pluralism #2. defining options...

I figured i should back up to define what are the historical choices that are available when we talk about religious conversation(specifically in the area of salvation/truth) Aka Religious dialogue.

1) exclusivism- One holds in an exclusive way to an absolute truth. All people must learn this truth to be "saved." this calls for Explicit acceptance. This has been the traditional position of the Christian church for 1000 years.

2) inclusivism- same as exculsivism in so far as Christ is essential for salvation, but it allows for an implicit faith. What Rahner calls "anonymous Christians," people who have faith in God but they don't realize or recognize this god as Jesus. This theory relies on the hypostatic union. Everyone who has faith is still saved by Christ and is moving toward "Christian" ends.

3) Pluralism- recognizes inclusivism as a mode of conquering the "other;" Imperialism (Hans Kuhn). Pluralism comes in many shapes, pluralism itself is plural. What is common in pluralism is a respect and tolerance for the other. Currently all of these modes are Christian modes, instead of religious modes.

There are 5 types of pluralism.

1) phenominalist pluralism- (Hick, Knitter)all religions have the same ultimate reality (noumenal in the terms of Kant) but each religion represents a phenomenal way of responding to the same ultimate. They are different due to their historicity.

2) Universalist Pluralism- We can have a universal theology by using each religions philosophical understanding and finding common threads running throughout each religion.

3) Ethical Soteriological pluralism- Different religions while different maintain a similarity when it comes to morality. Each religion is working toward a liberation and recognition of Justice. This theory recognizes diversity of religion but looks toward moral connectedness.

4) Ontological Pluralism- (Plantikar) Pluralism is not just our own perspective of reality (pluralism of perspective as seen in #1)the reality shows irreducibly different dimensions in every religion (and human). Each is irreducibly different . Plantikar uses the theological idea of trinity to explain this perspective. There is an irreducible difference of religions, including salvations and morality.

5) confessional pluralism- (Kuhn, Cobb, et al.) Each religion is a confessional community within a historical understanding. Thus each confession is different. We must recognize the difference between the confessions and recognize them as not reducible. This idea wants to preserve the particularity of each religion and what they mean in the historical context of their confessional identity.

having expressed these, it is important to note that pluralism does not mean we leave our religion. It does not mean loosing our commitment or a watering down of our own confession(although conversion does happen). It does mean we should learn form other religions. "we should live in the permanent light and shadow of the other"(Min). Pluralism is not relativism you must remain in the tension between your commitment to you confession and the truth of the confession of the others. Or said differently the willingness to allow for other possibilities. The Goal of this dialogue is Truth; a deeper, broader, and greater understanding of the Truth and revelation of God. Truth is something that judges us, it calls for our obedience, our testimony, and our affirmation. we are in dialogue to share our truth and to hear the truth of the other. it allows us to recognize the illumination of a common human reality. through religions dialogue we are searching together from our different vantage points. (john cobb)

Roger Haight- pluralism #1

Haight is a theology professor at union university. He taught at Weston Jesuit my alma mater until being silenced by our (the catholic church's) current Pope for his book Jesus symbol of God.


Below are how he sets up the framework for a postmodern understanding of pluralism.(396)

1) Historical Consciousness-
-all our thoughts, ideas and values have roots in a particular time and space.
-(ie. each religion makes sense in its own time and context)

2) Cosmic Consciousness-
-the size and age of reality enforces relativity


3)Positive appreciation for religious treasures of each tradition
-distinct revelations of reality

4)It is positive that religions deliberately coexist and actively interact with each other.

while this may make many people uncomfortable in reading this text and in understanding the hearts of my friends what we are suggesting is a movement of humility. humbly we recognize that our knowledge is a limited knowledge, including our knowledge of God. We recognize that what we see we are seeing though a limited spectrum.

So you ask what about truth? Truth is absolute. Well yes and no. From a "theology from below" perspective we do not speak of absolutes, to do so would be to reject our own historicity, something a postmodern cannot do this would also make us in my opinion taking on the mind of God (prideful at the least possibly idolatrous). This is not to say that we do not believe in a liberating truth, a truth that changes our lives and draws us to tell others about the truth that we have experienced and been changed by.

this is a different understanding of truth than some sort of psychological truth, where our truth becomes a power by which we control. this is also different from a subjective truth, which says my truth and your truth even though different may both be right. subjective truth is a type of truth, and an important one at that, but it is different from a liberating truth that has altered your humanity and understanding.


more to come...