35th ANNUAL DIM/MID MEETING - MARIENKRON, AUSTRIA:

June 5-9, 2006

[Report: Sr Lucy]

THE DIM/MID COORDINATORS

We had our first official DIM/MID meeting at 8.00 p.m. on Monday 5th June, to present the new Coordinators. The commissions represented were the Belgian, Dutch-speaking, French, German, GBI, Iberian, Italian and Nordic – 16 people in all. The Swiss Coordinator was unable to attend. An important member of the Belgian contingent was P Pierre de Bethune, the General Secretary who is planning to retire from this post, passing it on to his successors. There were two welcome guests: Fr Peter Bowe, now of Douai, France, Coordinator of MID-GBI for 20 years; and Fr William Skudlarek from MID-USA. We have as yet no MID local commission in Eastern Europe.

 

THE KNEIPP-KURHAUS MARIENKRON

The venue was a most interesting place. It is a sort of health spa or heath resort. It was founded to put into practice the ideas of Fr Kneipp, a well-known priest and practitioner of alternative therapies. They had all kinds of his alternative therapies on offer for guests, with skilled therapists and practitioners coming in to offer massage, aromatherapy and everything you can imagine. The Sisters (Cistercians, not Trappists) in the community who had training in these areas were involved in helping the guests, as well as in prayer and meditation groups and nature walks. They also supervised the general administrative staff—one was supervisor in the dining room; one for the reception, one was the “Direktorin” (general manager) and so on. But they were able to organize their working time so that their monastic life continued and guests were welcome to join in the monastic offices if they wished. The chapel adjoined the main reception building. The grounds were extensive and beautifully organized to include some very well kept areas, wild areas with woodland walks and a small lake with benches on the edges of it. The monastery itself is small, with its own garden, so the DIM/MID group were housed in the health spa and we were together as a group for meals in one of the two large dining rooms.

 

HUGO ENOMIYA-LASALLE – PIONEER OF INTERRELIGIOUS DIALOGUE

On Tuesday June 6, our day was led by Dr Ursula Baatz. She is the official biographer of Fr Lasalle, asked by the Society of Jesus to edit his previously unpublished correspondence. This then developed into a book recently finished in German and translated into French and Spanish. The Society of Jesus gave her a very free hand to write as she chose and supported her in producing a very realistic portrayal of Lasalle. Dr Baatz is well known in Austria in interreligious dialogue circles. She teaches at the University as well as working for the Austrian Broadcasting Corporation. She gave us a very lively and fascinating talk on her work on Fr Lasalle, bringing his character to life. She had actually met him. Her talk was enriched by anecdotes from his life, which made him very real to us. As a pioneer of Christian-Buddhist dialogue and an official Zen Roshi, he is of great interest to us in DIM/MID. In the afternoon she spoke knowledgeably of the history and characteristics of Buddhism in the West, pointing out the differences between that, and Buddhism in its “native” background countries. Having spent some years in Japan and being very familiar with Zen Buddhism there and in the West her talk was extremely valuable for its perceptiveness, interest and inspiration.

 

GROUP WORK – June 5-9

Our first plenary group meeting had been on Monday to introduce the whole conference and allow us to get to know each other a little. Thursday June 8 was given over entirely to group work, to the reports of the local Commissions and discussion of them. We met in language groups to discuss: What has been the most significant experience of your commission? Various new projects for interreligious dialogue had been undertaken by the different commissions. Long-standing relationships with the monastic elements in other religions were being maintained. For those of us who had been to Japan last year that was a personal highlight (the Nordic, Dutch and GBI[2] Commissions). For the GBI commission it had to be said that “most significant” for us was the departure of Fr Peter Bowe, and our sense of the fragility of our commission. Our local commission reports had already been circulated and read, so we were able to discuss issues arising from them all. Apart from the Dutch Commission which has the kind of structure we would like for GBI with significant support from the Curatorium (the Dutch equivalent of UMS), most of the other countries were in a similar position to GBI. Italy and Germany reported that not much was happening there at large. Several Coordinators and the editor of the European and IBI felt that things were happening that were not filtering through to the Coordinators and Committees. Although everyone felt the urgency of the need in the present political situation for the Church to be in dialogue in with Muslims and Jews there was a strong sense also that the monastic dimension of inter-monastic and intra-monastic dialogue should not be lost.

 A good deal of time was given to the GBI report and the suggested draft constitution, but the final result of all this was rather inconclusive. The European committee accepted the appointment of Sr Lucy as Coordinator for five years, and were sympathetic and supportive of the efforts we are making to establish ourselves more securely, but they could offer little in the way of positive advice or help. There was discussion of the long-awaited publication of P Bernard de Give’s thesis, and its translation into English. Honourable mention was also made of one of our GBI Commission, Sr M Catherine of Chester, who is doing some scholarly translation work for Fr de Give. The French Commission shared their experience of their three-week pilgrimage to India (and we had slides of it as our evening session). The Dutch Commission has changed most under their Coordinator, Br Andrew Peers of Zundert. They now have a three part structure (a working committee which meets several times a year, ‘friends’ giving regular help, and a wider network of occasional helpers), supported financially, and in other ways by the Curatorium of Holland.

 

COMMUNITY PRAYER

Another kind of “group work” was the ‘work of God’ which happened each day, again in the main language of the group. Each morning we had Lauds in French, combined with meditation; each evening Vespers was in English. Vespers took place in the community choir, and the home community joined US in praying in English. Fr Peter led this, including the psalm tones we could all join in. We joined the host community for the Eucharist each day, in German. We had at our own disposal in the Kurhaus a very spacious and beautifully simple meditation room where we met for morning prayer/meditation, and where we had Eucharist together as a group on the day we went to Pannonhalma.

 

POSSIBILITIES OF INTERMONASTIC DIALOGUE IN HUNGARY:

VISIT TO PANNONHALMA MONASTERY

Marienkron had been chosen as a venue for the DIM/MID meeting largely because it is only five miles from the border with Hungary. In fact, we were told that the area of Austria where the monastery and Kurhaus is situated used to BE Hungary. The countryside, the district known as Burgenland was flat and open, part of the great Hungarian plain. After our usual morning prayer, meditation and breakfast on Wednesday 7 June we set off in two vehicles: the Francophone group in one and the Anglo-German in the other. Arriving in Hungary, I was amused to note that the first big building on the Hungarian side of the border had COCA COLA in huge letters on the roof. We enjoyed the drive through the pretty Hungarian countryside with gentle rolling hills and fields and picturesque villages. There seemed to be a great deal of building or re-building going on. From quite a long distance away we could see the big monastery of Pannonhalma on top of a mountain, silhouetted against the sky, not unlike Monte Cassino in pictures I have seen. On arrival we had a tour of the outer parts of the monastery with Br Gregory, who spoke excellent English. There has been a Benedictine monastery here since 996AD. The present building(s) are the 4th lot, to replace various destructions in different historical periods. It was one of four monasteries allowed to continue in existence even under the Communist regime, provided it took responsibility for nine schools. One very highly regarded senior school still exists within the monastic enclave. We had a simple lunch in their dining room. Since the fall of Communism, religious congregations have received their buildings back, but not the means to keep them going, so there was a general sense of financial and economic pressure. They also commented on the lack of a whole generation of religious men and women missing from the newly arisen religious houses.

 Our Buddhist guests had arrived in time to have lunch with us (goulash—genuine Hungarian goulash—, pasta, and cucumber salad in a sauce, with some rather heavy white bread. For dessert, a bowl of delicious cherries from the monastery garden. The Buddhists were four Zen monks and three lay people. One of the laymen goes regularly, though not often, to Amaravati, and considers Ajahn Sumedho to be his teacher.

 After lunch we went into the main church for Midday Office. It is a vast, dark building, with three levels. The monks’ choir was on the upper level so we could hear them but not see them. As they sang in Hungarian, we were unable to join in, but we stood and sat when they did! After this a young student came to join us and explain as guide, together with the Br Gregory. We had some very interesting insights into the different historical periods represented in the varied architectural styles of the monastery and church. Then we were shown to a very large room on the third floor where we had our meeting for dialogue with the visitors. As a first meeting, it went well, but could not go very deep. We all introduced ourselves and spoke of our experience of dialogue with other monastic men and women in our own countries. The Buddhists did likewise, though they had little to report in terms of dialogue. This was the first experience for them, of coming together with Christian monks and nuns. The Roshi with them was actually French, and he told of how he had come into Buddhism from a French Catholic upbringing. It seemed to be true of all of them that they had been born into nominally, or even practising, Christian (mainly Catholic) families. They were very touched that RC monks and nuns should want to be in dialogue with them, and were amazed that we had all experienced Zen Buddhism. They felt that they were making an important beginning and that it was a healing experience for them. It remains to be seen if the need to survive present economic difficulties will allow the Christian monks time and energy to follow up the interreligious dialogue that began this day. We left Pannonhalma in time to have our evening meal at Marienkron, after which we had a concelebrated Eucharist four our own group, in the meditation room.

 

FUTURE PROJECTS

 

DIM/MID ANNUAL MEETING 2007

The group work on Thursday included plans for our meeting in 2007 and discussion of future projects. Some investigation has been done towards holding the meeting in Morocco, and we heard about this from P Daniel and P Cosmas. The move to do this stems from P Christian de Chergé, one of the martyred Trappists. He attended the DIM/MID meeting at Montserrat shortly before his death and pleaded for DIM/MID to move into some kind of dialogue with Muslims.

 

LOCAL COMMISSION WEB SITES

One of the future projects for all of us was urgent encouragement to set up a web site for our local commissions. Communication between Coordinators in preparation for the Vienna meeting had been greatly facilitated by the fact that we could all send our reports to each other by Email.

***********************

FINAL DAY IN AUSTRIA

Several of us stayed on for another day and saw a little of Vienna city, staying at the Schottenstift Benedictine monastery, near the city centre and not far from the great cathedral, the Stephansdom.

 


[2] GBI: The local commission for Great Britain & Ireland comprising the 47 monasteries that are members of the UMS, which includes a few Anglican communities living under the Rule of St Benedict See the Benedictine Yearbook.