The assumption undergirding our discussion is difficult. It is that the beginning of every dialogue should be marked by forgiveness. We are assuming that forgiveness should inform every dialogue, including those among peoples of various cultures and religions. This is a hard saying. But it marks the way to peace, the only way.

I propose to cover three aspects of this topic: 1) the history of the principle of dialogue; 2) the meaning of forgiveness in dialogue, and 3) the emerging culture as a formidable obstacle to realizing this vision

1) It is no mere coincidence that the concept, 'principle of dialogue,' emerged at the end of the First World War. It was a time when deception and illusion began to reveal the power of evil at its greatest.

In 1918 this principle was discovered by four independent and diverse thinkers: Ferdinand Ebner in Wiener Neustadt; Martin Buber in Frankfurt; Gabriel Marcel in France; and Franz Rosenzweig in Leipzig. All were influenced by biblical revelation. Two were Christians, Ebner and Marcel, and two were Jews, Buber and Rosenzweig.

Their publications marked the initial phase of the discovery of the principle of dialogue. The responses to the question, "Who am I?", had a prevalently theological character with the focus on the divine "Thou" in discovering the human "I".

In a succeeding period, a philosophical, non-theistic notion dominated reflections on dialogue. It began with Karl Lowith's inaugural dissertation in 1928 and ended inconclusively with Karl Jaspers in 1932. It was inconclusive because reductively horizontal understanding of dialogues lacked the quality of "destiny" and remained fortuitous and transitory. The human "I" could not emerge from merely fulfilling human encounters..

In 1983 Hans Urs von Balthasar argued for the vertical axis of biblical revelation in discovering the human "I' through dialogue. He wrote that only through the 'name' that God uses to address the individual is the human being validly and definitively distinct from every other human. He is no longer simply an individual of a species but a unique person. (Theodrama I, 628). One is led to acknowledge that every other man is what he is and who he is because he also stands before God and is individually and personally addressed by him. Each man, the other self, becomes an absolute, unique existence through the dialogue of divine and human freedoms.

In 1964 Pope Paul VI devoted a major part of his first encyclical letter, Paths of the Church, to Christian dialogue. He made no mention of forgiveness in what he called "the dialogue of salvation." He considered only "the motives which impel the Church toward dialogue, the methods to be followed, and the goals to be achieved. We wish to give, not full treatment to topics, but proper disposition of hearts", he wrote (66).

Pope John Paul II has asked God for forgiveness for the crimes of Catholics and for the pardon of those who were the object of Catholic violence. His request was part ofthe Great Pardon of the Jubilee Year 2000 and marked a deepening of the initiative of Pope Paul VI. The updating of the martyrology should also be seen within this context.

2) Forgiveness is a characteristic of inter-cultural and inter-religious dialogues from their opening stages. Dialogue is a drama of word and spirit. The Gospel of John is a disturbing, yet convincing, drama of dialogues. It opens with the statement, "In the beginning was the Word." The logos of Heraclitus was quite another thing. It was the logos of harmony through violence. The Logos of John is the Logos that renounces violence, which the world cannot understand, cannot know and did not accept. John also draws a paradigmatic opposition between the beginning of Genesis, where God drives man from paradise, and his prologue where the Logos is the one whom the world does not accept and drives out.

Several dialogues of Jesus follow the prologue. Hardly a single one is genuine, including the final one with Pilate. After being asked by Pilate, "What is truth?", Jesus continues the dialogue with silence. Finally, John shows the Logos as the universal scapegoat. The Lamb ofGod becomes the ultimate scapegoat of all of man's hostility.

Moreover, when a Cbristian is offended, it is impossible that he should perceive himself as a victim. No other conclusion is possible in light of Jesus's prayer upon the Cross, "Father, forgive them." Christians in dialogue must remember his prayer. They must further reflect upon the reason for his petition of forgiveness. "For they know not what they are doing." Even the smallest children can understand these words. They are almost childlike. Demons continue to repeat them to themselves since they were first uttered. But they do so without understanding them, much to their growing terror.

So in the Christian revelation, all dialogue is founded upon a dialogue begun by God "in the beginning." It reaches its culminating point in the Word of God made flesh. The astounding mystery ofGod's eliciting the 'Yes' of his human partner from the latter's innermost freedom is the masterpiece of creation. The subsequent dialogue of freedom between the Word made flesh and man places human dialogue in an entirely new light.

Forgiveness is an essential virtue in the new creation in Christ's Pasch. Those emerging from the baptismal waters are conceived by the Spirit of God. Through Baptism they know themselves to be united to Christ in a likeness to his death. That profound union remains an intimate part of their consciousness throughout life. The indifference of the baptized is an act of all-embracing love.

Trust in God is integral when one hears the universal human cry of dereliction. It is only an echo of the divine pathos. Upon hearing that cry, originating in God, men and women open their hearts in forgiveness of one another. They know themselves as persons standing before God's judgment and having been forgiven in that tribunal.

The consequences for dialogue are far-reaching. To be in dialogue means being a creature who knows oneself as an absolute and unique individual because one has been and continues to be addressed in mercy and pardon. One knows oneself to be guilty of wrongdoing and has taken the important step of asking pardon of God. One must take the crucial initiative in asking the pardon of the brother offended as the central petition of the Lord's Prayer indicates.

To introduce forgiveness into dialogue is to introduce a dramatic element. It is the heightening of its natural tensions. The mission of Jesus confirms this heightening. His words of forgiveness on the cross reveal that forgiveness is central to his death. It appears even that his life was always oriented to that mystery of forgiveness in the midst of forsakenness.

3)Is it possible to have dialogues beginning with such forgiveness. More and more religious leaders are becoming aware that they live in a world in which the centuries-old religions, both eastern and western, "tremble before the onslaught of American pop culture." The importance of the worldwide impact of American popular culture is indisputable. People everywhere are evolving from a vision of humanity rooted in psychology to one more anchored in biotechnology. The trembling of religions before this onslaught is also evident.

Elaborating on this theme, Stephen Holden, a film critic of The New York Times, wrote recently, "On fronts ranging from sports medicine to psychotherapy to fashion, popular art increasingly views people as perfectible machines who can be improved through drugs, diet, exercise and surgery. Most of the soul's ailments, this view presupposes, are physical imbalances that can be corrected. As millions avail themselves of everything from Prozac to plastic surgery, this mechanized notion of the human body has begun to take hold. Cloning, genetic engineering and the unraveling of the human genome tantalizes us with the prospect of extended life, and beyond that, perhaps even immortality, through some hybrid of human and computer. With all these humanly engineered intimations of infinity, who needs God when you can imagine being God? For all its promise, the biotech version of human life, in which all pleasure, even spiritual rapture, is quantifiable, is also profoundly animalistic. Beneath its progressive agenda, it is pure Darwinism. From reality television to professional wrestling to the beat-driven boasts and retorts of hip-hop to gross-out blockbuster films, the messages of the popular culture are becoming more and more brutally competitive�� But here, where life is an endless contest and the pressure to compete nonstop, the climate is a bit chilly. Yet this is what the majority seems to want. The most popular television shows ("Survivor"," Who wants to be millionaire") have become contests, and more and more Hollywood movies are obsessed with winning, whether the reward is being crowned prom queen or victory in an ancient Roman arena." (NY Times, September 1, 2000, E 1, Stephen Holden).

An honest question arises. Is the dialogue of forgiveness possible when peopie see life as a Darwinian battle? Forgiveness appears foolish and even ridiculous.

Yet forgiveness has always been seen in the Christian East and West as foolishness. This judgment is reflected in the ridiculousness and grace of Cervantes. And not to be outdone, Dostoevsky called it idiocy.

Since Dostoevsky grappled with issues still facing us today, it would be worthwhile reviewing his understanding of forgiveness as idiocy. The Idiot was the author's favorite book and his child of pain.

The main character, Prince Myshkin, understands by overlooking or forgetting, or if you like, by forgiving. But he does not forgive because he 'understands.' Psychology 'establishes things' by understanding them. Myshkin forgives because he loves. Everyone else in the novel 'understands' well enough the fault, the sin; it is clearly exposed, an objective reality. Myshkin forgives it by overlooking it, and thereby makes himself look ridiculous. The prince understands that such blind trust and naivete and being unsuspicious of derision or ridicule implied by forgiveness is the ultimate absurdity. He says, "You know, in my opinion, it's sometimes quite a good thing to be absurd. Indeed, it's much better, it makes it so much easier to forgive each other and to humble ourselves."

The most persuasive approach to forgiveness in dialogue is the song of love's jubilation by Paul. He writes, "Love is always patient and kind; it is never jealous; love is never boastful or conceited; it is never rude �f selfish; it does not take offence, and it is not resentful. Love takes no pleasure in other people's sins but delights in the truth; it is always ready to excuse, to trust, to hope and to endure whatever comes" (1 Cor. 13: 4-7).