In many American publications, especially popular business magazines there is an advertisement which begins with a very catchy phrase: In business - it says - you get not what you deserve, but what you negotiate. My impression is that very frequently we look upon ecumenical, or better said any religious dialogue, as if it were to be business negotiation. There is not the least doubt, that many elements included in serious business negotiations are and must be also present in sincere dialogue. But we must very clearly state that religious or specifically ecumenical dialogue is not business negotiation, not even an academic exercise in intellectual powers, but a heart to heart attempt to understand each other on the part of both partners engaged in it. It is a very human, a truly spiritual exercise. The first distinction from any other form of pointed conversation lies in the fact that religious dialogue affects partners as persons, in their very personal make up. Business negotiation, academic conversations need not at all affect the partners themselves or their attitude towards one another. The partners do not have to undergo an internal change. They may aquire more esteem of one another, may change their views, may recognize certain truths. Not so in religious dialogue.

Religious dialogue is a deeply personal and religious experience. It requires under normal circumstances (at least for those who are not yet formally canonized saints) a rather fundamental internal change to be able to open oneself, to overcome all prejudices and to be able to accept the other. All these may seem to be simple matter, but anyone who has honestly tried to change himself realizes that it is a truly difficult warfare against one's own self - warfare seems to be the only word that describes adequately the situation.

Religious differences or differences of religion, be they ancient in origin or recent, along with distinct approaches to the content of belief produce psychological attitudes which always seem to be rather negative.

To put it very simply - why is he not like I am? The more recent the alienation, the more burning the wounds. I take the position that all religions that exist and which are monotheistic and accept one God as origin, lawgiver, father of all mankind are at heart one religion which has undergone separations in the course of time. This in its turn requires us to begin our common religious journey from the person of God. Multiplicity of religions and more recently of confessions are a fact of history not of religion, but it colours attitudes of adherents to various religions very definitely. It is a very well proven experience that persons who all their life have been seekers of God, can engage in religious discussion very fruitfully and peacefully.

The more common variety of religious dialogue, that means by partners who are not very religious is usually by far not so peaceful and productive. Being religious in this context does not mean only a thorough knowledge of one's religious convictions or presented in other terms, knowledge and understanding of the truths of one's religion, but a living on daily basis of those truths: prayer, meditation, fasting, silence, total renunciation of worldly pleasures or at least a very moderate enjoyment of them. To put it in still other terms, an asceticism on religious foundation.

The difficulty of achieving such spiritual development or more precisely and realistically of striving daily to achieve it has discouraged most persons in the area of religious dialogue and has inclined them to keep it on a very formal exterior level of academic discussion or at worst leading bitterly fought religious wars, and that means no less than shedding blood in the name of God.

In my opinion forgiveness is not the only act necessary to prepare us for a genuine religious dialogue, but it does underline and highlight a very important aspect in the process of spiritual purification that must precede and prepare religious dialogue, namely the fact that in dialogue there are always at least two partners. The recalling of this truth might seem so selfevident as to appear superfluous. We know, however, of monks who are true ascetics, spiritual athletes, but who despise any heterodox Christian. Forgiveness, which is an essential part of spiritual purification, reminds us unequivocally that we have to accept the other person - our partner in any meaningful religious dialogue. This is especially true in a projected dialogue when one partner has been wronged by the other in the past.

To conclude, when we consider how much has to be done to overcome oneself and to learn to accept the other, we should not be surprised that there has been so little real religious dialogue in the past. But, on the other side, there is no hope of true Christian coexistence, let alone a return to pristine unity, without religious dialogue, we have to say a prayer and courageously join battle against the beast that consumes our hearts.