The architecture of the conference brought out clearly the distance that has been traveled. Iso Kern (Berne) examined the missionary methodology of the Jesuits in 16th and 17th century China. He showed how they preferred to rely on arguments from reason rather than affront the Chinese with the full implications of Christian revelation, treading a thin line between absorption into harmony with Chinese religion as "a special type of Buddhism" and controversy about the uniqueness of Jesus and his redemptive death on the cross. The Christian idea of a Creator who redeems a sinful world by the substitutionary sacrifice of his own Son was so repugnant to Confucian sensibility that the Jesuits chose a different route, though Prof. Kern defended them against Pascal's accusation that they "hid" the scandal of the cross. Heinz Mhrmel (Leipzig, in a paper read in his absence) sketched the sterile polemics which characterized early Buddhist-Christian encounters in Ceylon/Sri Lanka, while frank Usarski (São Paulo) analyzed the equally bitter exchanges between early German converts to Buddhism and their Christian opponents. we were to find not only that these controversies are still remembered in Southeast Asia, but that the obstacles to understanding encountered by the Jesuits in China and Japan still cause problems in Buddhist-Christian relations today.

Of fundamental importance to the development of the conference was a difficult paper by Shizuteru Ueda (Kyoto) on "Jesus in Contemporary Japanese Zen." Starting with his teacher Nishitani's presentation on "Nietzsche and Eckhart" to Heidegger's seminar in 1938, Prof. Ueda set out to show how both European nihilism and Christian absolutism can be overcome by Nishitani's understanding of Shûnyatâ: "The last ground of 'I am? is without ground and groundless." Shûnyatâ is itself subject to Shûnyatâ: nihilism can only be surmounted through nihilism itself. This dynamic relationship between Into-Nothingness and Out-of-Nothingness is Zen's point of access to Paul's characterization of Christian life-out-of-death: "I live no more, Christ lives in me " (Gal 2:20). Confronted by the question "Who said this?," as Nishitani confronted his Christian friend Muto, the Christian challenged to ask whether he or she can actually say it, thereby bearing true witness. Ueda's problem is not with this witness, but with the Christian claim that Jesus is unique, for god is not only infinite Person but infinite Openness (basho).

Some of these themes were echoed by two speakers who based themselves on experience rather than philosophy: Karl Schmied, a lay associate of Thich Nhat Hanh, and Than Santikharo Bhikku, an American monk at Suan Mokkh and Buddhadâsa's translator in the last eight years of his life. Without repudiating his Catholic roots, Mr. schmied said that he had simply found more joy in Buddhism. If Jesus is Son of Man and Son of God non-dualistically, could not the relationship between Buddhism and Christianity be one of non-duality, despite obvious differences (rebirth/historical uniqueness; no-self/person; emptiness/being). Cannot Jesus be seen as a universal bodhisattva whose "center" is everywhere rather than as God's "only" son?

Santikharo Bhikku, who still visits the Christian congreation in which he grew up, said that he also foumd it impossible to accept that Jesus should be the only "incarnation" of the divine rather than a universal prophet, adding tht his work with Catholic priests and nuns in the Philippines had enriched his Buddhist practice. Buddhadâsa had found Christian equivalents for dharma, law, duty and thefruits of practice in nature, God, redemption and salvation, though the concept of a "good" creation appears naive to Buddhists, for whom this world arises out of ignorance and craving and is characterized by suffering.

How are Christians to respond to this sympathetic but demanding Buddhist agenda? The cudgels were taken up by two Lutheran theologians with long experience of Buddhism. Notto Thelle (Oslo) suggested that Buddhists will have to become more daring in crossing boundaries now that Buddhism is spreading in the West. Their assumption that Buddhism is unsurpassable has the effect of "neutralizing" all other traditions and amounts to the same strategy as Christian "inclusivism," which Prof. Ueda had rightly found to be inadequate. Prof. Thelle developed interesting complementarities between Buddhism as a "religion of the eye," which begins as philosophy and grows into story, and Christianity as a "religion of the ear," which initially takes a narrative form but gives rise to philosophy. It is beginning to exist, not ceasing to exist, that is the true mystery, The Christian concept of creation, traditionally couched in the language of being, could more appropriately be seen in terms of nihility as c component of all things. The Christian emphasis on reconciliation and communion suggests the Buddhist "between " (basho) and is ne way off speaking of the "suchness" of reality as revealed by the Tathâgata Jesus. Whereas Buddhists stress compassion, for Christians the responsibility that leads to action is important: should Buddhists be more "disturbed" by social injustice?

This theme was also taken up by Michael von Brhck (Munich), who pointed out that all religion, inasmuch as it is asocial construct, is also a social factor. His main concern, however, was with the spirituality beyond religion, the reality beyond distinct identities, to attain which "you have to Shûnyatâ Shûnyatâ," as Prof. Ueda had said, just as Christians must avid trying to "grasp" God. Both Buddhism and Christianity are ultimately about death and dying. The test of whether Buddhists and Christians have really heard the "lion's roar" of the Buddha or Jesus is their response to suffering. Understanding -- not the same thing as agreement -- will be built on this, not on the "hermeneutic devices" of doctrines. Not pluralism, but what he called "relationalism, a partnership in identity" will disclose the universality of our attitudes, e.g., to social reality. For Christians, spirituality means accepting God's unconditional love and ourselves as expressions of its power. The lotus and the cross are not in opposition!

Profound and comprehensive as it was, this conference opened up still further areas for exploration, among them the Buddhist and Christian teachings on nature/ creation. the Network's next meeting will be held in Lund, Sweden, in2001. questions were raised about the conference methodology (underrepresentation of women, more interactive process), but it definitely marked a new phase in relations between Buddhists and Christians in Europe.

John D'Arcy May teaches interfaith dialogue and ethics at Irish School of Ecumenics, Dublin, Ireland.