pluralism and society !!!!!!

Summary terms

Traditional Christians: (Paul Eddy, Ratzinger & JP2) say dialogue and conversion can be combined.

Post-liberal christians (David Ford’s ‘Scriptural reasoning’) who say dialogue and conversion must be separated.

Secular liberals (Hitchens) who argue dialogue and conversion must be separated

The scriptural reasoning movement

• Modern form of inter-faith dialogue

• People of different religions get together and read each other’s holy books, discussing meanings and interpretations.

• The goal is just to promote understanding and friendship- Trying to convert others or criticise other religions is not allowed

• founded by David Ford (Anglican) and Peter Ochs (Jewish- midrash jewish practice analysing texts

• Unlike liberal approaches, it allows people to freely express the value and love they have for their own faith/tradition

• Scriptural reasoning is trying to keep things productive and polite

The scriptural reasoning movement - LIBERAL

• liberal approach forces the acceptance of difference

• Liberal approaches to inter-faith dialogue attempt to bring people together on a neutral ground where no one even professes much about the value they find in their own religion.

• The problem is, this leads to relativism- no absolute truth

That is not genuine inter-faith dialogue – liberalism sacrifices the faith part to enable the dialogue part

The scriptural reasoning movement - counter and eval

• D’Costa argued that scriptural reasoning was relativistic:

• “there is a vaguely pluralistic agenda present.”

• criticising other religions and trying to convert them is part of

• religion, whether you’re an exclusivist or an inclusivist

• scriptural reasoning is actually just like the liberal approach to inter-faith dialogue.

• It prevents the expression of faith to enable dialogue – but ends up not being genuine inter-faith dialogue.

• Scriptural reasoning excludes exclusivism

• interfaith network has been shut down by gov

eval

• Conversion does undermine dialogue, so it’s understandable why liberalism and scriptural reasoning wanted to separate them

• However, conversion is part of faith. Genuine interfaith dialogue has to allow for conversion.

• Scriptural reasoning is a specific activity with a specific goal

• it’s fair to ban criticism and conversion when the goal of the meetings is just to promote understanding.

• This is not promoting relativism – it’s not suggesting there is no one true religion, it’s just trying to get people to understand other religions

issue of secular liberal pressure on exclusivism justified AO1

• push religious people towards pluralism.

• If religious people were pluralists, they wouldn’t seek to convert others. Then, interfaith dialogue could be separated from conversion to enable social cohesion, without sacrificing the ‘faith’ element.

• So, liberal secular culture views exclusivist attitudes and conversion as intolerant and causing social tensions

Paul Eddy (COE) & Ratzinger (became Pope benedict XVI)- counter and eval

• Ratzinger noted this emerging dynamic, that secular culture has started to be intolerant of views such as Jesus being the only (exclusivist) or full (inclusivist) truth

• Eddy made a similar complaint, that Christians are made to feel guilty for believing that Jesus is the way, truth and life and for converting others.

• Christians are being socially pressured into relativistic pluralism

• feel like their religious freedom is under attack and this can cause a backlash

eval

• Hitchens respond that social pressure on traditional exclusivism is justified because exclusivism causes social tensions & problems.

• Liberalism has a tension with religion. Liberalism has to accept conversion increasing levels of religious political activism, such as the overturning of abortion laws in America

• wants everyone to get along and accept each other’s differences, but traditional religion can’t do that

• Religious intolerance and even violence has occured throughout history and still occurs around the world

• Religious freedom includes the freedom to criticise religion. 

• Eddy and Ratzinger think religion should have the power to be above criticism.

• This attitude does have no place in a free secular society

JP2 Redemptoris Missio – JP2 defends an inclusivist approach to interfaith dialogue and conversion AO1

• Inclusivism is the view that Christianity is the one true religion, but God reveals himself through other religions

• JP2 says that this means there is Christian truth in other religions

• Christians should engage in tolerant open-minded dialogue with those of other faiths

• ultimate aim of dialogue is conversion- is mutually enriching and can be done with deep respect and eliminate prejudice and intolerance, thus enabling social cohesion.

• So JP2 would reject the scriptural reasoning separation of dialogue from conversion.

JP2 Redemptoris Missio evaluation

• This is worse than being told they have the wrong religion – inclusivism says non-christians have been worshipping and following the Christian God without knowing it.

• John Paull II talks about ‘deep respect’ and ‘dignity’ and enriching both sides, but these words ring hollow when one realises the reason he is saying them

• under exclusivism, it’s possible for different religions to reach the mutual understanding of agreeing to disagree.

• The Catholic inclusivist approach cannot achieve mutual understanding because it regards other religions as a confused version of christianity.

• So the inclusivist approach to dialogue and conversion is unable to enable social cohesion

arguing that conversion is valid and good AO1

• JP2 Redemptoris Missio – argument for the validity of conversion

• conversion is positive because it is part of a free society that people should be free to try and convert others.

• Furthermore, JP2 points to St Paul who said ‘woe to me if I do not preach the gospel’

• emphasises that conversion must be done in a respectful way.

• Missionaries must be respectful of people’s freedom of conscience

• Church of England document

• ‘highest calling’ of the Church is to proclaim Jesus.

• Jesus is indeed the way, the truth and the life – so Christians should share their religion with others in the hope of converting themarns that conversion should be done in a respectful way.

• It says we shouldn’t view non-Christians as ‘targets’ of an advertising campaign

arguing that conversion is valid and good counter

• Secular liberal progressives would criticise the idea of conversion as insensitive and encouraging of social tensions.

• They would point out that Christianity throughout history has spread itself by the sword – through violence.

• Christianity is still currently benefiting from that history of forced conversion because it now has many colonised countries who are now predominantly Christian – e.g. in Africa and south america

• if Christians really want to make up for and apologize for that history, they should stop trying to convert people completely. (Giles Fraser – priest – accept

• Christians should not engage in conversion at every opportunity – they should instead take more opportunity to try to make amends for the brutal past

problems w religion in society

• southport riots

• divisive

• creates barriers between people

• faith svhools

• rise of populism and far right politics