Religions and Theological Education
Rev. Dr. Selvam Robertson
Religions and Theological Education: An Evaluation of the Religion Cluster of the New BD Curriculum-2010 of the Senate of Serampore College (University)
Religions and Theological Education: An Evaluation of the Religion Cluster of the New BD Curriculum-2010 of the Senate of Serampore College (University)
Introduction
In this paper I shall make an overview of
purposes/objectives of the study of religions in theological institutions and
then try to assess whether these are satisfactorily addressed in the new
curriculum of the Senate -2010.
Pedagogy
is the study of being a teacher or the process of teaching. The term generally
refers to strategies of instruction, or a style of instruction. Pedagogy is also occasionally referred to as
the correct use of instructive strategies.[1]
While dealing with instructive strategies or instructive
theory pertaining to teaching religions in theological institutions it is appropriate
to remember some limitations too. Eric
J. Lot warns “any one attempting a scholarly investigation of a religious
tradition must first recognize the complexity of religion, no matter how simple
it may seem to those who participate in its life.”[2] Added
to this is the following advice of Raimon Panikkar that “Truth although one is
multifaceted and we can only have a glimpse of some of the aspects of the
truth…We are conditioned by our perspectives, attitudes and culture; and what
is needed is that we accept these limitations and cooperate with others in the
search for Reality.”[3]
Considering these limitations it is proper to graphically highlight the
necessities of learning other religions in our theological education.
1. Necessity to Study Religions
According to Ninian Smart “understanding the world’s
religions and ideologies is important in three ways. First, they are a vital
ingredient in the varied story of humankind’s various experiments in
living….Second, and of more immediate importance, is the fact that in order to
grasp the meanings and values of the plural cultures of today’s world, we need
to know something of the worldviews which underlie them….Third, we may as
individuals be trying to form our own coherent and emotionally satisfying picture
of reality, and it is always relevant to see the great ideas and practices of
various important cultures and civilizations.”[4]
Added to this list is the fact that “before judging
people, it is important to understand their beliefs because it is on the basis
of these that they act.”[5]
Closely connected with this is the plural context where varieties of people
live together which demands ‘to know something of others, so that mutual
understanding, though may be not agreement, may animate community relations’.[6]
Considering these necessities the previous Senate BD
curriculum (prior to 2010) placed the following objectives in studying other
religions:
“Recognizing
the importance of religions in human life and acknowledging that the
interaction between religion and ideologies provides the context in which
Christian Theological reflection should take place, this department seeks to
train a community of students with the necessary skills and tools for such
reflection. With this view, the attempt is made
a)
to
study the phenomena of religions in society through the scriptures, traditions,
rituals, symbols social practices and other constituent elements.
b)
to
understand religion of India in their classical, modern and contemporary
expression, including tribal and village religions
c)
to learn classical languages of Indian
religions.
d)
to
enable students to participate in the struggle for an inclusive human
community, overcoming attitudes of narrow fanaticism or shallow friendliness.
e)
to
understand and appreciate the religious experience of people of other faiths
and overcome misconceptions of beliefs, practices and ways of life of others.
f)
to
understand the cultural heritage and roots of Indian Christians.
g)
to
gain new insights for the Christian faith-experience from the religiosity and
spirituality of others.
h)
to
encourage intra and inter-faith dialogue.”[7]
These objectives are very
relevant even today.
Apart from the positive necessities the other inferential
we need to address
is
the following fear voiced by our Hindu neighbors (Hinduism). In the words of
Ravi Tiwari “it feels threatened and in turn, poses the same to the very
existence of the followers of other religions, a process we are now
experiencing in India.”[8] Of
course the fear is the result of unwillingness to accept the changing scenario,
which is vivid in the statement that “the fact of plurality of religion, in
which Hinduism is merely one among many, has been very uncomfortable to the
propounders of neo-Hindu ideologues.”[9]
It has become usual in recent times
to emphasize the need for democratic living even in religious matters. Varghese
Manimala writes “today if Christianity, or for that matter any religion, had to
fulfill its mission there should be a paradigm shift. One of the important
values that religions will have to promote is democracy or a reverential
attitude for others.”[10]
In spite of the fact that religion
cannot be replaced by ethics there is also a tendency to reduce the role of
religion in human activities. For example it is argued that “we now live in
times where our political beliefs are founded on ethical precepts such as
democracy, human rights and the rule of law. People no longer need to turn to
organized religion in order to organize or stabilize society.
In
this age, religion has to stand on its own; which will happen only if the faith
in the hearts of its believers is true, solid and complete. The struggle is
private and internal, and a need to publicly defend a faith is an implicit
admission either a lack of belief in the power of god or of insecurity in the
faith of His believers. A strident call for public action to defend a faith may
over time serve to undermine the very cause that it claims to plead.”[11]
In this context the following
realization needs special attention that “traditional religious education,
based on scriptures, can leave young people both ignorant and prejudiced about
alternative faiths.”[12]
In a nutshell, teaching and learning religion in theological institutions
require innovations and dynamism to address newly emerging concerns besides the
continuing ones.
1.1 Common Humanness
To continue the discussion further study of religions
need to seriously view the one humanity which is behind all religiosity. Mircea
Eliade wrote “it is simply a matter of not losing sight of the profound and
indivisible unity of the history of the human mind. Consciousness of this unity
of the spiritual history of humanity is a recent discovery, which has not yet
been sufficiently assimilated.”[13]
In the words of William James ‘the pivot round which the religious life
revolves, is the interest of the individual in his private personal destiny.
Religion, in short, is a monumental chapter in the history of human egotism’.[14]
According to Raimon Panikkar “what religion needs to do is to make the human
beings realize their common humanity and strengthen the bonds of friendship and
affection.”[15]
Religious studies need to concentrate more in this
direction because “in whatever field we work, be it science, technology,
medicine, politics, policing, theology, religion or the judiciary, we have to
remain in the service of the common man whose well-being is central to all
human knowledge and endeavor.”[16]
Further “Religions need to realize that they are only means; they are not an
end in themselves. Human beings are not to be made slaves of religions; rather
they must experience freedom in
religion and freedom for religion.”[17]
To this end the department of religions has its task cut out.
1.2 Religion and Ideologies
As mentioned earlier “it is important for us to recognize
secular ideologies as part of the story of human worldview.”[18]
There is justification for this endeavour. Ninian Smart writes “before, there
is the narrative of the rise and fall of religious cultures in differing parts
of the globe; afterwards, we see patterns of interaction, and eventually the
emergence of a global civilization, in which inevitably religious and secular
worldviews have to learn to adapt to one another.”[19]
It is not just for coexistence but for cooperation for common causes. In many
cases earnest ideologies have played significant role in transforming societies
and liberating people. Therefore there is an essential need for religious
education to explore the possibilities of religion and ideologies cooperating
for liberative causes.
1.3 Religion and Theology
Although attempts to strengthen the difference between
religion and theology continue to exist, the signs of our times show that there
needs to be closer exchange of data between the two to rationalize their
contributions. It is thoughtfully said “with regard to theology, it is no
longer possible to limit the consideration of theological topics to the
Christian sphere; we must take into account the questions and answers posed by
other religions.” [20]
This mutual enrichment is a necessity. Eric J.Lot writes about his work that
“it has been intended to show that in spite of certain distinctive aims and
modes of functioning making it necessary to distinguish
the theological task within a religious tradition from other forms of
systematic investigation found in ‘religious studies’, there are also
significant and substantial areas of interdependence
between these two basic approaches.”[21]
The concern to relate theology and religious data and using religious data for
relevant theologizing and mission deserves attention in teaching and learning
religions.
1.4 Renewal of Religious Traditions
The meeting of different cultures and traditions often
produces new religious movements.[22]That
is why “while it remains most important to evaluate founders and early scriptures,
we also need to be sensitive to the ways in which religious traditions evolve
and form.”[23] In other words, there is distinction between
the period or periods of roots and
those of formation.[24]
The development of many religions confirms that it is because of crises in
depth and the creations that result from them that religious traditions are
able to renew themselves.[25]
Hence, religious study needs to be more sensitive to this aspect and be
analytical in nature to address such issues.
1.5 Plurality of Religions
There is a strong reason to consider plurality of
religions as a serious matter for consideration while studying religions. Paul
Knitter writes “it is said that in our present age, religious people have to be
religious interreligiously. To walk one’s faith-path, one needs to be walking
with others from different paths.”[26]
John Hick maintains “I suggest that the best religious account we can give of
the global situation is that of a single ineffable Ultimate Reality whose
universal presence is being differently conceived and experienced and responded
to within the different human religious traditions.”[27]
To go further “Reality is intrinsically complex, rich, intricate, mysterious.”[28] A substantial and meaningful recognition of
many religions is not a matter of compromising faith traditions but
transcending boundaries while deeply committed to our own. In the words of Paul
Tillich “in the depth of every living religion there is a point at which the
religion itself loses its importance, and that to which it points breaks
through its particularity, elevating it to spiritual freedom and with it to a
vision of the spiritual presence in other expressions of the ultimate meaning
of man’s existence.”[29]
In our given context religions need to acknowledge one
another as co-travelers towards the Absolute offering mutual support and
enrichment.[30]
Ninian Smart emphatically suggests ‘a pluralistic approach to religious
education is best’.[31]
Such a painstaking and risky assertion is grounded on the fact that ‘religion
cannot be shelved to some corners of life and to a few hours of practice; it
has to permeate the whole life. As religious pluralism is a gift and a
challenge the religions need to take it up with earnestness not by its denial
but by learning to live with it’.[32] It is fitting to recall here that “we must
all remember, very often we tend to forget that religion is an accident of
birth except perhaps for that minuscule minority which might adopt it by
choice. It is, therefore, essential that we realize that the purpose and
objective of every religion is to foster peace, harmony, brotherhood, and not
to quarrel needlessly.”[33]
Hence a responsible undertaking of studying religions needs to address the
uniqueness of the existence of different religions and their problems and
prospects.
1.6 Dialogical approach
Recognition of the existence and reality of many
religions and ideologies is closely linked to one of the concerns expressed in
Samartha’s One Christ Many Religions,
i.e. to listen to the experiences and voices of others as well. This he
demanded in the context of dialogue between different faith traditions and it
is finding space in the present academic exercises as well. For example it is
said “until now, we have only had representatives of various religions speak to
each other in interfaith dialogue; a next step will be taken when Buddhist,
Hindu, Taoist and other theologians of religions begin to dialogue and perhaps
carry out common research projects.”[34]
Such daring considerations require humility because “we
can be persuaded by personal experience: and this may indeed be spiritually
convincing, but it is a ‘soft’ reason for belief, in as much as a differing
revelation can attract a similar proof. From a public point of view, however
much my belief is hedged by certitude, it is still (and I repeat, from a public
point of view) a matter of opinion.”[35]
Hence
“from this perspective, faith is not something about which to dogmatize, and
again it is a matter about which we may enter into dialogue, and should.”[36]
To deepen the discussion Eric J. Lot writes “if we believe our faith in some
way puts us in touch with ultimate realities, then engaging in dialogue with
people of similar conviction, even if their faith and its community loyalty
identifies them as ‘other’, is an essential part of the dialogical life faith
calls for. Given the crises of our times, and the frequent violence between
religion-based communities, there can be few more urgent tasks than that of
dialogical interpretation.”[37]
Wilfred Cantwell Smith’s view point is relevant here
because “Smith recognizes that in each religious tradition ‘faith’ is
interpreted differently; but in that faith is that by which the religious
person participates in transcendence, he sees it as essentially the same in all
cultures.”[38]
He goes on to suggest that “it is this generic quality of ‘faith’ by which
people of all kinds of cultures find a link between the mundane and the
transcendent; it thus creates the interaction between these two poles of human
existence. Faith, then, is a universal characteristic of humanity, it is the
fundamental quality of the religious life, though because it represents more
adequately that fundamental quality of human life in all its dynamism, this term ‘faith’ can supersede ‘religion’ as
the focal category for religious study.”[39]
Still further “the study of religion is essentially the
study of persons. If faith is central to religious life, then we should look to
personal life as ‘the locus of faith’.”[40]
Therefore “if the locus of faith is person, our goal in the systematic study of
religions should be primarily to understand the inner life of religious traditions.”[41]
On the basis of this “an important task
of the professional student of religion, contends Smith, is to participate in the growing interaction
between world cultures and religious traditions and even to further activate this process.”[42]
Although our new curriculum often implicitly points to these directions, it is
essential to be made explicit in our teaching(pedagogy) and make them
functional. May be this too is ambitious given the pastoral paradigm, but let
us not doubt about its effects in the days to come.
1.7 Tribal and Dallit Religions
E.E. Evans Pritchard writes “primitive religion are
species of the genus religion, and that all who have any interest in religion
must acknowledge that a study of the religious ideas and practices of primitive
peoples, which are of great variety, may help us to reach certain conclusions
about the nature of religion in general, and therefore also about the so-called
higher religions or historical and positive religions or the religions of
revelation, including our own.”[43]
Again he declares “indeed I would go further and say that, to understand fully
the nature of revealed religion, we have to understand the nature of so-called
natural religion, for nothing could have been revealed about anything if men
had not already had an idea about that thing.”[44]
Further ‘they provide all the more valuable data for a comparative analysis
aiming at determining the essential characteristics of religious phenomena and
making general, valid, and significant statements about them’.[45]
A.M.Abraham Ayrookuzhiel remarks about the dynamism
required to understand Dalit religion in India. He writes “I think if we are
serious about the 200 million Dalit community in India regaining their
religious status, we should undertake the study of Dalit religious heritage
both in its folk form and in its historical form.”[46]
Since there is a growing reassertion of traditional values particularly in
tribal and dalit religions, our learning and teaching of religions need to
square out substantial space and program for deeper understanding of these
phenomena so as to explore them and constructively use the findings.
2. Evaluations
In the new BD curriculum the Religions Cluster (Religion,
Culture and Society) has been placed as third cluster from its previous Branch
6. It is a significant pointer to the fact that religious study requires
serious consideration in our context. In the previous curriculum, the religion
branch was titled as religion and society, the new curriculum has included
culture as well to the title. The broader and useful objectives set forth as
introduction to the entire courses under religion branch in the previous BD
curriculum are replaced with a brief pointer at the beginning of each course.
This may raise a question whether the new curriculum has sincerely absorbed all
the purposes behind learning and teaching religions in theological colleges.
Histories and
cultures of India/South Asia Regions is a new and ambitious course. Apart from
constrains of time, the objectives of the course are praiseworthy, but it may
become mere repetition to a History graduate. It may be useful if this course
is taught at the first year of BD five year program in the place of
philosophical foundations and philosophical foundation is made available to
all.
The
course on Introduction to Indian religious traditions includes two additional
religions (Zoroastrianism and Dalit Religion) which also have implication for
teaching load. The suggested methodologies need further consideration because
each method is relevant for certain purposes. All the proven methods together
constitute the study of religions. The section on different methods to study
religions is avoided in the new curriculum. It may be because it finds vivid
expression under an interdisciplinary course (methodologies).The importance of
harmonious living together with others for the purpose of engaging them for
sustainable existence need more emphasis.
As per Sanskrit language is
concerned no change has been effected, not even attempt to suggest recent
available books.
In the detailed study of Hinduism the text from Upanishad
is replaced with texts from Manusumurti. The objectives like concern for woman,
tribals and poor, dalit and interreligious relations laid down for the detailed
courses are appreciable. The addition of required perspective readings is new
but the authors mentioned need substantial justification.
Under the course Modern religio—socio-political
Movements in India Hinduism section contains a few new titles: satyashodhak
Samaj, Narayana Guru Movement, Prajapati Brahmakumaris. Under Guru Movements the new titles are: Mata
Amritananda Mayi, Baba Ramdev and Sri Sri Ravi Shankar. Under political parties
more regional parties are added. The section on contemporary issues and the
responses of churches is new and comprehensively direction oriented. Including additional topics are encouraging
but time management has to be taken in to account.
Detailed study of primal religion is removed from new
religion cluster; similarly, Indian philosophy and Cultural anthropology. These
changes are not in line with the emphasis on the importance of philosophical
approach in India. This also is the case with tribal concerns including their
methodology.
The courses under Inter-disciplinary
are useful from the point of religions; particularly the course on
Methodologies extensively deals with most of the methodologies used for the
systematic study of religions. The course Science and religion offers the
possibility of dialogue. And Christian faith and witness in pluralistic
societies, is removed from theology branch and included as interdisciplinary
course in the new curriculum. This is also in line with the purpose of learning
and teaching religions in theological institutions.
In the new curriculum the optional courses are reduced.
Flexibility is relegated to tight schedule which robes the expected freedom to
choose.
All of us can judge whether the above listed purposes are
met in the new curriculum. Even if these are implicitly referred to, a right
pedagogy can help addressing these concerns.
In general the shift from old curriculum to new is
minimal in nature. A manageable religion syllabus may be worked out even with
the consultation of people of other faith traditions. Nevertheless, as listed
in the previous pages, if we can pursue teaching and learning other religions,
we can achieve the target.
3. Conclusion
While evaluating the new curriculum one has to bear that
different strands of thoughts will continue to exist side by side with the
favored and newly emerging ones. Therefore emphasizing one aspect does not mean
other aspects are ignored. What is important is to prioritize the relevant
concerns.
Every branch of M.Th. study needs to include a course on
pedagogy even before the commencement of evaluation of M.Th. curriculum as
M.Th. being the basic degree for teaching.
In order to avoid the notion of ‘too ambitious’ clear
demarcation between BD and M.Th. courses and standards are necessary to be set.
It helps limit the scope of different courses and make it manageable. It can be
helpful in managing stipulated time frame for different courses.
The emerging view point that many courses are lengthier needs
serious consideration. In this regard the senate fraternity should courageously
be satisfied with courses in consonance with time limit permissible to a BD
degree course.
It will also be immensely credible if Senate can workout
course numbers that are same in syllabus and examination registration form.
Of course the one inalienable factor that has to motivate
the religion pedagogy is to ensure that God’s Mission is carried out at all
circumstances in collaboration even with other religions and ideologies.
Finally to sum up, the pedagogy of religions needs to
help religions to be viewed as vital ingredient in the varied story of
humankind’s various experiments in living, help grasp the meanings and values
of the plural cultures of today’s world, help see the great ideas and practices
of various important cultures and civilization, help judging people, help
animate community relations in plural contexts, help analyze the importance of
religions in human life, help interaction between religion and ideologies, help
religious communities participate in the struggle for an inclusive human
community, help understand and appreciate the religious experience of people of
other faiths, help gain new insights for the Christian faith-experience, help
encourage intra and inter-faith dialogue, help avoid fear of Hinduism, help
promoting democratic living, help avoiding reduction of religion to mere
ethics, helps overcome traditional
religious education based on scriptures, help recognizing common humanness,
help cooperation between religion and ideologies, help interaction between
religion and theology, help see causes for renewal of religious traditions,
help recognize plurality of religions, help promote dialogical approach, help
sincere study of tribal and dalit religions and help adequate space for other
significant developments.
Religion and Dialogue
[1]
For example, Paulo Freire referred to his method of teaching adult humans as
"critical pedagogy". In correlation with those instructive strategies
the instructor's own philosophical beliefs of instruction are harbored and
governed by the pupil's background knowledge and experience, situation, and
environment, as well as learning goals set by the student and teacher.
[2] Eric J. Lott, “Approaching Religious
Tradition,”, in Religious Traditions of India, edited by P.S. Daniel,David C. Scott and G.R. Singh (New Delhi
[3]
Raimon Panikkar,
“Introduction,” in Toward Mutual
Fecundation and Fulfilment of Religions,
Varghese
Manimala(Delhi
[4] Ninian Smart, The world’s Religions 2nd ed.(Cambridge
[5] Paul G. Hiebert, R. Daniel Shaw and
Tite Tienou, Understanding Folk Religion:
A Christian Response to Popular Beliefs and Practices (Michigan
[6] Ninian Smart, The world’s Religions 2nd ed.(Cambridge
[7] Senate of Serampore College Serampore College
[8] Ravi Tiwari, Reflections and Studies in Religion (Delhi
[9] Ibid., p.138.
[11] Prem Chandavarkar, “Should
One be Defending One’s Faith at all?,” The
Hindu (Vijayawada
[12] Ninian Smart, The world’s Religions 2nd ed.(Cambridge
[13] Mircea Eliade, A History of Religious Ideas, Vol. 1, translated by Willard R.
Trask (Chicago University
of Chicago Press
[14] William James, The Varieties of Religious Experience: A Study in Human Nature (London
[15]
Raimon Panikkar,
“Introduction,” in Toward Mutual
Fecundation and Fulfilment ofReligions, Varghese Manimala(Delhi
[16]
A.P.J. Abdul Kalam, “The Joy of
Human Life,” in Towards a Culture of
Harmony and Peace, editedby T.D. Singh (New Delhi & Kolkata:Delhi Peace Summit
& Bhaktivedanta Institute, 2005), pp.13-14.
[17]
Raimon Panikkar,
“Introduction,” in Toward Mutual
Fecundation and Fulfilment ofReligions, Varghese Manimala(Delhi
[18] Ninian Smart, The world’s Religions 2nd ed.(Cambridge
[19] Ibid.,
p.11.
[20]
Veli-Matti
Karkkainen, An Introduction to the
Theology of Religions (Illinois
[21] Eric J. Lot, Vision, Tradition, Interpretation: Theology, Religion, and the Study of
religion (Berlin New York Amsterdam
[22] Ninian Smart, The world’s Religions 2nd ed.(Cambridge
[23] Ibid.,
p.26.
[24] Ibid.,
p.27.
[25] Mircea Eliade, A History of Religious Ideas, Vol. 1, translated by Willard R.
Trask (Chicago University
of Chicago Press India
[26] Paul F. Knitter, Introducing Theologies of Religions (Maryknoll , New
York
Books, 2002) p.xi.
[27] John Hick, “The next Step beyond
Dialogue,” in The Myth of Religious
Superiority: MultifaithExplorations of Religious Pluralism, edited by Paul F. Knitter (Maryknoll , New
York
[28] Paul F. Knitter, Introducing Theologies of Religions (Maryknoll , New
York
Books, 2002) p.7.
[29]
Paul Tillich, Christianity and the
Encounter of the World Religions (New York
and London Columbia University
[30]
Raimon Panikkar,
“Introduction,” in Toward Mutual
Fecundation and Fulfilment ofReligions, Varghese Manimala(Delhi
[31] Ninian Smart, The world’s Religions 2nd ed.(Cambridge
[32]
Raimon Panikkar,
“Introduction,” in Toward Mutual
Fecundation and Fulfilment ofReligions,
Manimala(Delhi
[33]
A.M. Ahmadi., “Towards a Global
Society,” in Towards a Culture of Harmony
and Peace, edited byT.D. Singh (New Delhi & Kolkata:Delhi Peace Summit &
Bhaktivedanta Institute, 2005), p. 18.
[34]
Veli-Matti
Karkkainen, An Introduction to the
Theology of Religions (Illinois
[35] Ninian Smart, The world’s Religions 2nd ed.(Cambridge
[36] Ibid.,
p.583.
[37]
Eric Lott, Religious Faith, Human Dignity: Dangerous Dynamics in Global and
Indian Life (Bangalore
[38]
Eric J. Lott, Vision, Tradition, Interpretation, Theology, Religion, and the
Study of Religion, Mouton de Gruyter,
1988, p.193.
[43] E.E. Evans Pritchard, Theories of Primitive Religion (Oxford;
Clarendon Press, 1965), pp.1-2.
[44] Ibid.,
p. 2.
[45] Ibid.,
1965, p. 2.
[46]
A.M.Abraham Ayrookuzhiel, Essays on
Dalits, Religion and Liberation (Bangalore
Comments
Post a Comment