The Pontifical Council for Interreligious Dialogue held its first Plenary Assembly in 1979. The Catholic Church was still grappling with the question of 'why' interreligious dialogue. It was still struggling to come to terms with the basic theological foundation for dialogue. Dr Samartha and Mgr Rossano, Secretary, PCID, insisted that the Church's dialogue means accepting the other with his/her otherness without abandoning one's own Christian identity. Mutual enrichment was emphasized as one of the key foundations for interreligious dialogue.

It was at the "Theological Convention on Dialogue in Community", held at Chiang Mai (Thailand) from 18-27 April 1977, that the positions adopted by the World Council of Churches were seen to be nearer those of the Catholic Church. The architect of the meeting was Dr Samartha. From the beginning of the preparatory stage Dr Samartha wished to have the active participation of the Catholic Church in the Consultation. Mgr Rossano was invited as an observer for the preparatory meeting at Glion (Switzerland) from 24-28 January 1977. For the Consultation itself the President, the Secretary and the Under-secretary, together with two Consultors, were invited. Dr Samartha, on his own, also invited other Catholic participants as 'Catholic experts'. The Catholic Bishop of Chiang Mai and a Catholic monk were also present at the Consultation.

At the Chiang Mai meeting the Catholic Church was always looked to as an interesting point of reference. The report which was published in the Bulletin (1977-XII/3, 36) says, "Never once did we hear an anti-Catholic word". It continues, "Among the chief points explained as the foundation of dialogue we must mention the revaluation of creation in a Christological and pneumatological sense and a decidedly innovatory anthropology with regard to the Reform. This led the assembly to use, consciously or unconsciously, expressions similar to those of Vatican II and of the Pontifical documents, such as "riches of the nations" "self-revelation of God to the peoples" "action of the Spirit outside the Church" "dialogue as activity and service of the Church" "Christian community as distinct and open to the world of the religions", etc., and to give unanimous encouragement to dialogue as the modern form of the ministry of the Church" (p. 139).

Mgr Rossano, speaking on behalf of the Catholic participants said, "The Chiang Mai Convention represents in my view a real step forward in the ecumenical movement. From now on I am sure we will speak in terms of "before Chiang Mai" and "after Chiang Mai", and this not only for the Churches affiliated to the WCC but especially for the relations between the RC Churches and your Churches. It happens that the movement of convergence between the Churches finds today one of its major catalysts in the dialogue with people of other faiths... I will affirm strongly in your presence what has been already agreed between our Vatican Secretariat and the DFI, that every initiative of dialogue, either of thinking on it, or of practising it with members of other faiths, be taken, whenever possible, in an ecumenical shape and collaboration" (Bulletin, 1977-XII/3, 36, p. 140).

I see Dr Samartha complementing the person of Mgr Rossano. Both had the task of laying the theological foundations for interreligious dialogue in their respective Church/churches. Both contributed immensely to make interreligious dialogue credible in their respective Church/churches. In his book, Between Two Cultures, Ecumenical Ministry in a Pluralistic World, Dr Samartha speaks about the motivations, difficulties and ideas concerning interreligious dialogue. In that book he also touches on the growing positive attitude of the people of other religious traditions in the context of interreligious relations. Rooted and grounded in Christian tradition he proposed that religious identities not be understood or experienced in a static manner. For him they have to be affirmed and rediscovered, and they grow in relation to both their own community and those of other faiths.

Having spent most of his life in India (where he was born and where he died) and Switzerland (where he worked) Dr Samartha brought enrichment to the reflection on the churches' dialogue with other religions while he was enriched by the practice of that dialogue. He had plenty of success stories to tell but he also humbly admitted the failures which were due mainly to the uncomprehending attitude of the people around (E.g. While Christians feared a betrayal of mission, relativism and syncretism, the others accused Christians of using interreligious dialogue for a missionary purpose).

I must also place on record the contribution Dr Samartha made to our Bulletin from time to time (cf. Bulletin, nn. 26 (1974-IX/2), 38 (1978-XIII/2) and 41-42 (1978-XIV/2-3). Dr Samartha deeply believed that dialogue is more than just an encounter of commitments. He wrote, "Commitment involves both an assent and a question within oneself. The area between the 'I' and the 'thou', between 'we' and 'they', is an area of personal relationship between people sharing the burden and joy of existence where genuine dialogue demands humility and love. Dialogue therefore is both an expression of faith and a sign of hope" [Bulletin, n. 26 (1974-IX/2)].