Question: "The proposal of dialogue goes far beyond mere tolerance, already at its times, it was an achievement and it is always a value at risk in our society. If two centuries ago Lord Stanope could say that tolerance 'one day will be rejected as an insult', it was because he expected that day - we hope today – we would become sensitive to a higher value, which is dialogue: not only to tolerate each other, but to respect each other deeply, to welcome different ideas to be able to compare them and above all to build a relationship between true brothers. What do you think ? "
Chiara Lubich shared her thought :
I certainly think that dialogue far exceeds tolerance, though I would not fully disregard that because in some places it's better that it's there, because at least there is no dispute, there is no fighting. But dialogue is something else, it is a mutual enrichment, a welfare, a sentiment of being like brothers, a universal fraternity on Earth, so it's a whole different thing.
Of course, dialogue is true if it's spirited by true love. Now, true love is true if it's unbiased; otherwise it's not love, and what kind of love is it? It's egoism. So in fact, you made various questions about this possibility that there is perhaps a self interest in loving, even in dialogue. It would be a dialogue built without love, so it wouldn't be a dialogue, it would be another thing. Dialogue means loving, giving what we have inside for the sake of the other, and then also receiving and enriching himself; This is dialogue: becoming "world men" who have all the others inside of them, and who managed to give even their own.
Chiara Lubich to a friend of non-religious convictions
Chiara Lubich is the foundress of the Focolare Movement, to which the Youth for a United World belong