Introduction
Theology is the interpretation of the contents of one’s own faith. Now the question is whether there is a theology outside Christianity? Yes, Indeed. This is what the Christian theology claims. But it is more than a claim, a natural expression of the fact that the theologian works within a theological circle. Has it any validity beyond the margin of the circle? It is the task of Apologetic theology to prove that the Christian claim has validity from the point of view of those who outside the theological circle. Besides, it is also the task of this Apologetic theology to make the claim relevant to the people who are outside the religious circle, which means the people outside Christianity. “Apologetic theology must show that trends which are immanent in all religions and cultures move toward the Christian answer. This refers both to doctrines and to the theological interpretation of theology.”
If taken in the broadest sense of the word, theology, the logos or the reasoning about Theos (God and divine things), is as old as religion. This is true with religion in which it includes all the religious activities of human beings. Human beings could not be spiritual without words, thoughts, concepts, and belief systems and even the myths by which they relate themselves to God. “Every myth contains a theological thought which can be and often has been made explicit. Ethical, Legal, and ritual interpretation of the divine law create another form of theology on the soil of prophetic monotheism…a rational interpretation of the religious substance of rites, symbols, and myths.”
Christian theology is no exception. It does the same thing. But it does it in a way which implies the claim that it is ‘the theology’. The basis of this claim is the Christian doctrine that the “Logos became flesh, that the principle of the divine self-revelation has become manifest in the event ‘Jesus as the Christ.’ If this message is true, Christian theology has received a foundation which transcends the foundation of any other theology and which itself cannot be transcended.” Christian theology has received something which is absolutely concrete and absolutely universal at the same time. “Christian theology is the theology in so far as it is based on the tension between the absolutely concrete and the absolutely universal. Priestly and prophetic theologies can be very concrete but they lack universality. Mystical and metaphysical theologies can be universal, but they lack concreteness.”
When we think about Scripture as the source of Christianity, it is often described as the religion of book. A few years ago, “German theologian Gerhard Ebeling wrote that ‘church history is the history of the exposition of scripture.’ He reminded us that the collection of writings which Christians call the Holy Bible is an integral element in the life of the Church and in Christian theology as well.” Theologians sometimes accuse one another of underestimating or overestimating the value of Scripture, mistaking its meaning, or failing to apply it rightly. These disputes, however, are usually domestic quarrels; no serious theologian denies that Scripture is vitally important in the household of faith.
Role of Scripture in Theology
The Christian biblical canon that is known to us today (with Hebrew Scripture and New Testament writings) is a legacy of the ancient church. It emerged from a consensus formed over several centuries and it reflects the impact these books had on church life. In a strictly historical sense, then, the Bible and the church belong together, and theologians whose faith seeks understanding must return to the witness of the Scriptures. The significance of the Bible for theology, however, cannot be reduced to its value as a historical record. Christians seek to hear through these writings a message from God – the Word of God. The Scriptures proclaim the Word that called forth the faith of Israel and the faith of the earliest Christians. That word of God is still heard today by the reading of the Scripture in the Church. It is not surprising that these writings have a special status in the church and exert a special force-a canonical force-on theological thinking. They contain resources essential for theologians whose aim is to understand the meaning of the faith. “For many Protestants especially, a phrase for the Reformation expresses their abiding conviction: the Bible is Norma normans sed non normata, the norm that judges every other norm but is not itself judged by any other.”
The use of Holy Scripture in theology has always been a hot button issue in theology: its authority, inspiration, unity and diversity, and reliability in terms of history and faith have been particular areas of concern. Each church has its own viewpoint on these matters, and there is considerable grass roots diversity as well. Each of us is well advised to consider where we will stand on these questions. However, we should not stop at stating our beliefs about the Bible. How we make use of the Bible’s resources in actual practice is another important question. David Kelsey, in The Use of Scripture in Recent Theology, “Points to four distinct ways in which modern theologians draw biblical texts into their theological reflections. While the authority of Scripture is affirmed in all four cases, the Word of God heard through the words of the Bible is identified in different ways: (1) as propositions about divine truth, (2) symbolic expressions of faith experiences, (3) recitals of God’s identity, or (4) invitations to existential possibilities for new life.”
Role of Scripture and Authority in the Church
The remarks about the concepts “scripture,” “church,” and “tradition” bring out another point about the use of scripture in expressions such as this scripture is authoritative for the life of the Christian church and this scripture is authoritative for Christian theology. When it is judged as these texts are authoritative for the life of the Christian church, the judgment is very logical, which means, these texts are Christian scripture. The term ‘Authoritative’ is part of the meaning of scripture and it is not a dependent judgment about the scripture. And then about the judgment, these texts are authoritative for theology, it is also logical because these texts are authoritative for the life of the church. The texts’ authority for theology is “logically grounded in and dependent on their authority for the life of the church generally. But since, concretely speaking, the life of the church taken as some sort of organic whole is ‘tradition,’ that means that the texts’ authority for theology is dependent on their being authority for ‘tradition.’”
To call certain texts as scripture is to say that they should be used in the common life of the church in normative ways that they positively rule its form of life and forms of speech. But to say how tradition is used, the text should be used in certain normative ways in tradition understood as a set of activities. However, when we hear someone preach the sermon next time and when the minister quotes the Scripture, we should ask the following things for ourselves: What is the speaker using the Bible ask me to do? Or, put the same question to a sermon or lesson that u deliver to a particular congregation, of it what are you asking your listeners to do when u quote the Bible? If we ask ourselves these questions next time, we can surely get to know about the four above categories said by Kelsey. By evaluating these theologians’ efforts in the light of our own ongoing study of the Bible, surely we construct a responsible approach to the use of the Scripture for theological deliberation.
Christian Scripture’s Response to the plurality of religions
Scripture means the unitary book we call the Bible. For outside the church, no such body as the Christian Bible has any reason to exist. It is not merely that “exegesis of the Bible is likely to be mistaken in one way or another when done outside the church; interpretation of the Bible outside the church must be arbitrary, uncontrollable, and finally moot.” When we consider the above statement as Scripture with its special reference to Pluralistic context, it is clear that Christian scripture’s interpretation should be open and debatable. That is what they call in the contemporary theology as ever-increasing pluralism. Because such a pluralist condition that enriches the possibilities for theology would seem at least equally clear and true. “Certainly the richness of imagination which these theologies, these several ways of envisioning the world, offer to the theologian can be counted pure gain. However, can theology afford to relax into that attitude of lazy intellectual ‘tolerance’ with which Marxists and Christians alike have charged our consumer society?” If it is true, then surely a pure pluralist attitude is worthy either of a logical commitment or of the traditional Christian claim to light up the meaning and truth of our common humanity.
The present work operates on two principal assumptions. The first assumption insists that the present pluralism of theologies allows each theologian to learn incomparably more about reality by disclosing really different ways of viewing both our common humanity and Christianity…The second assumption is all about the present situation. That assumption holds that each theologian must attempt to articulate and defend an explicit method of inquiry, and use that method to interpret the symbols and texts of our common life and Christianity.
Most summarily stated, each theologian must take a stand on both the basic formal methodological and material constructive issues which face us all. That stand should be taken as explicitly and as systematically as present resources will allow. Finally, that stand should take a self-consciously revisionist attitude toward the major present alternative models for a contemporary Christian Theology.
Christian Theology’s Response to Plurality of Religion
Christians should be responsible for all the religions. They should be open and flexible enough to respond to the people of other faiths. Our Scripture, which we call as ‘the living word’ should be relevant to the pluralist society. The role of Christian scripture in theology with its specified connection to the multi-religious context should be very well brought through speeches and actions by the people of faith. Even from the early days of the church till date, various approaches have been adopted and applied by Christians towards the people of other faiths. Early Christians adopted much from their Jewish background; hence, we trace negative approaches towards other religions. Here we will focus our attention on the major approaches made in history: exclusivism, inclusivism, pluralism and dialogue.
Theologians generally identify “a three-fold pattern in Christian theology of religions i.e. ‘exclusivism,’ ‘inclusivism,’ and ‘pluralism’ as Christian approaches towards the people of other faiths.” Any religion or faith seen from outside may appear to be “exclusive” or seen from inside, may appear to be “inclusive” or seen both from inside and outside it may appear to be “pluralistic”. However, there is an ambiguity in the approaches of the Christian Church. “Christianity cannot be classified as an‘exclusivistic’ religion in the strict sense of the term, since this is a missionary religion with a universal love and a vision of salvation.” Since, this is so, let us examine some of the important Christian approaches in the history of the Church.
a) Exclusivism
“The term “exclusivism” is taken from the Latin verb ex-claudere, which means to “shut out”. Exclusivism is the view that one’s own religious thought and experiences are alone valid and all others are false.” Christianity as a missionary-oriented monotheistic religion having the vision of “Universal salvation,” cannot be treated totally ‘exclusivistic’ in a narrow sense of term. It is a fact that the early Christian Church at Jerusalem adopted a great deal of its thinking and attitude towards non-Christians from the conception and understanding of their fore parents’ religion – Judaism. They had a strong negative thought towards all other alternative faiths as “pagan” or “idolatrous”. The early Christian community treated non-Christians as “infidels” for the simple reason that they did not believe in Jesus Christ as the Messiah or Saviour.
With the advent of Islam as a strict monotheistic religion, Christians adopted a much negative attitude towards non-Christians. “The Catholic Council of Florence (1442) referred to non-Christian religions as ‘Pagan,’ with the axiom extra ecclesiam nulla salus which means ‘there is no salvation outside the Church.’” This became the mantra of the time for centuries until the evolution of the modern ecumenical movement. Even well-known theologians and Christian missionaries of middle ages followed this kind of exclusivistic attitude towards non-Christian religions. For example, “the great Dutch theologian Hendrik Kraemer…wrote a book on The Christian Message in a Non-Christian World, which indeed aimed at attacking liberal theological thoughts and... Main purpose of his book was to persuade non-Christian world to surrender to Christ as the sole Lord of life.” Later, however, we could identify a paradigm shift in Christian thinking from the beginning of the second half of the twentieth century, adopting a more inclusive approach towards the people of other faiths.
b) Inclusivism
“This endorses a view that one’s own religious tradition contains the whole truth, and also acknowledges, that this truth is however incompletely reflected in other traditions.” In an inclusivistic way salvation is possible as per Christian faith, by the death and resurrection of Jesus Christ to non-Christians also. Even the Alexandrian fathers described the wisdom of the Gentiles as a form of divine condescension in view of educating “infidels” on the way of good conduct towards the path of righteousness. “Clement of Alexandria further explained his inclusivistic stand that the first-born son, the co-adviser to God, was the great teacher of the Egyptians, the Indians, the Babylonians and the Persians.” This kind of attitude and inclusivistic approach helped Christian theologians to express themselves very positively that “Christianity is the fulfillment of other religions.”
From the beginning of the twentieth century, a rethinking on the part of Christian theologians emerged for more viable attitudes of Christian witness in a pluralistic and multi-faith context. Moreover, the theory of ‘Anonymous Christianity’ of Karl Rahner…opinions such as… ‘visible and invisible Church’ and ‘Cosmic Christ,’ developed expressing the spirit of Inclusivism.
c) Pluralism
Religious pluralism is the theory that “The great world religions constitute variant conceptions and perceptions of, and responses to, the one ultimate, mysterious divine reality.” Leading contemporary theologians, who are in the forefront of Inter-religious dialogue, believe that “pluralistic approach” is the only adequate model in the understanding of inter-faith relations. Today’s general understanding of religious pluralism is that, “Different religions exist as diverse means of knowing and experiencing God or the ultimate one reality in a culturally, historically and linguistically familiar way. John Hick…as a practicing Christian has attempted honestly to develop this pluralistic theory. The basis of the theory is the ‘Pluralism of the religions of humankind,’…has always been self-revealingly active towards humankind.” This same salvation process is taking place in every religious tradition, especially the transformation of human existence from self-centeredness to reality centeredness. Therefore, for Hick, every religious tradition is thus a valid context of salvation or liberation.
For M.M. Thomas, “…true equality in a pluralistic society lay neither in the religious idea of the equality of religions nor in the idea of equal respect for all religions (sic), but in the equality of persons, that is, the equal recognition and reverence for persons in the integrity of their religious or secular ideological-faith-commitments.” Many pluralists assume that the respective Ultimate goals of different religions, in general, to be one and the same. In that sense, salvation is the same, but only the means to attain it are different. Though we say that mutual respect and give-and-take relationship between religions, this raises a problem, particularly from the Christian point of view of one Triune God. How can we avoid rivalry while different faiths are in general competitive with each other to prove the superiority of their respective religion?
This discussion leads us to note that there are different goals and means of salvations. In other words, there are plurality of religions and faiths. It seems that ‘pluralistic Inclusivism’ is an “unavoidable fact for the harmonious life of people of different faiths in a multi-faith context, which emphasizes further the need for mutual respect and nourishment through the approach of ‘inter-faith or inter-religious dialogue.’”
d) Dialogue
Christianity indeed has adopted dialogue as a better way of expressing our positive attitude towards other religions in improving relations with people of other faiths. Further, a living contact with people of other faiths, sharing their experiences and listening to them in their times of crisis and tragedy would constitute the fundamental procedure in a dialogical approach. This leads Christians to get rid of the old-age negative, exclusive and superior claims of their own religion, and to give up aggressive approach towards other religions in order to develop good relations with people of other faiths. It is also true, that there is no demand to give up one’s personal religious or faith commitment in a dialogical approach.
S.J. Samartha points out clearly that “Our Christian identity, affirmation of the centrality of Christ in our life and the Trinitarian nature of God cannot be diluted. Rather…God’s supreme grace and Universal love revealed particularly in Jesus Christ so that Christians may develop a new outlook towards people of other faiths.” Moreover, this approach removes misunderstandings about other religions; helps to work for common justice and welfare of local and larger community; promotes harmonious religious life by reducing tensions between different communities and builds up peaceful relations among peoples in a multi-faith context.
Conclusion
Re-thinking of Scripture as the source and the valuable force behind Christian Theology, it is very well advocated that Scripture is the message from God. It is not only the message but also the living source for the faith community. I am really inspired to get to know that Bible is not just ‘The Book’ or ‘Collection of Books’ but it is an anthology of books written over many centuries, each reflecting its own distinctive origin. Drawing the resources of scripture in the course of theological reflection it calls us to decide whether the texts relate to the whole or the contemporary multi-religious context. If scripture does not help us to relate ourselves with the people around us in good relationship, we lose our relativity. However, Scripture is the life-giving source for all living beings, no matter what religion we belong to.
Bibliography
Jenson, Robert W. “Scripture’s Authority in the Church” In The Art of Reading Scripture. Edited by Ellen F. Davis and Richard B. Hays. UK: William B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 2003.
Kelsey, David H. The Uses of Scripture in Recent Theology. London: SCM Press, 1975.
Raju, Swami T. Christian Responses to Plurality of Religion. Bangalore: BTESSC/SATHRI, 2006.
Stone, Howard W. and James O. Duke. How to Think Theologically. Minneapolis: Fortress Press, 1996.
Tillich, Paul. Systematic Theology: Vol 1. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press, 1951.
No comments:
Post a Comment