving world religion. 3) To frankly admit that there are differences which we should be willing to
accept and give all men of faith full freedom for religious self expression.
7.2. Satnley J. Samarth
Stanley Jedidiah Samartha (1920 - 2001) was an Indian theologian and a participant in inter-
religious dialogue,15 has had profound influence within the Indian theological community in its
theological development, and carried this influence into the wider world setting through the WCC unit
on dialogue, providing leadership and a third-world perspective at several consultations of the unit
while also editing the reports. Such consultations and reports formed a new corpus of literature to
arouse relevant interest in the process of interfaith dialogue in a world, which was experiencing the

8
S.Wesley Ariarajah, Not with Out My Neighbour (Geneva: WCC, 1999), 79.
9
S. Wesley Ariarajah,” Ecumenical Issues In Dialogue “,Inter- faith Dialogue And World Community Edited by C.H Sreenivasa Rao,
(Chennai: CLS, 1991) 68.
10
Bob Robinson, “Lesslie Newbigin and Hindu-Christian Dialogue: A Decided Ambivalence”,
http://www.missionstudies.org/archive/anzams/2001/PAPERS/ANZAMS_2001_Robinson.doc, (Accessed on 28/07/09), 4:50 pm.
11
Ibid.
12
T.V. Philip, “Edinburgh to Salvador: Twentieth Century Ecumenical Missiology”, http://www.religion-online.org/showchapter.asp?
title=1573&C=1524, (Accessed on 28/07/09), 4:50 pm.
13
Ibid.
14
Mission Today, Journal of Missioalogical and Ecumenical Research (Shillong: Vendrame Inst. Pub., Jan – Sept 1999, Vol.1), 76-84.
15
“Stanley Jedidiah Samartha”, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stanley_Jedidiah_Samartha, (Accessed on 28/07/09), 4:50 pm.
4
effects of religious pluralism as never before.16 He was also the primary spokesman for the theology of
dialogue in WCC. Samartha's major contribution was through the World Council of Churches sub-unit
"Dialogue with People of Living Faiths and Ideologies" of which he was the first Director. 17 Samartha
was acknowledged as a leading authority on inter-religious dialogue.18
In August 1968, Stanley J. Samartha was appointed Associate Secretary in the Department of
Studies in Mission and Evangelism. His primary responsibility was to pursue the study on the ‘Word of
God and the living faiths of men’, and to encourage and coordinate the work of the Study Centres
related to the Division of World Mission and Evangelism. At the initiative of Samartha, a consultation
with adherents of other religions was held in March 1970 in Ajaltoun (Beirut). Its purpose was "to
gather together the experience of bilateral conversations between Christians and men of other faiths,
to experiment with a multilateral meeting, and see what could be learned for future relations between
people of living faiths". Samartha speaks of the Ajaltoun meeting as a new beginning. "With this
consultation, dialogue made a provocative entry into the agenda of the World Council of Churches and
became a continuing ecumenical concern for the churches affiliated to the Council". The Ajaltoun
meeting brought together for the first time people of four different faiths - Hindus, Buddhists,
Christians and Muslims - under the auspices of the WCC. It also brought together for the first time
Roman Catholic theologians to join Orthodox and Protestants to meet neighbours of other faiths. 19
Ariarajah affirms that Samartha has contributed a great deal to the “client theological revolution” that
has been taking place as a result of the ministry of dialogue. Whereas this revolution took place from
Geneva, the Indian scene followed along with less glamour, as interfaith interaction was an everyday
affair.20
David Jenkins, a British theologian and the Director of Humanum Studies of the World Council of
Churches at the time was a participant at Ajaltoun consultation. He observed:
The pre-supposition of the Consultation on "Dialogue between Men of Living Faiths" at Ajaltoun
was that a living commitment to a living faith within a particular religious tradition did not
forbid dialogue on the grounds of disloyalty to the exclusive claims of that faith nor render
dialogue impracticable because the object of the commitment was experienced so differently as
to make dialogue impossible. The experience of the actual dialogues possible at Ajaltoun
confirmed this pre-supposition.21
7.3. M.M Thomas
M.M Thomas was the logical successor to Devanandan in shaping inter-religious interaction. He
saw the koinonia of the church not as “the Christian community in the narrow sense” but as “the
whole human community… included in Christ,” a Christ-centred secular fellowship in other religions
and ideologies outside the church. This “wider ecumenism” and “open secularism” enables the
Christian to participate with all humanity in nation building. 22
From 1947 to 1952 he served on the staff of the World Student Christian Federation in Geneva,
with special emphasis on Christian political witness. He took part in the First Assembly of the World
Council of Churches in 1948 and in the formation of the Council’s Department of Church and Society,
of which he became an active member and chairman from 1961 to 1968. In this capacity he also
chaired the World Conference on Church and Society at Geneva in 1966. From 1968 to 1975 he
served as Chairman of the Central Committee of the World Council of Churches itself, guiding it
through some of the stormiest years of its history. The 1966 Church and Society study conference at
Geneva, 1968 Uppsala WCC Fourth Assembly and 1973 Bangkok conference of the Commission on
World Mission and Evangelism were occasions when the ecumenical movement on the whole was
taking the world situation seriously. The attempt to theologically interpret mission in terms of the
“world ward journey of the Church” was at its height. Thomas was influential in shaping these trends

16
Siga Arles, op.cit., 147-148.
17
“Stanley Jedidiah Samartha”, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stanley_Jedidiah_Samartha, (Accessed on 28/07/09), 4:50 pm.
18
Ibid.
19
Stanley J. Samartha, Between Two Cultures, (Geneva: WCC Publication, l996), 49.
20
Siga Arles, Missiological Education: An Indian Exploration, (Bangalore: Centre for Contemporary Christianity, 2006), 151.
21
T.V. Philip, “Edinburgh to Salvador: Twentieth Century Ecumenical Missiology”, http://www.religion-online.org/showchapter.asp?
title=1573&C=1524, (Accessed on 28/07/09), 4:50 pm.
22
Siga Arles, op.cit.,144.
5
as well as being shaped by these occasions. 23 Through the power of his thought, the breadth of his
vision, and the genius of his diplomacy, he influenced the mind and policy of the ecumenical
movement more than any other person save its architect, W.A.Visser’t Hooft.
He served first as Associate Director of the Christian Institute for the Study of Religion and Society
and then, upon Devanandan’s death, as Director until his retirement in 1976. Over these years the
Institute poured out literature for the guidance of both church and society in India on social policy,
cultural encounter, Christian-Hindu relations, political analysis, family problems, and ecumenical
affairs. 24
8. Conclusion
However, dialogue is now widely accepted as one of the approaches to maintaining relationship
and communicating with the people of other faiths. Churches and councils promote inter-faith dialogue
as we have seen in the presentation. India being a land of diverse faiths and religions must have
Christians who take part in dialogue. However, there are still a lot of people who do not accept it. The
Conference mentioned above has paved the way for more positive thinking about other religions
improving Christians’ relations with non-Christians. The contributions that the Indian gave towards the
ecumenical dialogue were remarkable and ever remembered in the history of ecumenism. It won’t be
wrong to say there is no such effort without these Indian theologians.
Bibliography
Ariarajah, S. Wesley. “Dialogue Interfaith”. Dictionary of the Ecumenical Movement. eds. Nicholas Lossky. (1991): 281-287.
Ariarajah, S.Wesley. Not with Out My Neighbour. Geneva: WCC, 1999.
Arles, Siga. Missiological Education: An Indian Exploration. Bangalore: Centre for Contemporary Christianity, 2006.
Rao, Sreenivasa CH. Inter- faith Dialogue And World Community. Chennai: CLS. 1991.
Samartha, Stanley J. Between Two Cultures. Geneva: WCC Publication, l996.
Articles
“Ecumenical Responses to Other Faiths: In the Mission Conference, WCC and Roman Catholic Church”, Paper Presentation,
pp.1-4.
Mission Today, Journal of Missiological and Ecumenical Research (Shillong: Vendrame Inst. Pub., Jan – Sept 1999, Vol.1),
76-84.
The Princeton Seminary Bulletin, Volume XVIII Number 2 (1997), 208-210.
Webbliography
“Stanley Jedidiah Samartha”. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stanley_Jedidiah_Samartha. Accessed on 28/07/09.
Philip, T.V. “Edinburgh to Salvador: Twentieth Century Ecumenical Missiology”.
http://www.religion-online.org/showchapter.asp?title=1573&C=1524. Accessed on 28/07/09.
Robinson, Bob. “Lesslie Newbigin and Hindu-Christian Dialogue: A Decided Ambivalence”.
http://www.missionstudies.org/archive/anzams/2001/PAPERS/ANZAMS_2001_Robinson.doc. Accessed on 28/07/09.

23
Ibid., 144.
24
The Princeton Seminary Bulletin, Volume XVIII Number 2 (1997), 208-210
6