Religious Pluralism

theology of religion

• the branch of theology that examines the status of different religions in relation to each other

restricted access exclusivism

• salvation comes from hearing the Christian message and accepting it into your life

universal access exclusivism

• the idea that God wishes everyone to be saved

normative way to salvation

the usual or ideal way to be saved, but not necessarily the only one

anonymous Christian

• someone who is open to God’s grace but not a Christian

social cohesion

• a society that works well together - has a sense of identity and community

evangelism

• spreading the Christian message

pluralism and theology overview

• Christianity preaches the uniqueness of the Christ-event, but beneath this comes the fundamental question of, in a world where we are more aware of other religions whether Christianity or one denomination of Christianity has a particular claim to be ‘right’

• does one religion or tradition have a greater claim to the truth? does one lead to salvation better than or in place of the others?

• what is necessary for salvation and what is sufficient? is a particular belief necessary? was Jesus’ death and resurrection necessary - and do you have to believe in it to go to heaven?

exclusivism

• Christian exclusivism is the idea that only Christianity holds the truth and only Christianity can offer salvation

• Calvinists teach that the Bible is clear that fallen humanity was restored through the unique sacrifice of Jesus, who also taught “no one comes to the Father except through me”

• due to the Fall, humans are sinful and therefore nobody deserves to be saved; this is how exclusivists justify the fact that some people have never had the opportunity to meet Jesus or have the Christian message explained to them - this is an example of restricted access exclusivism

• some exclusivists believe that Jesus’ salvation restored the whole of humanity, past, present and future

• for these Christians, the emphasis shifts to God wishing to save everyone - universal access exclusivism

• perhaps people’s non-religious lifestyles are appropriately moral and spiritual and they will have the Christian message explained to them at the moment of death, or after death: this gives everyone the opportunity to become a Christian

Catholic views on exclusivism

• the Catholic Church teaches that there is no salvation outside of the Church - a person must be baptised and live a faithful Catholic life if they are to be in with a chance of going to heaven

• this view excludes all other Christian denominations

• since the 1960s, the Catholic Church has acknowledged that other denominations and religions hold aspects of the truth, but that the full expression of truth (and salvation) can only be found in the Catholic Church itself

• CCC - ‘he gives life and breath and all things and wants all men to be saved’

assessing exclusivism

some key weaknesses of exclusivism include:

• the fact that exclusivism leads to wars and conflicts and treating others as less valuable people

• the suggestion that if God condemns people who couldn’t have heard the Christian message to hell then God is not loving

• if God cannot be fully understood then it is impossible to say that anyone can have full control of the truth (and therefore salvation)

• the Bible suggests that people might be judged based on their actions (for example, the Sheep and the Goats) and not their beliefs

• it does not seem fair that the Catholic Church should say that other religions are a preparation for the Gospel but that people cannot be saved if they are not part of the Church

however, exclusivism clearly does make sense if Christianity is right. if Jesus is the son of God then it makes sense that Christianity holds the truth in a way others don’t. it could be argued that universal access exclusivism is also respectful of other faiths (because it allows for people to seek the truth, even if they are wrong), as is the Catholic approach (because it allows for some truth to be found in other religious practices

inclusivism

• inclusivism is the idea that, although Christianity is the one true faith and the normative way to salvation, it is possible for non-Christians who are anonymous or invisible Christians to be saved

• ultimately, all people have a spiritual aspect to themselves, which makes them search for the truth

• if done in an appropriate way, even if from within another faith setting, non-Christians can access the same benefits of Jesus’ death on the cross

Karl Rahner

• Rahner was a 20th century German Catholic thinker

• Christianity is the one true religion (because of Jesus) but even before Jesus, Christianity had a history and the OT figures must have been able to be saved

• other religions can help people to salvation but only until a person encounters the Christian message, at which point they can accept or reject it

• Christian missionaries must not assume that non-Christians they encounter have no experience of the truth

• the Church needs to be the visible expression of what other institutions have in an invisible way

• Rahner draws on Acts 17 where Paul commends his Pagan listeners for an altar he found marked ‘to an unknown God’: they had been worshipping the Christian God without knowing it and his role now is to explain who this God is

• similarly, it is valid for those of other backgrounds to worship God in their own way until they encounter fully the Christian message

• if God truly wants people to be saved, Rahner believes that:

• institutions can be a form of anonymous Christianity - because they have structures that explore truth and salvation they, just like the Jewish faith pre-Christianity, can be a means of grace

• individuals can be anonymous Christians - because people who do not identify as members of a religious institution can be said to be good and moral and therefore on their own search for the truth

assessing inclusivism

• inclusivism balances the unique Christ-event and the idea that a loving God would want to save people

• it acknowledges the idea of a sensus divinitatus

• it also conforms to biblical ideas that the Jewish people were chosen by God and presumably therefore saved without knowing Christ and passages like the Sheep and the Goats, which say that judgement is based on our actions, not beliefs

• however, inclusivism has been accused of being patronising to other faiths - why could a Christian not be an anonymous Hindu?

• Rahner potentially could also be accused of decentralising Christ from salvation and of undermining the role of the Church (founded by Jesus) in the world

• arguably, inclusivism is a dressed-up version of universal access exclusivism because non-Christian religions remain inferior to Christian ones

• it could be argued that Rahner is simply playing with words to try to make Christianity look less unapproachable

pluralism

• the most common image to explain pluralism is that of the blind men and the elephant

• the idea is that if a group of blind men come across an elephant and each touch a different part of it then each will gain a different understanding of what the elephant is like, even though each is equally valid (and equally limited)

• pluralism is the idea that there are many ways to salvation and Christianity is just one of these paths

Hick

• Hick is the best-known advocate of pluralism and is said to have been inspired by his work in multi-cultural Birmingham

• a natural theologian, Hick felt that all that needed to be known should be able to be deduced from this world

• people believe because of religious experience, but religious experience is interpreted through individual faith traditions - religious experience is common to all faiths

• therefore, different people are experiencing and interpreting the same reality in different ways

• cultural differences provide the different lenses through which we experience the divine

• Hick was influenced by Kant, who distinguished between the noumena (what a thing actually is) and the phenomena (how we individually experience it). therefore, the noumena of the divine is one thing, but it is experienced through different phenomena (religions). pluralism understands each of these phenomenal ways as equally valid

• Christianity is generally Christocentric but Hick felt that the central point should not be Christ but God - Hick argued for the theology of religion being theocentric

• Christianity’s claims on truth, such as the incarnation, the nature of Jesus and resurrection, need to be reinterpreted as mythical - stories with truth elements - rather than factual ones

• this means that Christianity is on the side, looking inwards towards God, like other religions

• Hick’s empirical evidence for this is quite simply that other religions produce equally good people as Christianity; why should Christianity be superior in any way?

assessing pluralism

• Hick’s approach assumes that Kant’s philosophical approach is correct

• it also assumes that there is a ‘real’ in terms of a divinity of some sort; this is rejected by many forms of Buddhism

• arguably, if Christianity (and other religions) are simply myths then any aspect of truth becomes lost and there is nothing to believe in, except a completely distant ‘real’

• Christians might challenge Hick on the basis that they argue that the Christ-event is unique in a way that other religions do not claim. it is faith, especially in the resurrection, that is the challenge for believers

• atheists might challenge him because it seems to be an assumption that there is any reality behind it all - why not simply reject religion outright?

• however, Hick’s approach is attractive. in a global society, it recognises that the foundations of many religious beliefs are outdated and narrow, and may need to be reconsidered

if Christ is the ‘truth’ can there be any other means of salvation?

exclusivists might say:

• the claim that God became a human is too different from other truth claims of other faiths to not be taken seriously

• jut because somebody disagrees with you, it does not mean that you should reach a compromise - this is the trend towards relativism in modern society

• such a serious question as to whether or not someone spends eternity in heaven or hell requires definite answers

• pluralism sounds nice, but moves away from any possibility of there being truth

• pluralism tries to approach evidence from a natural theology standpoint but fails to notice essential and revealed Christian truths, such as the effect of the Fall on the world and humanity

however, an exclusivist approach requires revealed theology, which has its own issues. people who answer ‘yes’ to this question might say:

• inclusivism shows that Christ’s truth is for all of humanity - Christ’s incarnation took place out of love and this same love must look after those who are not Christians

• pluralism rejects the idea that Christ is ‘the’ truth - the words of the Bible might not be literally true, for example, including the words attributed to Jesus

• if God truly does not save others then this God is not worthy of our worship

• Hick’s approach to the ‘real’ is a useful way of understanding how different worldviews might work together appropriately

would a loving God ultimately deny any human being salvation?

• in many approaches, there seems to be the assumption that salvation is determined by beliefs. however, there is equally as much to suggest that salvation is linked to our actions

• in Christian ethics, it is often thought to be the case that the intention behind our actions is important. why should this not be the case with belief? if our intention is to seek the truth, surely God, who knows everything, will reward this?

• pluralists feel that it is possible that God is present in different ways and in different cultures, so that people can understand salvation in an appropriate way. it might not be useful for someone with a non-western worldview to think of reward, punishment, time and judgement in a western sense

• some Christians believe that original sin made too great an impact on the world

• one of the biggest problems for Christians is the problem of evil and the problem of innocent suffering. for any Christian to say that some go to hell because they weren’t Christians - and they couldn’t have been Christians - is perhaps to develop the problem of innocent suffering

the development of contemporary multi-faith societies

• globalisation spread in the second half of the 20th century far faster than before because of technological developments

• with this globalisation comes the ability both to encounter people of other faiths and also to find out information about other faiths

• in addition to this, as people have moved away from the tendency to live in their local area for their whole life, there has been more mixing of people with already-established communities, such as Indian or Jewish communities which have been around for some time, but have been concentrated in particular areas of the country

• modern abilities to communicate and travel more easily and more cheaply mean that more and more people have encountered other cultures and, with them, other faiths, and this has generally led to more tolerance in society, such that people of other faiths feel able to move to a traditionally Protestant Christian country

• the trend to this tolerance arguably started with the Enlightenment, but has been facilitated by modern lifestyle

migration

• underneath all of this is the issue of migration

• people have migrated to the UK for many reasons: for safety (in the case of refugees), for economic development (because the standard of living is higher in the UK) or simply because other members of their family have already lived here for a while

• as such, communities of those from other cultures have increased and multi-faith society has become natural to much of the UK

• it is important to recognise that migration has also led to Christianity seeing new influences and new denominations, as much a significant increase in members of other faith traditions

• living in a multi-faith society challenged John Hick to become a pluralist and potentially will challenge British Christians as these societies become more embedded

inter-faith dialogue

• inter-faith dialogue, the conversation between different faiths, has taken a new direction, perhaps because of three reasons

1. migration has exposed more people in the West to ways of thinking from the far East that are entirely different from their normal use of language

2. the Holocaust forced Christianity to think about its relationship with Judaism because strands of institutional anti-Semitism seemed still to survive (whereby Jews are seen as those who have somehow ‘failed’ to become Christians)

3. modern tensions with Islam, still being played out, show the importance of seeking common ground and common teachings of loving your neighbour and placing God at the centre of life

exclusivist view on the aims and purposes of inter-faith dialogue

• to open the conversation so that people from other faiths can be converted

• to begin to understand where those from other faiths are coming from so that they can find common ground and show how that common ground points towards the Christian message

inclusivist view on the aims and purposes of inter-faith dialogue

• to create dialogue between both institutions (anonymous Christianity) and individuals (anonymous Christians) to understand where each comes from and how to communicate with the Christian message relevantly

• the dialogue can provide openings for ways to work together, perhaps charitably, in a context of mutual respect

pluralist view on the aims and purposes of inter-faith dialogue

• to discover different understandings of the truth and so to enhance your own understanding of the ‘real’

• inter-faith dialogue could potentially serve to stop conflicts between different religions and lead to peace

• some might approach this from looking at shared ways of life before tackling points of theology

Catholic Church: Redemptoris Missio

this Papal encyclical (authoritative letters from the Pope to his Church) from 1990, written by Pope John Paul II, focused on the missionary work of the Church in a multi-faith world. Catholics must remember they have a mission to non-Catholics, remain open and honest and respectful, but never shy away from the truth of the Gospel

• there is no conflict between belief in Christ and inter-faith dialogue

• inter-faith dialogue is an opportunity to give a full account of Christian belief

• all religions hold aspects of the truth and are led by the Holy Spirit, so dialogue needs to be respectful (and not have an ulterior motive of converting people)

• dialogue helps the Church to find out which aspects of the truth are held by other individuals and institutions

• a key aim is to build a happy society

• mission is for all members of the Church, not just priests

• missionaries need to be persistent in their work

• ‘dialogue is a path toward the kingdom and will certainly bear fruit’

Church of England: Sharing the Gospel of Salvation

this document from 2010 acknowledges that modern Britain is a multi-faith society which everyone shares. the document affirms that salvation has been achieved through the Christ-event and therefore Christians must proclaim this. the role of a Christian in it is to:

• be sensitive to those around them - do not try to ‘make a sale’

• develop good relationships with people in the spirit of welcoming in the hope that they will be baptised in the future - to ‘go beyond tolerance’

• live a good Christian lifestyle as distinct and authentic Christians

• work for the common good of society

• remember that they could be a missionary in a number of different contexts, not just the more obvious ones and to do this through being proud of your tradition

• ‘it makes example - the shared vocabulary through which the Christian story may be known’

the scriptural reasoning movement

• scriptural reasoning began in the US and has been adapted by the Cambridge inter-faith programme

• it is a tool to help with inter-faith dialogue and will suit some, but not all people

• its purpose is not to convert anyone but to help those from different truth claims and to discuss them in a safe place

• the movement started with Jews, Christians and Muslims because of their shared history, but has also successfully worked with people from other faith backgrounds

methods of the scriptural reasoning movement

• a session will focus on one text from each tradition and will look at the text in the common language of the participants, with the original language close to hand

• a facilitator will lead and people will read the texts and discuss their messages

• as the discussion progresses, some of the context of the passages will be explored to try and understand where the text is coming from

• texts are understood in two ways: as texts themselves - looking at the language, the themes, the historical context, structure and so on and as being read - looking at how the text is read and understood in the modern life of the faith

• if the participants are academics, texts will be approached in one way; if they are not scholars, it will be different

• one of the important ‘rules’ of a session is that the focus must remain on the texts and it should not become a general discussion of the religion

• participants are encouraged not to speak ‘for’ their faith by saying ‘Christians believe _’, but to say ‘as a Christian, this text says _’

aims of the scriptural reasoning movement

• the aims of the scriptural reasoning are very much to maintain a spirit of dialogue

• there is no attempt to convert people to one way of thinking and there is no intention to produce official documents on behalf of a religion or group of religions

• three core aims of scriptural reasoning might be identified:

1. wisdom (everyone is united in their desire for wisdom coming out of discussion)

2. collegiality (everyone is an equal participant; all contributions are equal)

3. hospitality (it is non-judgemental)

assessing scriptural reasoning

• scriptural reasoning is difficult to criticise

• it has very clear guidelines about what it aims to achieve, the safety of the dialogue and the limits of the discussions

• it has clear spiritual benefits for individual and participants and encourages tolerance

• as many religions have texts at their heart, it encourages participants to engage deeply in the origins of these religions

• some criticisms might be identified as:

• if it is impossible to be wrong, what is the point of the sessions and when does an interpretation begin to be inappropriate?

• is there any point in having these discussions if there is no official teaching of the religion? in some situations, people might leave with an incorrect view of another faith

• scriptural reasoning will not work for people from certain traditions within faiths, such as exclusivists or literalists

• it could relativise religious beliefs because the methods require that all points are treated as equally important

has inter-faith dialogue contributed practically towards social cohesion?

• Christians aim to live life to promote the common good and therefore to live as a part of society

• this is a fundamental aim of Roman Catholic ethics and an underpinning element of Sharing the Gospel of Salvation for the Church of England

• therefore, it would be hoped that any engagement in inter-faith relations would contribute positively towards social cohesion

• however, modern secular society has less space in it for religion and religious practices are less influential in day-to-day life

• some might suggests that anything that promotes tolerance in contemporary society is important

• there is suspicion of some faith communities simply because they are different and overcoming ignorance is important

• any shared charitable work for the local community will promote social cohesion

• those living in a local community with a range of faith communities will probably be able to point towards more examples of inter-faith work promoting the local community than others

• some might argue that the aim of inter-faith dialogue is not to promote social cohesion, but to work on an even smaller scale - a few individuals together - and that this is beneficial

• others might suggest that it is about exploring differences safely and is not about overcoming them, as social cohesion might suggest

should Christians try to convert people?

• for most Christians, evangelism is a central aim

• Jesus sent his disciples out to spread the message in the Great Commission ‘go and make disciples of all nations’

• the Roman Catholic Church speaks of the ‘right’ of all to hear the Gospel message and the Church of England agrees that the Christ-event needs to be communicated with others

• converting people of other religions assumes that Christianity is the one way to the truth

• exclusivists would argue that it is important to offer the chance of salvation to all

• inclusivists would emphasise the need for sensitivity and would not wish social cohesion to be upset, but would still aim for all to hear the true message

• pluralists would not agree with the conversion of other faiths to Christianity because other faiths are also valid ways to express truth

• as society encourages religious belief to be more private, Christians often evangelise by example - living lives that make others ask, ‘why are they like that?’ and opening the opportunity for dialogue

• the Christian mission to those of no faith is more urgent for some Christians because they might argue that many atheists and agnostics do not have access to the truth even in its dimmest form

• many church communities welcome people into their buildings just to break down barriers and perceptions about what it is to be a Christian and many discovery courses about faith appeal to those with no tradition of religious belief

Barth

• Barth is an example of where the boundaries between exclusivism and inclusivism can blur

• Barth’s starting point is a Calvinist approach to exclusivism and election

• God is only knowable through his choice to reveal himself to people when he wishes. humans cannot choose when to identify God

• the Trinity and the person of Jesus are unique to Christianity and this makes the Christian understanding of God’s self-revelation unique

• Jesus as the Word made Flesh is revealed through the incarnation, the Bible and the Church, but only the completely accurate way of understanding God’s self-revelation is through the Bible

• Jesus was entirely unique and God can only be properly known through Jesus Christ

• the Christian revelation overcomes all other faiths

• however, Barth does not seem to have thought that only Christians can access God’s grace: the Holy Spirit can work anywhere and God can choose to reveal himself wherever he wants, not just through Christian methods. for this reason, Barth begins to come across as an inclusivist: election, for Barth, is something open to anyone who is willing to receive God’s grace