Spiritualities and discriminations

Since antiquity Christian theologians named the concept of Go’d’s care for the whole world from the beginning to the end of times “economy of salvation”. Antiquity understood the Greek term “oikonomía” as management of a household. Understanding the whole of humanity as a household and being convinced that Go’d takes care of Her creation, that is Her household, the Christians speak of Go’d’s “economy of salvation”. In recent times, the Roman Catholic Church assesses and defines her teaching on revelation and salvation in the Second Vatican Council (1962-1965). The Preface of the Dogmatic Constitution on Divine Revelation Dei Verbum  ends using a citation from Saint Augustine (354-430 CE) claiming that Go’d’s plan to reveal Herself concerns the whole of humanity, “so that by hearing the message of salvation the whole world may believe, by believing it may hope, and by hoping it may love” (https://www.vatican.va/archive/hist_councils/ii_vatican_council/documents/vat-ii_const_19651118_dei-verbum_en.html).

For centuries the Roman Catholic Church tried to tell humanity that Go’d’s salvation is only for Roman Catholic Christians and that outside the Roman Catholic Church there is no hope for reconciliation, liberation, and redemption. At the Second Vatican Council this auto centrism and isolation are ended. The Roman Catholic Church finally defines her relation to non-Christian Religions and to the whole of humanity based on the faith-conviction that she “knows only of one economy of salvation which comprises the entire human family” (Neuner, Josef. 2001. “The Fullness of Revelation”. Vidyajyoti Journal of Theological Reflection 65 (1): 7–13. 12).

The last sentence of the Preface of Dei Verbum speaks of “the whole world”. The Second Vatican Council “opens a worldwide vision of God’s abiding presence and saving love offered to the entire human family” (Neuner 2001, 8). Not surprisingly, the Dogmatic Constitution Dei Verbum confesses first that Go’d’s abiding presence and saving love for all time is connected to Jesus Christ: “The deepest truth about Go’d and the salvation of man shines out for our sake in Christ, who is both the mediator and the fullness of all revelation” (Dei Verbum 2). The Second Vatican Council is eager to assure that its message on the relation with the non-Christian religions corresponds with the New Testament. Scriptural authority is assessed by 7 references to the Gospel, which climax in a great Christological hymn on Go’d’s plan of salvation at the beginning of the Letter to the Ephesians (Ephesians 1, 3-14. The New Jerusalem Bible).

At first sight, Dei Verbum 3 simply continuous remembering the history of salvation, starting with the auto-communication of Go’d to Adam and Eve, the parents of humanity, to Abraham and the patriarchs, to Moses and the prophets. In between this assessment of the history of salvation, there is one remarkable sentence concerning Go’d’s economy of salvation. Revelation is not limited to history; revelation is an ongoing open process. The sentence of Dei Verbum 3 that Go’d “from the start manifested Himself to our first parents … and from that time on He ceaselessly kept the human race in His care, to give eternal life to those who perseveringly do good in search of salvation (Romans 2, 6–7)” serves Josef Neuner as justification of the understanding of revelation as a present and ongoing process. For Josef Neuner (1908–2009), Jesuit priest and theologian, the text of Dei Verbum 3 constitutes the acknowledgement and confession of the Catholic Church that revelation “is in no way limited to a prehistoric period but is actually present and effective among all nations, cultures and religions through the ages” (Neuner 2001, 8). Does this sentence really speak about a revelation in the present and does present revelation really concern all nations, cultures, and religions through the ages?

The reference to Romans 2, 6-7 of Dei Verbum 3 is meant for Jews. Paul tells the Jews that Go’d “will repay everyone as their deeds deserve. For those who aimed for glory and honor and immortality by persevering in doing good, there will be eternal life” (Romans 2, 6-7). Romans 2, 6 is a reference to Psalm 62, 12 and speaks of retributive justice in the way of the Hebrew Bible. Is this emphasis on works compatible with Paul’s theology of grace and faith (Barret. C. K. 1991. The Epistle to the Romans. 44. A&C Black: London)? Romans 2, 7 is meant for Jews and Greek, as we learn from Romans 2, 10: “glory and honor and peace will come to everyone who does good – Jews first, but Greek as well”. Is there really condemnation for those who do evil? The Biblical scholar answers that “glory”, “incorruption” and – to a less extent – “honor” are “matters which are exclusively in Go’d’s gift; they are eschatological terms” (ibid. 45). Following this expertise, the reward of eternal life is promised to those who regard their good works not as marks of human achievement “but as marks of hope in God. Their trust is not in their good works, but in God, the only source of glory, honor, and incorruption” (ibid). This is a nice interpretation. Nevertheless, the reference in Dei Verbum 3 to Romans 2, 6-7 is not helpful for assessing revelation as a present and ongoing process. Therefore, I go back to the sentences in Dei Verbum 3 that serves Neuner assessing a present and ongoing process of revelation. Go’d “from the start manifested Himself to our first parents … and from that time on He ceaselessly kept the human race in His care, to give eternal life to those who perseveringly do good in search of salvation (Romans 2, 6–7)”.

Nobody will negate, that revelation has to do with Go’d’s will. In the Dogmatic Constitution on the Church Lumen Gentium 16 the Roman Catholic Church asserts there are people moved by Go’d’s grace, and in their conscience know about Go’d’s will. Lumen Gentium 16 speaks in present tense. This means, Go’d’s revelation is going on, is an open process. In Lumen Gentium 16 the Catholic Church claims "Those also can attain to salvation who through no fault of their own do not know the Gospel of Christ or His Church, yet sincerely seek God and moved by grace strive by their deeds to do His will as it is known to them through the dictates of conscience. Nor does Divine Providence deny the helps necessary for salvation to those who, without blame on their part, have not yet arrived at an explicit knowledge of God and with His grace strive to live a good life. Whatever good or truth is found amongst them is looked upon by the Church as a preparation for the Gospel. She knows that it is given by Him who enlightens all men so that they may finally have life.” (Lumen Gentium 16).

Using Dei Verbum 3 as authority for claiming revelation “is in no way limited to a prehistoric period but is actually present and effective among all nations, cultures and religions through the ages” (Neuner 2001, 8), clearly has to be seen as part of ongoing revelation itself. The teaching of the Roman Catholic Church is not yet ready to confirm Neuner’s claim without ifs and buts. The Roman Catholic Church respects non-Christian religions, accepts what is good in them, and yet insists on the eminent role of the Roman Catholic Church concerning revelation and salvation. Meanwhile there are Roman Catholic leaders who understand and support the theology of religious pluralism of Josef Neuner and develop the consequences for the Roman Catholic Church. A profound and consequential developer of the acknowledgement of Go’d’s auto-communication in all religions of the world was Cardinal Franz König (1905-2004) from Vienna, Austria: The Roman Catholic Church must try to understand, to study and to learn from Go’d’s realization of His economy of salvation with the religions of this world (König, Franz. 2006. 126. Offen für Gott – offen für die Welt. Kirche im Dialog. Edited by Christa Pongratz-Lippitt. Freiburg im Breisgau: Herder).

König did not publish the above conviction when living. König had published a lot, but he knew he would receive order from the dogmatic watchdogs in the Vatican and the Eurocentric authoritarian Pope John Paul II to stay silent on accepting Go’d’s revelation in other religions than the Roman Catholic. König maintained all his life discussing matters of the Christian faith, of developments in the Roman Catholic Church and in the worlds of politics, science, and the arts with journalists and personalities from public life. König nurtured a special relationship with The Tablet, the International Catholic News weekly from London, England. Christa Pongratz-Lippit, the reporter for The Tablet stationed in Vienna, had worked with Cardinal König for many years and was a trusted interview-partner. To her König revealed his conviction that we must learn about Go’d and Her economy of salvation by listening and studying all religions of this world (ibid.).

König was an excellent academic researcher of religions and University teacher; he was a priest dedicated to the care of individual women and men and capable of convincing by appealing to personal responsibility of the individual’s conscience concerning the social choices that realize the Christian faith (Feichtlbauer, Hubert. 2003. Franz König. Der Jahrhundert-Kardinal. Holzhausen Verlag GmbH: Wien).  In 1968, König was protesting Pope Paul VI decision forbidding artificial birth control. König made the Austrian bishops’ conference publish a document that gives freedom for the choice of artificial birth control to the conscience of the concerned woman and man. König was not a feminist, but he encouraged and supported Austrian Catholic women faithful to assess their faith and to develop organizations for active participation and responsibilities of women and men in the Roman Catholic Church and civil society. König publicly protested the legalization of abortion, but respected the Austrian parliament’s decision not to criminalize any more abortions in the first three months from the beginning of pregnancy that went into law on January 1, 1975.

In 1927 König was sent by his bishop to study philosophy and theology at the Pontifical Gregorian University in Rome. König also took courses in Ancient Persian and Iranian religion and Oriental languages at the Pontifical Bible Institute (ibid. 269). In 1933 he was ordained priest in Rome and then was sent into villages of Lower Austria as a chaplain. Changing from participating at a world-church in the center of the Roman Catholic Church, from an international community of Catholic professors and students to a country chaplain was quite a challenge. König confessed that the years of his pastoral work were of invaluable importance for his personal life because no academic study would have allowed him to learn what one could learn only from experience (ibid. 21). Nevertheless, König continued during his absorbing work as community pastor with his studies and graduated in 1936 in Rome as Doctor of Theology about the concepts of Go’d in Zoroastrianism at the Gregorian (ibid. 269).

In 1938 König was appointed pastor for the youth at the Cathedral of St. Pölten (ibid.). His round table talks in the sacristy of the Cathedral soon attracted the young from St. Pölten and the surroundings. König insisted on the necessary conjunction of reflecting on the Gospel of Jesus and the personal experience of Go’d, of the study and the prayer, of meditation and personal faith choices (ibid. 24). Thomas Beckett and Thomas Morus were models for this Christian youth at the Cathedral and an inspiration in their resistance to the propaganda and ideology of the Nazis. The Gestapo, the official secret state police of Nazi Germany and their occupied countries in Europe was suspiciously observing the Catholic youth, putting informants into the group, opening the correspondence of König, and tried in several interrogations to intimidate König. König organized the group meetings at underground locations and in the countryside. During this time of resistance to the Nazis König already wanted to close the gap between the Roman Catholic Church and the workers’ class (ibid. 29).

From 1945 to 1948 König taught religion at a High School in Krems, Lower Austria. During these years he continued his research on Zoroastrianism. In 1948 he became assistant professor for moral theology at the University of Salzburg and published in 1951 “Christ in the religions of the World” that became a standard reference work in religious science (ibid.). In 1952 he was nominated Coadjutor Bishop in St. Pölten, Lower Austria, and in 1956 he was nominated Archbishop of Vienna. In 1958 he was created cardinal by Pope John XXIII (ibid. 270). Pope Paul VI made him in 1965 president of the Pontifical council for dialogue with non-believers. König resigned as president in 1980 and in 1985 he resigned as Archbishop of Vienna and as head of the Austrian Bishops’ conference. In 1965 he was invited to give a talk at the Al-Azhar University in Caire. He established personal relations with many personalities from the Orthodox and Old-oriental Churches and engaged in dialogue with the natural sciences and humanities (Neuhold. David 2013. “König“ In Personenlexikon zum Zweiten Vatikanischen Konzil, edited by Michael Quisinsky and Peter Walter, 155-56. 156. Freiburg im Breisgau: Herder).

As Cardinal of Vienna and president of the Austrian bishops’ conference König continued to be a pastor of his diocese and of Austria. When he visited the parishes, König wanted to meet with the workers and visited them at their working places in the fabrics. He started a dialogue with the workers’ unions and with the Austrian Social Democratic Party. The dialogue was about the Socialists’ differentiation from atheist Marxism, economic policy, nationalization of private enterprises and the world views on society (Feichtlbauer 2003. 97). For the socialists it was a pity that the Roman Catholic Church for more than a century was not capable of differentiating between Marxist communism and democratic socialism. König published wrote a pastoral letter and made the distinction between Marxism and democratic socialism clear. In 1958 the Austrian Socialist Party claimed that socialists aimed at social justice in society, the welfare of the people, freedom, and world peace (ibid. 98). The party congress of the Socialist Party in 1959 discussed openly the reconciliation between the Socialists and religion, and socialist Catholics did their part for the reconciliation. On both sides there were sceptics and adversaries. The old social democrats passionately defended their credo:

Strict separation of stated and religion, no reaching of religion in public schools and no public subvention of Roman Catholic institutions. Conservative Catholics were not convinced of the new socialist program and polemized against König calling him the “red cardinal” (ibid. 97). In the last years of König being Archbishop of Vienna, they systematically lobbied Cardinals at the Roman Curia in the Vatican to find an appropriate loyal successor for König, who would correct his errors and defend the Catholic doctrine. In 1986 Pope John Paul II, who had become after the death of Pope John I a papal candidate at the conclave in 1978 thanks to the initiative of Cardinal König, appointed the Benedictine monk Hans Hermann Groer to succeed König as Archbishop of Vienna. Groer caused the deepest crisis of the Roman Catholic Church in Austria since the end of World War II. Hundreds of thousands of Catholics left the Church because of their broken confidence in Church authorities who - like Cardinal Hans Hermann Groer – were accused of power abuse and sexual abuse of minors. The excuses presented by the new Archbishop Christoph Schönborn in 1998 did not help overcome the crisis of the Church.

Cardinal König appointed Josef Neuner his theological expert at the Second Vatican Council. Neuner’s experience of living in India and his knowledge and insight of Hinduism had been invaluable for the preparation of the Council’s Declaration Nostra Aetate (König 2006, 130). Although Josef Neuner was the most important Austrian theologian of the twentieth century, his prophetic pioneering of a Catholic consciousness that abandons Eurocentrism and goes global by respecting cultures and religions as being of equal value, is still not fully recognized in his Roman Catholic Church. Josef Neuner left Europe for India in 1939 (Quisinsky Michael 2013. Personenlexikon zum Zweiten Vatikanischen Konzil, edited by Michael Quisinsky and Peter Walter, 199. Freiburg im Breisgau: Herder). The British put him into an internment camp; Austria had become part of Hitler’s Germany and Neuner, a dedicated opponent to Nazism, nevertheless was thought to constitute a security risk (Fischer 2009). Neuner used the seven years of his captivity until 1947 for intensive studies of Indian culture. He learned Sanskrit, read the Bhagavad Gita, the Upanishads and studied Indian philosophy. He taught Christian faith not only by theology at the De Nobili College in Pune, but also by the example of his life. He publicly called for enhancing the rights of women in the Roman Catholic Church; he planted trees to improve the deteriorating ecologic situation of India and long before there was talk of the climate change, he exclusively used public transport and further tried to reduce his ecological footprint by living modestly. He lived the preferential option for the poor. Together with the sisters of the Society of Helpers of Mary, he worked in the Dharavi slum of Mumbai, the biggest slum in Asia (Fischer, Georg. 2009. “Pater Josef Neuner SJ. Großer Theologe, Gefährte Jesu, Tröster der Armen.” Innsbrucker Theologischer Leseraum. https://www.uibk.ac.at/theol/leseraum/texte/840.html.). He joined the sisters of the Society of the Helpers of Mary in their vision, envisaging a society “where the values of compassion, equality, justice and harmony flourish and everyone experiences the fullness of life and their mission to reach out to the powerless and the voiceless, especially women and children and empowering them” ( http://www.societyofthehelpersofmary.org).

He supported, backed, and sponsored, with the money he would collect in his native Austria, the work of the sisters living with the people suffering from leprosy, HIV infection and AIDS, with orphans, displaced and homeless persons. As a spiritual guru, he inspired, encouraged, and accompanied thousands of women, men and queer, lay and clergy. From 1999–2001 he promoted the beatification of Mother Teresa as the so-called “censor theologicus”, that is the theological expert in charge of the case for the Vatican (Quisinsky 2013, 199).

In the last years of his life, he publicly protested against the Vatican’s stubborn and stupid fighting against open and interactive dialogue with the non-Christian religions and lamented the ignorant resistance to any development of the doctrine of faith (Fischer 2009). Neuner had helped in the realization the Eucharistic World Congress in Mumbai in 1964. Cardinal König was chairing the first interreligious talks together with a Muslim, a Buddhist, a Hindu and a Parsi. At the Congress there was not yet talk of a dialogue, the meeting was a first timid exploration (ibid.). König does not speak of his role at the Congress, he points to the important presence of Pope Paul VI in Mumbai. The pope left a deep impression on the congress members, when citing from the Upanishads and calling for a getting together of the hearts of the Christians and the Hindus (König 2006, 129).

A spectacular consequence of the Second Vatican Council’s effort to relate to the non-Christian religions was the World Day of Prayer in Assisi in 1986. Pope John Paul II invited representatives of the great world religions to pray for peace. This meeting in Assisi was a strong signal for the Catholic Church’s sincere promotion of peace and solidarity (ibid.: 131). Assisi had put into the center of public attention the power of religion for the future of mankind (ibid.). At the same time Assisi was the bone of contention for those anxious circles in the Catholic Church that opposed the recognition of a pluralistic situation of religions of equal dignity, freedoms, and rights (ibid.). Cardinal König voluntarily recognizes the search for truth in other religions (ibid.: 126), Cardinal Ratzinger, who as a theologian at the Second Vatican Council collaborated editing Nostra Aetate and Dei Verbum, as prefect of the Vatican’s congregation for the proclamation of the faith started to fight and suppress the theologians who defended the equal dignity and value of the plurality of religions on earth.

For example, Ratzinger started questioning the faith in Christ of the Belgian Jesuit Jacques Dupuis (1923–2004), who according to Cardinal König was considered as the most important living Catholic thinker on inter-religious dialogue at that time (ibid.: 131). Dupuis lived and taught for more than forty years in India, constantly dialoguing with Buddhists, Christians, Confucians, and Hindus. Dupuis tirelessly and against all resistance from his Church, worked on a Christian theology of religious pluralism (ibid.: 132). Dupuis was ready to investigate the ways of the non-Christian religions realizing Go’d’s economy of salvation, although he cautiously insisted in the special situation of Christendom. Dupuis claimed the urgent necessity for a “qualitative jump” forward in the Catholic Church’s relating to the non-Christian religions (ibid.: 133). Broken by the attacks of Cardinal Ratzinger who had opened an investigation into his works in 1999, Dupuis did not publish his advanced thoughts anymore.

Cardinal König, the retired Archbishop from Vienna, was more than upset by the Vatican’s persecution of Dupuis. Christa Pongratz-Lippit testifies about König that she “had always admired how calm he remained during our interviews, despite the many deadlines he had to keep. But during the Dupuis investigation he was a changed man. It obviously upset him greatly” (Pongratz-Lippit, Christa. 2008. „Writer witnessed conversation between cardinal and censured theologian Jacques Dupuis”. National Catholic Reporter, March 21. http://natcath.org/NCR_Online/archives2/2008a/032108/032108q.htm).

Pongratz-Lippit has the merit giving a journalist’s account of how the prefect of the Congregation for the Faith treats a brother colleague of the college of Cardinals of the Roman Catholic Church. In 1978 during the Conclave, Cardinal König was “papabile” that is a serious candidate for the papacy. Now, in 1999, the old, wise, and weak Cardinal of Vienna got shaken by the humiliations and ignorance he received from Rome. Pongratz-Lippit reports of her encounters with the Cardinal during the investigation of Dupuis:

The Cardinal “asked me to come round several times but on each occasion, instead of remaining seated as he usually did when we met, he would keep striding up and down and frequently interrupted our conversation by saying he had to telephone Rome to check something, and would I mind waiting while he went to his study to do so. On one occasion when he came back, he was very pale and when he picked up a book his hand shook -- something I had never seen before nor ever experienced afterward. It transpired that he had been in touch with the congregation authorities, and he had concluded that they had not studied Dupuis’ work properly. Moreover, he mused, how could they, as it was written in English and, as far as he knew, none of those responsible for the investigation had an expert command of that language? …

I remember how he would sit there shaking his head and muttering, ‘What happened to the spirit of the council?” or “How could they do this to a man as loyal as Dupuis?’ He was determined to defend Dupuis against Rome as he was deeply shocked at how unfairly, in his opinion, Dupuis had been treated by the congregation. Nevertheless, he was loath to come out openly against the Vatican congregation” (Pongratz-Lippit 2008).

Cardinal König wrote in The Tablet: “I cannot keep silent, for my heart bleeds when I see such obvious harm being done to the common good of God’s Church” (König 1999, 76). “We have a privileged position as Christians, but we must be humble and understand that Christ’s message goes beyond us. We must try to comprehend what God’s plans are for the different religions” (König 1999, 77). König wants to transcend the limits of the Christian world and to find out “what the non-Christian religions mean for us, and how the good in all religions can be combined to serve global justice and peace” (ibid.).

The Cardinal refers to the encyclical of Pope John Paul II Redemptor Missio (John Paul II 1990). It is a century old strategy to defend a theological argument citing a papal authority. König refers to Redemptor Missio 5 but interprets the text of the encyclical in a way John Paul II does not intend. John Paul II does not open up to “other mediator roles of a different kind and order in Christ’s universal mediatory role” as König comments (König 1999, 77). John Paul II makes clear, that “forms of mediations of different kinds” only can be understood as “parallel or complementary” to Christ’s mediation (John Paul II 1990). The papal encyclical insists on superiority of Christ’s role in mediating salvation, and not on humility as a faithful. The Cardinal clearly transcends the limits of the official Catholic teaching on inter-religious dialogue when he claims with Dupuis “the Holy Spirit’s activity also outside the visible Body of the Church” and uses Sacred Scripture as validity condition for this claim: The Gospel of John 3, 8 says: “the wind blows where it will” (König 1999, 76). It is not surprising that the response from Cardinal Ratzinger on König ‘s article was coming soon.

“On March 1, 1999, König received a personal letter from the prefect of the congregation of the faith, the former Inquisition, the then-Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger, saying he had read König’s article ‘In Defense of Fr. Dupuis’ in The Tablet ‘with astonishment and sadness’ and defending the congregation” (Pongratz-Lippit 2008). As Pope Benedict XVI Ratzinger continued humiliating and ignoring brothers and sisters holding different views in the Catholic Church from the time of his election in 2005 until his resignation. He decided that he was incapable of resolving some pending problems inside Vatican’s corruption and mismanagement, leading to his resignation as pope in 2013.

Since 1984, Depuis had been teaching theology in Rome at the Gregorian University and therefore was directly exposed to the Vatican’s doctrinal watchdogs. Neuner had decided to stay in India and to continue to work with his Indian sisters and brothers within the context of Hindu culture. In January 2001, Neuner published his thoughts on Cardinal Ratzinger’s declaration on the relation to the non-Christian religions Dominus Jesus (Ratzinger, Joseph. 2000. “Declaration ‘Dominus Jesus’ on the Unicity and Salvific Universaliry of Jesus Christ and the Church.” The Holy See. http://www.vatican.va/roman_curia/congregations/cfaith/documents/rc_con_cfaith_doc_20000806_dominus-iesus_en.html). Neuner writes that Dominus Jesus cites only from Dei Verbum dealing with the revelation in Jesus Christ but not from Dei Verbum speaking of revelation going on “among all nations, cultures and religions through the ages” (Neuner 2001, 9). Neuner goes on analyzing the distorted way in which Ratzinger speaks of the “fullness of revelation in Jesus Christ” (ibid.).

The term “fullness of revelation” must be described according to its context in Dei Verbum 4 (ibid.). Dei Verbum 4 claims that Jesus Christ is fulfilling with us a twofold task: “he ‘speaks the words of God (John 3, 34)’, communicates with us, ‘and accomplishes the work of salvation which the Father gave him to do (John 5, 36 and John 17, 4)’” (ibid.). The text of Dei Verbum 4 continues:

“To see Jesus is to see His Father (John 14, 9). For this reason Jesus perfected revelation by fulfilling it through his whole work of making Himself present and manifesting Himself: through His words and deeds, His signs and wonders, but especially through His death and glorious resurrection from the dead and final sending of the Spirit of truth. Moreover, He confirmed with divine testimony what revelation proclaimed, that God is with us to free us from the darkness of sin and death, and to raise us up to life eternal.”

Neuner critically observes that Dominus Jesus leaves out citing the above sentence from Dei Verbum 4: These lines “sum up the significance of the revelation in Jesus Christ” (Neuner 2001, 9). Jesus revealed by his words and deeds, by his life, death and resurrection “that God is with us to free us from the darkness of sin and death, and to raise us up to life eternal” (Dei Verbum 4). Fulfilling revelation means leading us women, men and queer on this earth to the hope of Go’d’s realization of His or Her promise to liberate us finally from sin, to realize salvation. Dei Verbum 4 speaks of Jesus Christ fulfilling revelation, but not of “the fullness of revelation in Jesus Christ” as Ratzinger claims (ibid.). Jesus announced the fullness of revelation for his second coming. Until then, fullness remains our hope.

With the Apostle Paul and with the teachings of the Roman Catholic Church we must bear in mind that this hope for salvation is hope that will be realized by the second coming of Jesus Christ at the end of the times. Fulfillment of revelation by Jesus Christ in this context of Dei Verbum can be described as the New Covenant, as our definitive assurance that God sticks to Her or His word, “Jesus Christ perfected revelation by fulfilling it” (Dei Verbum 4) by his death and resurrection. This promise is valid through the whole of history. The realization of this history may be called a history of the way of salvation. Jesus Christ has revealed to us women, men and queer the “the universal solidarity with all people” as the universal will for salvation of the eternal God of mercy (Neuner 200,1 11).

The faith and belief in “the total dependence on God and the communion with all people is actually lived in many nations and cultures and cannot be revealed in the historical person of Jesus; it has to be discovered in inter-religious dialogue. … The Church never meets ‘outsiders’, people who are simply ‘different’ she always encounters fellow-pilgrims who, under the guidance of God’s eternal Word, are moving towards the same destiny, the fulfillment of all creation in the divine mystery, in the final Kingdom of God” (ibid.). One may say that the Christians are called to make to sisters and brothers, to make to their neighbors all women, men and queer of all religions and beliefs just as Jesus made to his neighbor the Pharisee who asked him about eternal life.

The Church needs shepherds like Luke who narrate like Jesus had narrated to the lawyer the parable of the Good Samaritan to make him understand that Go’d wants mercy and not a legal definition of “the neighbor”. In Luke 10, 29–35, Jesus provided himself a neighbor to the lawyer and only then, he encouraged the lawyer to provide himself neighbors too. Jesus realizes the validity condition of his claim to mutual relations of dignity by making himself a neighbor to the consenting lawyer. The purpose of Jesus’ dialogue with the lawyer as the realization of revelation consists in a transformation and creation of unity and peace; the purpose of interreligious dialogue is not a doctrinal information or intellectual abstraction (ibid. 10). Lumen Gentium 16 claims that even atheists, “who cannot conceive of God but live a committed life, are guided by God and may in the end have life” (ibid.: 12). Salvation comes from God’s love. This sentence expresses the hope of Christians. It is God who calls each of us, and Neuner refers to the proclamation of Gaudium et Spes 22 that “the Holy Spirit offers everyone the possibility of sharing in the paschal mystery in a manner known to God” (ibid.).

According to the teaching of the Church there is only one economy of salvation which comprises the entire human family (ibid.). Neuner concludes by summarizing the recognition of the possibility condition by the Second Vatican Council that “hence, in dealing with other religions, we are concerned most of all with the question whether and how they help people, with God’s grace, to come to the ultimate surrender to God which is the way to salvation, the promise of Jesus Christ (ibid. 13). Roman Catholic Christians are on the way to salvation, and we are struggling to walk the line. Interreligious dialogue does not consist in persuading women, men and queer of other religions or spiritualities to a Christian world view. On the contrary! As Christians interreligious dialogue questions our own belief system, questions the imperfect state of our faith and helps enhance the understanding of our convictions. Neuner insists be conscious “of how deficient, even erroneous, the faith-understanding of many good Catholics may also be” (ibid. 12).

The way to salvation and liberation is not a theoretical one, it is a concrete, daily struggle for physical, psychic, social, economic, cultural, and spiritual integrity of concrete women, men and queer in this world. The aspect of spirituality is constitutional for human integrity and health. There is no discrimination with spirituality, all women, men and queer are given equal dignity, freedom, and rights. There is no separation of the different aspects of human integrity. The Good Samaritan does not preach integrity, the Good Samaritan realizes integrity.

In 2017, 258 million women, men, and queer migrants all over the world live their personal exodus to freedom, liberty and a better life, a possibility condition for realizing their hopes for life (United Nations, Department of Economic and Social Affairs, Population Division 2017, 4). The “Missing migrants project” of the International Organization for Migration of the UN by December 18, 2015, counted for Europe 956, 456 arrivals by sea and estimates that in 2014 and 2015 about five thousand persons had died at sea crossing the Mediterranean to reach Europe (Radulovic, Zarko. December 22, 2015. Asyl & Flucht im Jahr 2015 - Ein Rückblick. medienservicestelle.at/migration_bewegt/2015/12/22/asyl-flucht-im-jahr-2015-ein-rueckblick/).

Writing a history of salvation, that is the history of the billions of women, men and queer having struggled and struggling for their salvation, requires describing and confess the involvement of us, women, men, and queer Catholic European Christians in the failure to rescue children, women, men and queer from death at home, during flight, and at sea.

Writing a history of salvation would require from us, European Christians, to confess the history of exploitation, suppression, and colonization around the world; we are invited to describe our involvement in the current exploitation of African women, men and queer to get precious raw materials for our computers and not paying fare prices. Writing a history of salvation then would require describing how we worked together with all women, men and queer to restore justice and create peace in hope for salvation.

Since we are still on the way to this justice and peace, we are called at least to identify some of the injustices that we wanted to correct. In the context of the interreligious dialogue of Christians and Hindus, I want to receive the critique of father S. M. Michael of the present situation of the Dalits in the Roman Catholic Church in India (Michael, S. M. 2001. “Dialogue of Cultures: Hindutva & Dalit Perception of the Christian Mission.” Vidyajyoti Journal of Theological Reflection 65 (1): 14–26.). Christians are no better than Hindus, when it comes to discrimination of human dignity, freedom, and rights.

The Hindutva is one of many nationalist movements of militant Hindu revivalism in the Indian subcontinent sustaining the superiority of Hinduism to any other faith (ibid.: 15). Politicians, the media, students, laborers, and Hindu religious groups are trying to establish an upper cast Sanskritic Hinduism, “isolate Christians and Muslims as foreign to India, claiming that Tribals and Dalits are Hindus, and Buddhists and Jains are subcultures of India” (ibid.: 16). The Tribals and Dalits rejected this determination by the Brahmanic casts and “found their own ways of improving their social status” (ibid.). The Dalits, the untouchables, are the lowest rank in the caste hierarchy. “Their person, shadow, food, vessels were to be avoided, they were made to live separately” and their occupation was “clearing the dead cattle, cleaning the public places and removing the night soil; … they make up about 16% of the Indian population and number about 138 million” (ibid.).

“Christians of Dalit background in the Christian community in India suffer a threefold discrimination: first at the hands of members of the Hindu society; second from the Government of India when it denies them constitutional rights which it gives to the Dalits in general; and third, from Christians of upper caste background” (ibid.). “Though Dalit Christians make 65% of the ten million Christians in South India, less than 4% of the parishes are entrusted to Dalit priests” the Apostolic Pro-Nuncio to India told the Catholic Bishops` Conference in 1992 (ibid. 23). In 2019, this situation of injustice has not changed very much. The Indian catholic population in 2015 is twenty million. 65% of them are Dalits, but their representation among bishops, priests, and religious sisters is only 5 percent, among major superiors of religious orders only 1.5%; there is no Dalit archbishop and no Dalit cardinal (Isidore, Isidore, 2019. 278. The Dalit Christians in India with special reference to Bihar. A Pastoral Response to their History, Identity and Struggles. Unpublished doctoral Dissertation at the Faculty of Catholic Theology of the Leopold-Franzens-University, Innsbruck, Austria). At the same time, the cruel suppression, violence and discrimination of the Dalit Christians by the Hindutva forces is still a sad reality in 2019 (bid.: 276).

From 1984 to 1987, I lived in the Jesuit community in Frankfurt with P. Francis, a Jesuit father from Tamil Nadu, South India. Later, he should become the first Jesuit provincial superior of Dalit background and so far, he was not any more followed by a brother from his caste. It would take five hundred years for the Jesuits be ready to overcome caste differences. I could not believe it. A few years later, Jesuits with Indigenous background in Peru told me the same stories of Jesuit discrimination of Jesuits in Latin America. In the 1990s, I lived with young Indian Jesuit fathers doing their theological doctorate studies at the Jesuit College in Innsbruck. I did not observe at first sight any discriminations among them, and they were discrete about their caste background. One day I organized a dinner for all doctorate students and invited an Indian father to help me with the cooking. The father turned at me with a very serious expression on his face and told me that it was practically impossible for him to join the preparation of food, because there were Indians in the group who belonged to a lower caste, and he came from a superior caste. I was more shocked about the fact that for years I had not realized the practice of discrimination among my Indian brothers than about the discrimination itself. The high caste Jesuit finally joined the cooking team, but the strong feeling of caste exclusiveness and the continuing silent discrimination among my Indian brothers did not really change.

Nevertheless, Michael can assess in 2001 that “the Dalit consciousness has been well awakened towards a new dynamic India based on the principles of equality, fraternity and social justice (Michael 2001, 23). Michael is clear: “The future of the Church in India will depend on its witness to the love of God and the equality of persons and on the building up of a just society where the poor and the marginalized feel the dignity of their humanity” (ibid.: 24). In the given political situation, dialogue is increasingly difficult, since dialogue asks for respect of the multi-cultural and ideological variety of Indian traditions (ibid.).