The terrorist attacks of 11 September on the United States inaugurated a new stage in history, says a Jesuit based in Tokyo. The crisis we face is essentially spiritual. Can the human family show that it can pray together for peace? A good start was made in Assisi in 1986, but the successor event in 2001 went backwards.

AS WE MOVE into 2002, the crisis in our world deepens. Thinking people realise that bombs and computers and dollars, far from solving our problems, will bring us closer to disaster. What is happening? Will nuclear catastrophe overtake us? Are we faced with a universal collapse? Small wonder if many people in the advanced countries are falling into depression and despair.

Under these circumstances it is not enough to look at our plight from the standpoint of economics or politics or sociology or psychology. It is not enough to discuss the ethics of just and unjust war: we must go deeper and look to the spiritual dimension of the crisis. We must listen carefully to the prophetic voices of our era.

One of the great prophets of the twentieth century was Pope John XXIII. Calling the Second Vatican Council, the Blessed John spoke of ?the tasks of immense gravity and amplitude that await the Church as in the most tragic periods of its history?. He could not agree with prophets of doom who talk about the end of the world. ?Divine Providence?, he said, ?is leading us to a new order of human relations which, by our own efforts and even beyond our very expectations, are directed toward the fulfilment of God?s superior and inscrutable designs.? A new and wonderful order is coming! God is leading the way! What optimism!

Pope John said that the teaching of Jesus telling us to read ?the signs of the times? is particularly relevant today. And he asked for prayer from the whole world, particularly from innocent children and the sick, confident that prayer was the answer.

Faithful to the vision of Pope John, the council wrote of the Church?s duty to scrutinise the signs of the times, and interpret them in the light of the Gospel. The human race, said the council, is passing through a new stage in its history: ?The whole human family has reached an hour of supreme crisis in its advance toward maturity? (Gaudium et Spes 77). ?The men and women of our time must realise that they will have to give a sombre reckoning for their deeds of war. For the course of the future will depend largely on the decisions they make today? (GS 80).

Forty years have elapsed since the bishops of the council spoke to the world; and we Christians of the third millennium are called to follow in their footsteps by scrutinising the signs of our times and interpreting them in the light of the Gospel. A daunting task.

Let us remember that reading the signs of the times is different from engaging in scholarly research or scientific analysis. It is more akin to what traditional spirituality calls ?discernment of spirits?. It is primarily a work of prayer in which the individual and the community ask God for the gift of wisdom so as to understand what is happening in the world and in their own hearts.

Furthermore, discernment takes into account the presence in our cosmos of powers that are greater than human ? one may call them ?powers of light and darkness?, or ?positive energies and negative energies?, or ?good and evil spirits? ? and that these powers can act upon the human unconscious, leading men and women to life or to death. St Paul, using the terminology of his day, speaks of enslavement to ?the elemental spirits of the world?, and he can say that ?our struggle is not against enemies of blood and flesh, but against the rulers, against the authorities, against the cosmic powers of this present darkness, against the spiritual forces of evil in the heavenly places? (Eph 6:12).

Reflection on this Pauline doctrine may lead to weighty questions. Is the human race faced with a gigantic revolution of unprecedented proportions, as we pass through a completely new phase in history and move towards the new era foretold by the prophetic Pope John XXIII? Is it possible that George Bush and Osama bin Laden are no more than players in a gigantic cosmic drama that is only now beginning? And are Pope John Paul and the Dalai Lama actors in the same cosmic drama? And do we all have our role and our responsibility? And what will the world look like when the curtain comes down?

The discernment to which we are called is a delicate work, demanding assiduous prayer and reflection and consultation. It is only too easy to conclude that the good spirit is with ?us? and the evil spirit is with ?them?, or that the good spirit is with the establishment and the evil spirit with the terrorists. The institutional Church, jealously guarding its security, tends to think that the good spirit is active in the status quo and the evil spirit foments revolution.

To avoid such oversimplification we must remember with St Paul that the evil spirit transforms himself into an angel of light, that Jesus himself was tempted and that Scripture warns us: ?Beloved, do not believe every spirit, but test the spirits to see whether they are from God; for many false prophets have gone into the world? (1 Jn 4:1).

Testing the spirits and seeking the will of God is the challenge for today?s Christians.

Looking back on the twentieth century, I see a great sign from God in the prayer of world religious leaders at Assisi in October 1986. The meeting was hosted by Pope John Paul II at a time when it was clear to everyone that religions must unite in common prayer for peace, justice and protection of the earth. As he welcomed the participants, John Paul stated clearly that he had not asked them to come for an interreligious conference on peace, but to proclaim to the world that there exists another dimension of peace and another way to promote it. Prayer ? and interreligious prayer at that ? was the key to world peace.

Eyewitnesses describe movingly how the procession entered the Basilica of St Francis. The Dalai Lama was there, the Archbishop of Canterbury, Mother Teresa of Calcutta, the Chief Rabbi of Rome and some 60 religious men and women. After listening to the choir sing Psalm 148 in Greek ? ?Let everything that lives praise the Lord? ? the participants entered into a deep silent prayer of thanksgiving. Then they dispersed to various parts of Assisi to pray according to their own traditions.

That afternoon John Paul said that ?the challenge of peace transcends all religions?. Assisi was a magnificent sign. The great religions praying together generated a spiritual energy that vibrated throughout the cosmos. Those of us committed to interreligious dialogue and interreligious prayer saw it as the first step ? and only the first step ? in a movement towards world peace. Praying together, the religions would lead the world to the new order prophesied by Pope John. Talk, we felt, was not enough. There must be prayer. Only prayer will save the world.

Yet some cardinals and theologians of the Roman Curia were less than happy. They could not reconcile Assisi with the teaching of the Catholic Church as set forth in the Catechism of the Council of Trent and the standard work of Heinrich Denzinger. They were educated to believe that worship with non-Catholics (communicatio in sacris) was an abomination. The council, it is true, had permitted and even encouraged prayer with other Christians. But prayer with pagans? No doubt Christians and non-Christians could pray ?in the same place?. But could they pray ?together?? Perish the thought!

This year Pope John Paul, deeply shocked by the terrorist attacks of 11 September last, called another interreligious peace meeting at Assisi. The 200 delegates from 12 of the world?s religions were to commit themselves to ?eliminate the root causes of terrorism? and to proclaim that ?violence and terrorism are incompatible with the authentic spirit of religion?.

This time the preparation was entrusted to the Roman Curia, which made it clear that the religious leaders would not ?pray together? but would pray ?in different places in the same town?. One curial theologian explained that prayer is based on what we believe; and since we believe different things we cannot pray together. The sick and ageing Pope, who had previously said that the challenge of peace transcends religions, now said that there would be no religious syncretism: each group would pray in a different place.

But even these concessions did not satisfy the critics. Some conservative Italian Catholics issued a statement saying that the supreme pontiff was creating confusion among Catholic believers by appearing alongside heretics and unbelievers. More disturbing is the fact that only a handful of cardinals from the Roman Curia agreed to attend the peace meeting.

All in all, January 2002 was a disappointment. It was less prayerful, less enthusiastic than the first Assisi gathering. Was ?prayer in the same place? the only thing the religions have in common? What about union of minds and hearts?

That the religions committed to peace cannot pray together but only in the same town ? this is a scandal to the Japanese among whom I live. It strengthens their conviction that the institutional religions are, and always have been, the cause of conflict and war throughout the world.

Educated people throughout Asia are very familiar with European history. They know about the crusades and the religious wars, about the conflict in Northern Ireland and the turmoil in Israel. They can easily agree with Richard Dawkins who, interviewed in a popular Japanese newspaper, repeated that in his view religion is ?not harmless nonsense but dangerous nonsense? and that after 11 September he felt a duty to be actively hostile to religion. In Japan it is even said publicly that institutional religion is evil and that the religions? talk about peace is hypocrisy. Conversions to Christianity have come to a standstill. If institutional religion is to survive in Asia, it must convince the world that the authentic spirit of Assisi will continue so that people of all religions pray together.

I am reminded of the Council of Jerusalem. One group of Christians wanted the Gentiles to preserve the law of Moses in its integrity. Another group, led by Paul and Barnabas, wanted to impose no burdens other than the essentials. And this second view won the day. A new, if turbulent, era in Christian history began.

Now Paul and Barnabas did not immediately bring forth theological arguments to justify their conduct. They preferred to speak from experience: ?The whole assembly kept silence and listened to Barnabas and Paul as they told of all the signs and wonders that God had done through them among the Gentiles? (Acts 15:12). In other words, the experience came first and the theology came afterwards.

And in interreligious prayer something similar is happening: practice is coming first and theology afterwards. Christians who pray with believers of other religions relate the great wisdom that God bestows on these people. This is not to say that there is no existing theological basis for interreligious prayer. Pope John Paul II in his encyclical Dominum et Vivificantem spoke of the presence of the Spirit in all prayer: ?It is good and salutary to know that wherever one prays in the world, the Holy Spirit, the living breath of prayer, is present.? The same Pope John Paul prayed with Jews at the wailing wall in Jerusalem; he prayed silently at a mosque in Syria. And in all this his total commitment to Jesus Christ as Saviour was beyond question.

If, however, we are in a situation like that of Jesus? disciples at the Council of Jerusalem, if we are preparing for a new order, then we must change our way of thinking; and perhaps we must change our way of doing theology. Instead of looking at Christianity as a collection of dogmas and doctrines found in the catechism and in the manual of Heinrich Denzinger, we can look at Christianity as the following of Jesus Christ. ??Follow me...?, and immediately they left their nets and followed him? (Mk 1:17). If we see ourselves quite simply as followers of Christ, we will be less inclined to condemn others who follow the Buddha or Muhammad. We may be glad to join them in prayer for peace.

The important question, however, is the practical one: what will be the nature of interreligious prayer? Is there some formula to which we can all subscribe?

Here let us remember that not all prayer is in words. There is prayer of silence, of breathing, of dance, of ?just being?, of ?just sitting?, of mindfulness; and there is prayer in tongues. There is a prayer of just looking at the lilies of the field and the birds of the air. There is a prayer (and what enlightenment it can bring!) of just looking at the river or at the sky. It is here that human beings of any religion or of no religion can find common ground.

Let us also remember that silent prayer is central to the Christian spiritual path. One who follows the way of Jesus with fidelity will sooner or later enter into the cloud of unknowing. That is to say, such a one will experience a unitive silence ? the silentium mysticum ? which is full of love. Mystics of all religions, in a stumbling attempt to describe the unutterable mystery at the depth of their being, speak of the emptiness, the void, the nothingness, the divine darkness. But finally, like Job, they put their finger to their lips. Nothing can be said. The mystics meet in silence.

And the mystical silence is fruitful. It leads to transcendental wisdom of the highest kind. In Buddhism it leads to enlightenment, in Hinduism to liberation, in Christianity to divinisation. Mystical experiences in the various religions are not identical, but they may be complementary. And they have common features, notably ?the coincidence of opposites? found both in Asian religions and in Christian mystics such as Nicolas of Cusa and Meister Eckhart. As we move further into the third millennium, the religions will find common ground in the evolving mystical consciousness characteristic of the new era and foretold by prophets such as Teilhard de Chardin, Bede Griffiths and Aurobindo.

At Assisi, it must be said, world religious leaders manifested deep humility in coming to a meeting sponsored by the Bishop of Rome. Let us hope that in the future other religious leaders will take the initiative, calling similar meetings at another venue to which the Bishop of Rome will come as a humble pilgrim. The ideal will be reached when the gathering is composed not just of religious people but of all who pray. For there are indications that many self-styled agnostics and atheists, who reject institutional religion, pray in their own way. If they were included, the meeting would represent the prayer of humanity. Could God resist such a prayer?

All the signs of the times indicate that the world must pass through a dark night of purification before coming to the enlightenment that brings peace. Perhaps the human family, now so arrogant and proud of its extraordinary achievements, must come to the state described so vividly by Alcoholics Anonymous whereby it recognises its powerlessness and calls on a Higher Power. But the new order will come. All will be well and all manner of thing will be well.

Back to homepage