Pluralism and society

IFD

• communication

• build relationships

• break stereotypes, prejudices

• promote peace and understanding

• → mutual respect and co-operation

• x about converting/ proving superiority

• identify diff and causes of tension

CoE doc ‘Sharing the Gospel of Salvation’ 4 strands of IFD (2009)

1. dialogue of daily life

• informal

• e.g. IF Conversion cafe

2. dialogue of the common good

• diff religious groups work together to benefit others

• e.g. IF Committee for Detained Immigrants

3. dialogue of mutual understanding

• formal

4. dialogue of spiritual life

• get together for prayer and worship

• IF worship services

e.g. Assisi and Ohito meetings

• brought together diff religious leaders and environmental scientists to discuss how should hep to care for environment

RCX

• Redemptoris Missio= papal encyclical by Pope JP II (1st pope to pray in mosque)

  • = the mission of the redeemer

  • aim to reaffirm that missionary work essential in multi-faith world

  • only 1 saviour = JC (revelation)

  • C empowered by HS to bring other ppl to C faith

Pope JP II

• recognised missionary work may be seen as arrogant, intolerant and condemnatory

  • other IFD seen as part of NOT in opp to C mision

  • respect diversity

  • God wishes to share rev and love with ppl of all faiths

    • other religions could contain ‘gaps, insufficiencies and errors’

      • CA/ superiority?

    • BUT ‘Church is the ordinary means of salvation’ (7 sac)

  • IFD and C mission can work together

• BUT duty to emphasise salvation thru JC

  • C unique → salvation

  • for IFD: respect cultural diversity and ppl’s freedom of choice

    • aim to uncover universal truths

  • can learn from good in faith of others and SIMULTANEOUSLY seek to bring them to C

    • CA/ ulterior motive/ agenda/ self-contradicting?

  • Corinthians: ‘For when I preach the gospel, I cannot boast, since I am compelled to preach. Woe to me if I do not preach the gospel!’

  • C mission in many forms

• NEED to tell others that C offers only means of salvation even if this is difficult

  • only C can offer salvation (JC I,S etc)

  • C should make effort to tell other about faith bc spiritual + eschatological, mandate

CoE

‘Sharing the Gospel of Salvation’ 2010

• doc issued by CoE Synod in response to member Paul Eddy

  • worked explicitly to convert Muslims to C

  • asked where CoE whether C should publicly claim salvation only thru Christ

• Bishop Stephen Lowe

  • opposes “evangelistic rants”

  • dangers of being performative/ proving faithfulness

    • pointless unless nuance and respect

  • → mutual relationships etc.

Aim of ‘Sharing the Gospel of Salvation’

• reaffirm God’s plan for salvation uniquely thru JC

  • church mission = witness this

• discipleship

  • beyond tolerance

    • C called to actively bring others to explicit faith in C and baptism into C church

  • but sensitive to difficulties of conversion

  • doc draws on experience of C living in diverse parts of UK

    • focus on commandment ‘always treat others as you would have them treat you’ (golden rule)

• reaffirms oneness about God and incarnation

• warns against treating C mission as marketing exercise of salesmanship

  • converted bc of work of God not successful sale

  • Paul Eddy: not ‘'marketing exercise with corporate targets’ but ‘expression of love’

  • share by living for good of others not just telling ppl what they believe

  • J teachings in practice

  • open about C beliefs that inspire good works

  • shouldn’t be intimidated about getting wrong

• reminds C, own faith and traditions = result of misionary work of others

  • BUT C history and mission hasn’t always lived up to teachings of Bible (spirit of Agape)

    • violent and unfree

• conversion can be difficult

  • hurt family members, risking estrangement, danger, religious persecution, social isolation, alienation

    • allow them to take time

  • x darkness and hopelessness (hell) they think awaits those who seek God in non-C ways

    • leave ultimate judgement to God

Scriptural reasoning movement

• began amongst Jewish scholars in USA

  • opportunity for Jewish academics in uni setting to study jewish texts together, sharing expertise

  • C asked to join → Islam (remaining of 3 ‘religions of the book’ → now all

    • SR part of Cambridge I-F Programme

• discuss themes e.g. modesty, edu, fasting

  • goal =/= agreement/ consensus

  • goal = get beyond superficial

  • openness and honesty

  • look at diff ways apparently similar beliefs understood in own contexts

  • ask each other q

  • discuss wording, how texts shape and influence understanding, how should be applied to contemporary society

• HOW IFD take place

• collegiality - small groups

• debate

• read in English = no alienation

• neutral space - comfort

• not to claim speaking for entire religion/ not official representative

  • contribute as individuals

    • x missionary work

• David Ford

  • mutual hospitality

  • deeper into own text and others

  • deeper into common good

    • know God concerned for whole world

  • form risky friendships with religious foundation

to what extent does SR relativise religious belief

• relativises = treating as equally valid, not treating as if some claims true, others not

  • bc SRM means not allowed to be judgemental/ critical

• opp of absolutism

  • 1 universal truth

  • p for fundamentalists (Bible - WoG) and exclusivists (salvation thru Christ alone)

exclusivist response to SR

• exclusivists e.g. Karl Barth would disagree

  • God fully and exclusively revealed in JC thru witness of Bible

    • evangelism endorsed by (with caveats) STGOS (CoE) and even > so by RM (RCX)

  • teachings of other religions = false

    • e.g. Islam J = prophet, Muhammad = “seal” of prophets

  • trivialises religious doctrine if all valid

  • x study scripture together, should point to uniqueness of C message

supporter response to SR relativising q

• no

• open recognition to diff between faiths

• encourages participants to deeper understanding of own faith

  • > convinced of truth

• confronts points of tension and contradictions

• Aristotle: ‘it is the mark of an educated mind to be able to entertain a thought without accepting it’

religious pluralist response to SR

• e.g. John Hick

• does relativise religious belief

• =/= bad

• religion = human construct and no religion can claim to have monopoly on truth

positives of SR

• open-minded discussion

  • no 1 authority/ representitive of religion

• effective and reasonable for theological exclusivists as each committed to truth of tradition and not seeking to compromise doctrinal basis of religion

• listening =/= accepting < value to own scriptures

• awareness > ignoring

criticisms of SR

• lack of orthodoxy

  • representing self, not indiivdual

  • danger = views expressed removed from ortodox teaching of religion

• reasonableness

  • no right interpretations

  • can’t judge reasonableness

  • if not scholars/ academics, just enthusiastic amateurs

• authority of scripture

  • for some, text = direct rev. from God

  • (exclusivists and literalists)

• non-abrahamic faiths

  • can be done outside J,I,C?

    • fundamental ground (monotheistic and abrahamic)

    • in reality, mostly done between these

  • other, don’t share same foundational beliefs

• have to be academically well-informed/ intellectual humility

• implies have something to teach if listening

• for Jews, Muslims, C misleading

  • idolatry of J, images etc.

development of contemporary multi-faith societies

• historically, uk = C, upheld by monarchy

• now, W liberal democracy, upholds freedom of thought and religion, and freedom of religious expression (Human rights)

  • → multi-faith society

• Why

  • migration

    • historical reach of british empire

  • tolerance

    • e.g. Jews during nazi regime

  • relativism

  • globalisation

    • knowledge

    • interaction

development of contemporary multi-faith societies = opportunities for C

• +ve opportunities for learning, developing relationships

• C work with non-C

  • example of co-operation, helping dispel prejudice and promote peace

  • deeper consideration of own beliefs

    • what accept/ reject

    • challenge = rewarding

  • not going thru routines unthinkingly

    • what means to them individually

• develops as ppl and as Cs

development of contemporary multi-faith societies = challenges for C

• undermining uniqueness (salv only thru JC)

• encourage children to be interested in following false beliefs, attracted to diff religion

• at expense of C mission

  • evangelising seen as judgemental/ arrogant where popular insistence on tolerance and respect

NB assumption of ex

mission

showing ppl the faith e.g. cross, charity work (e.g. Christian aid)

literally = ‘sent out’

evangelism

converting ppl to the faith

preaching gospel

should C communities aim to convert ppl from other faiths

• NT - urgency

  • J great commission

    • Matthew: ‘go and make disciples of all nations, baptising them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit’

• share life-transforming faith that opens door to eternal salvation

• RM: everyone has right to C message

• CoE same

  • but practical difficulties → sensitivity

should convert

• exclusivists

• C teachings

  • Luke Parable fo the Lost Son: ppl lost should be brought back to God

  • last words of Jesus to disciples in Matthew = instruction to proclaim Good News to all

  • Pope Francis - The Joy of the Gospel (2013)

    • all have right to receive Gospel

    • duty, without excluding

    • “share joy”

    • “invite other to a delicious banquet”

    • “not proselytising” (aiming to convert) but “by attraction”

shouldn’t convert

• inclusivists: possible with diff religions

  • anonymous C

    • e.g. sincere Muslims/ Sikhs geninely trying to serve God thru prayer and care for other ppl

      • living C lives without knowing

  • inc and universalists encourage ppl to be better members of own religion instead

• history of antisemitism, anti-islamic feeling and colonialism makes it inappropriate to continue

  • against social cohesion

should C have mission to convert those of no faith

• need to defend beliefs against criticisms e.g. science/ suffering

• counter-productive effects?

• easier?

  • no hurdles no committment to other religion

• need most bc other faiths merely have ‘gaps and insuffciencies’ (JPII)

• non-confrontational ways

  • e.g. coffee shops on church premise ppl drop by for refreshments

  • ‘alpha courses’ - intros to C for non-C

• No: Christopher Hitchens

  • ‘domesticating’ religion essential for social cohesion

  • traditional approach bc its intolerance → social p

  • religious ppl free to try to convert but should be socially looked down on

    • others have right to judge them -vely for creating social tensions

  • atheists right to convert ppl to atheism

shouldn’t convert ppl of no faith

• tensions with family

• reason have no faith

  • upbringing

  • feel can manage withotu

  • believe outdated, superseded by science, cause of conflict and bloodshed

• reductionist + materialist (Dawkins etc)

• salvation by works

• inclusivism

  • > need

  • not going up mountain at all

shouldn’t convert ppl of diff faith

• social difficulties and tensions

  • betray culture and disrespected rest of community

• Hick + pluralism → all paths lead up to same mountian

  • no need

  • provided → “other-centred”

• offensive?

  • implies other faiths lesser

  • identity challenged

  • imperialistic

    • crusades

    • antisemitism

social cohesion

• anti-theist Hitchens ‘domesticating’ religion essential for social cohesion

• = society where ppl have strong sense of belonging, feel can communicate easily with each other

  • share moral values and feel fairly treated

• groups better at achieving common aims and tend to be > peaceful

  • but can be exclusive to other, diff societies

• little SC → some groups marginalised and oppressed → hostility and violence

  • outbreaks of rioting in some towns and cities in UK e.g. Oldham

    • so politicians tried to promote social cohesion

    • emergence of some politcally and religiously extremist groups → > attempts

• hard to measure

  • indicators e.g. crime stats

  • BUT hard to know how ppl feel about communities

    • harder to make judgements about causes of feelings and effectiveness of efforts to improve SC

IFD ineffective in contributing practically towards social cohesion

• not everyone agrees with it

  • e.g. C who think 1 true religion

  • e.g. group of Cat disagreed with emphasis in Vat II on developing IFD

    • falsely suggests other religions worthwhile and also → salvation

  • alr disagreement within C = brings < cohesion

  • causing division within religion, not succeeding in healing riffs between diff faiths

• lack of SC due to material inequaity

  • CoE ‘STGOS’

    • division of socieites caused by inequalities in housing, employment, income and edu not faith/ religion diff

    • excluded from material goods other groups have easy access, e.g. decision making and employment → social disorder, racism, crime

    • hostility between ppl of diff religious belief = symptom of poor SC =/= cause

  • if feel powerless, unlikely to feel loyalty and solidarity with country/ city

    • SC works better if communication encouraged but IFD has limited effects

    • religion increasingly < important

IFD +ve effect to SC

• IF groups and events increased popularity over last 100 years

• regular IFD, special events where work and pray together

• David Ford

  • IFD between J and C → possibilities of relationship

  • “genuine”

  • “best activated thru engagement before God” (The Future of C Theology)

SC not main aim of IFD

• for spiritual purposes, ppl seeking truth

• IFD not necessarily to demonstrate that all religions underneath surface - diff cultural ways of expressing same ideas and moral codes

  • BUT actually encourages discussion points of diff and conflict + similarity