RELIGIOUS PLURALISM: NEW DEVELOPMENTS
RELIGIOUS PLURALISM: NEW DEVELOPMENTS
Religious
pluralism has been accepted as the order of the day. Kuncheria Pathil states that “religious
pluralism has been established today not only as an irreversible historical
fact but also as a theological principle.”1 According to Alan Race, “we have reached a
point in history when it is no longer permissible to remain comfortable in
particularity and to ignore the forces… which call for positive relations
between the different world faiths.”2 This section of the work contains an analysis
of two of the new developments related to religious pluralism. The first one is a pluralist view and the
next is the resulting dialogue. This
analysis is based upon the thoughts of leading scholars who have contributed to
the pluralist view and dialogue.
11.1 Pluralist
View
This
view holds that the different religions are unique, thereby necessitating
mutually critical and enriching dialogue.
A definition of the term ‘pluralism’ as perceived by different scholars
can be of great help in understanding the issue.
11.1.1 Definition
Pluralism
has been defined in diverse forms.
According to Alan Race, “Pluralism in the Christian theology of
religions seeks to draw the faiths of the world’s religious past into a mutual
recognition of one another’s truths and values, in order for truth itself to
come into proper focus.”3 S.J. Samartha explains it as “pluralism does
not relativises truth. It relativises
different responses to truth which are conditioned by history and culture. It rejects the claims of any particular
responses to be absolute.”4 In another place he said, “in theological
terms plurality may even be the will of God for all life.”5 In the words of Raimond Panikkar, “pluralism
is not synonymous with tolerance toward a multitude of opinions. Pluralism climaxes in acknowledging the
unimaginable, that which is absurd for me and, to a certain degree, unbearable
to me.”6
For John Hick, pluralism is the view-which advocate-that the great world
faiths embody different perceptions and conceptions of, and correspondingly
different responses to, the Real or the Ultimate from within the different
cultural ways of being human, and that within each of them the transformation
of human existence from self-centeredness to reality-centeredness is manifestly
taking place.7
Paul
F. Knitter writes about “unitive pluralism”
in which “each religion will retain its own uniqueness, but this
uniqueness will develop and take on new depths by relating to other religions
in mutual dependence.”8
K.P.
Aleaz has proposed the theory of ‘pluralistic inclusivism’. According to him,
“Pluralistic inclusivism is an attempt to make Christian faith pluralistic
inclusive i.e., the context of the revelation of God in Jesus is to become
truly pluralistic by other faiths contributing to it as per the requirement of
different places and times and it is through such pluralistic understanding of
the Gospel that its true inclusivism is to shine forth.”9 Further, “according to pluralistic
inclusivism richness of religious experience grow by mutual giving and
receiving.”10
In
the pluralist view equality of religions, in spite of all the tangible
differences is accepted. These
differences are attributed to context and time.
It also recognizes the potential contribution every religion could make
for a better life.
In
general, the pluralists accept that there are many ways of salvation and they
call for a mutual enrichment between religions.
Eeuwout Klootwijk writes that, “in a divided world, pluralists call for
mutual enrichment; cooperation; and the sharing of religious resources.”11
While recognizing the ‘plural structure of reality,’12
Samartha remarks that, ‘religious plurality is the homage which the
finite mind pays to the inexhaustibility of the infinite’.13
As the human response to the divine mystery is always plural, Samartha
says “a sense of mystery provides a point of unity to all plurality.”14
Eeuwout
Klootwijk considers religious plurality to be more of an opportunity than a
threat.15
It is an opportunity because we have realized that the other
faith-traditions can contribute to our own faith-practices. Another form of fear is highlighted by David
Tracy that “to recognize the other as other, the different as different is also
to acknowledge that other world of meaning as, in some manner, a possible
option for myself.”16
The
strongest criticism against pluralism comes form Gavin D’ Costa, who says that, “the general point I have been
trying to make is that pluralism as a category simply does not exist, only
another form of exclusivism.”17 A fact to be admitted at this stage is that
all the pluralists center their position around Reality/Theos/Mystery etc. Arvind P. Nirmal writes about the one God and
his manifold ways of salvation. 18 Nevertheless, the presence of those religions
without the idea of God/Reality is a challenge to the pluralists.
11.1.2 S.J. Samartha
In
his book Between two Cultures, Samartha discusses the role of
Christian Anubhava (experience) in the evangelical
sermons and asks “why then is it necessary to deny the credibility and the
genuineness of the religious anubhava
of neighbours of other faiths?”19 He argues that “our neighbours too have their
answers to the mystery of life and the tragedy of suffering.”20
And “in terms of spiritual depth, intellectual power, cultural richness,
and social solidarity they do not regard themselves in any way inferior to
christains.”21 Further, “in the last analysis, religions
should be recognized as having responded differently to the mystery of the Ultimate.”22
Samartha
calls for tolerance and mutual enrichment between various
faith-traditions. In Samartha’s words
“Mystery provides the ontological basis for tolerance without which it runs the
risk of being uncritical friendliness.”23 He always insisted upon the importance of
establishing a community of communities while emphasizing the necessity of the
faith on Jesus Christ for Christians. He
writes “for Christians the fight against all that destroys true community, the
quest for spiritual resources to under grid all efforts to build community, and
the search for the ultimate meaning of truly human existence in community
cannot be separated from faith in Jesus Christ.”24
11.1.3 John Hick
While
speaking about Christianity, Islam, Hinduism and Buddhism, Hick says “they do
however in fact, I suggest, exhibit a common structure, which is soteriological
in the broad sense that it offers a transition form a radically unsatisfactory
state to a limitlessly better one.”25 For Hick the better quality of existence can
come about only in the transition from ‘self-centeredness to
reality-centeredness’. Self-centeredness
is evil and narrow and the opposite is reality-centeredness.
His answer to the issue of many religion was that, “we have to realize
that the universe of faiths centers upon God, and not upon Christianity or upon
any other religions.”26 For him, “there could not be a divine
revelation, through any human means, to mankind as a whole, but only separate
revelations within the different streams of human history.”27
About the role of Christ he says, “we can revere Christ as the one
through whom we have found salvation, without having to deny other points of
reported saving context between God and man.”28 In support of this Theocentric position Hick
quotes from Bhagavad Gita IV:11, “However man may approach me, even so do I
accept them, for, on all side, whatever path they may choose is mine.”29
11.2
Inter-Religious
Dialogue
According to A. Pushparajan “it was Pope Paul VI who in his encyclical
Ecclesiam Suam, employed for the first time the term ‘dialogue’ to designate
the “new attitude” which the Second Vatican council had adopted.”30
In India ,
the initiative for inter-religious dialogue stemmed from P. D. Devanandan.
For Samartha, “dialogue is an attempt to understand and express our
particularity not just in terms of our own heritage but also in relation to the
spiritual heritage or our neighbours of other faiths.”31
Again he says, “dialogue is a mood, a spirit, an attitude of love and
respect towards neighbours of other faiths.”32 This is further clarified as, “the dialogue
which is called for is a face to face existence of living together and
struggling together as we seek community.”33 Samartha always insisted upon the necessity
of building a community of communities.34 He was also keen on dialogue between
religions and ideologies. He says, “it
will be unwise to form ‘a religious alliance’ against ideologies in order to
save and to perpetuate traditional religious institution.”36
The role of other faith-traditions in inter-religious dialogue is
considered positively. According to John
B. Cobb, “we confront with the conviction that others have something to say to
us – that we need to listen as well as speak.”37 In other words the expectation of inter-religious
dialogue is that all partners are transformed because of enrichment from each
other.
Harold G. Coward writes, “it is the way of dialogue, and not theological
bulldozing”, that is required of Christian in today’s pluralistic world.”38
Frank Whaling indicates the necessity of Church of the twentieth century
being thrown into a dialogue with every fact of life which is out of contact
with the Gospel of Jesus Christ.39 Samartha writes, “inter-religious dialogue,
carefully prepared and practiced can help people to respond to the dangers of
religious fundamentalism not just on the political but on the religious level
as well.”40 Raimundo Panikkar goes
to the extent of saying that “the way to peace is neither isolation nor
competition, but through dialogues.”41
All pluralists take life situation seriously. For Panikkar “the context of the
Hindu-Christian dialogue, as well as of any inter-religious dialogue, is not
the narrowly specific “religious” field but the arena of life, the daily
struggle for justice, peace, happiness.”42 J. Rusell Chandran, says that in our dialogue
with people of different faiths as well as with different Christian Churches
one of the important objectives will be our common quest for a just society
free from all forms of oppression and marginalization.43
All forms of religious fundamentalism are hindrance to the continuation
of inter-religious dialogue.44 For the people of other faiths ‘dialogue is
simply a new and subtle Christian tool for mission that is being forged in the
post-colonial era’.45
Some
Christians fear that “in the case of dialogue with believers in other
traditions there is danger that sympathetic appreciation of their concerns may
lead to compromise of faith itself.”46 Added to this is the fear that, ‘dialogue
with men of other faith is a betrayal of mission and disobedience to the
command to proclaim the Gospel’.47 It is
also held that ‘dialogue has so far tended to favour the dominant class and not
the poor’.48 Of course this cannot
be the vision of dialogue. The main
purpose of dialogue is to help all religions work together for a healthy life.
Dialogue
should not be confined to only relationship between religions. It needs to inspire religions to utilize
their own resources for the building up of a healthy and peaceful community
life. In short, what is required is a
deep spiritual foundation for the meaningful sharing of religious resources for
a better life situation.
1
Kuncheria Pathil, “Christian Approach to other faiths: A Historical
Perspective”, NCC
Review,
Vol. CX, No. 2 (February 1990), p. 67.
2
Alan Race, Christians and Religious
Pluralism: Patterns in the Christian Theology of
Religions (London: SCM Press Ltd, 1983),
pp. 147-148.
3
Ibid., p. 148.
4
S.J. Samartha, Between Two Cultures
(Bangalore: Asian Trading Corporation, 1997), p. 190.
5
S.J. Samartha, One Christ Many Religions,
op. cit., p. 4.
Westminister
Press, 1993), p. 85.
7
John Hick, Problem of Religious Pluralism
(… : The Macmillan Press Ltd., 1985), p. 91.
8
Paul F. Knitter, No other Name?, Op. cit., p. 9.
9
K.P. Aleaz, Theology of Religions (Calcutta: Moumita Publishers and
Distributors, 1998),
P. 172.
10 Ibid.,
p. 193.
11 Eeuwout Klootwijk, op. cit., p. 12.
12 Ibid.,
p. 86.
13 S.J. Samartha, One Christ Many Religions, op. cit., p. 5.
14 Ibid.,
p. 5.
15 Eeuwout Klootwijk, op. cit., p. 86.
16 David Tracy, Dialogue with the other: The Inter-religious Dialogue (Louvain : Peeters Press,
1990), p.
41.
17 Gavin D’ Costa, “The Impossibility of
a Pluralist View of Religions”, Religious
Studies, Vol.
32, No. 2
(June 1996), p. 232.
18 Arvind P. Nirmal, Op. cit., p. 59.
19 S.J. Samartha, Between Two Cultures, op. cit., p. 151.
20 S.J. Samartha, The Lordship of Jesus Christ and Religious Pluralism (Madras : The
Christian
Literature Society, 1981), p. 2.
21 Ibid.,
p. 3.
22 Ibid.,
p. 23.
23 S.J. Samartha, “Commitment and
Tolerance in a Pluralist Society”, NCC
Review, Vol. CVI,
No. 2
(February 1986), p. 76.
24 S.J. Samartha, “Dialogue as a
Continuing Christian Concern”, Religion
and Society, Vol.
XVIII,
No.1 (March 1971), p. 22.
25 John Hick, Problems of Religious Pluralism, op. cit., p.69.
26 John Hick, “Whatever Path Men Choose
is Mind”, Christianity and other
Religions, ed., by
John Hick
and Brian Hebblethwaite, op. cit., p.
182.
27 Ibid.,
p. 183.
28 Ibid.,
p. 186.
29 Ibid.,
p. 190.
30 A. Pushparajan, From Conversion to Fellowship, op. cit., p. 47.
31 S.J. Samartha, Courage for Dialogue, op. cit.,
p. 99.
32 Ibid.,
p. 100.
and Society Vol. XXIII, No. 3.
(September 1976), p. 35.
34 S.J. Samartha, Dialogue as a Continuing Christian Concern, op. cit., p.11.
36 S.J. Samartha, “Dialogue as a
Continuing Christian Concern” in Christianity
and other
Religions, op. cit., p.159.
37 John B. Cobb, Jr., “Dialogue”, Death or Dialogue? ed. by Leonard
Swidler, John B. Cobb
Jr., et
al., (London: SCM Press, 1990), p. 2.
38 Harold G. Coward, Religious Pluralism and the World Religions, op. cit., p. 40.
House,
1966), p. 1.
40 S.J. Samartha, “The Future of
Inter-religious Dialogue: Threats and Promises”, Journal of
Dharma, Vol. XIX, No. 1 (January-March
1997), p. 83.
41 Raimundo Panikkar, “Forward” in Hindu-Christian Dialogue: Perspectives and
Encounters
(New York:
OBRIS Books, 1990), p. 9.
42 Ibid.
43 J. Russel Chandran, “Mission in Today’s Pluralistic Context”, NCC Review, Vol. CXIV, No.
5
(May-June, 1994), p. 360.
44 S.J. Samartha, Between Two Cultures, op.
cit., pp. 167-168.
45 S.J. Samartha, “Dialogue as a
Continuing Christian Concern,” in Christianity
and other
Religions, op. cit., p. 3.
46 John B. Cobb Jr., “Dialogue”, in Death or Dialogue, Op. cit., p. 3.
47 S.J. Samartha, “Dialogue as a
Continuing Christian Concern,” in Christianity
and other
Religions, op. cit., p.
62.
48 Jose Kuttianimattathil, op. cit., p. 118.
Comments
Post a Comment