I. The phenomenon of religious pluralism (Tangaza)

I. The phenomenon of religious pluralism

1.       Why does Cardinal Ratzinger think that “a phenomenological investigation [of religions] which would not straightaway concern itself with the value of these religions for eternity… needs to precede such theological judgments about other religions” (p. 18)?

Cardinal Ratzinger was of the opinion that we ought first of all to seek an overall view of the whole panorama (an unobstructed view) of religions, with its inner development and spiritual structure. In essence, we should first of all try to see whether there was any kind of continuous historical development here and whether any basic types of religion could be recognized, which we could easily evaluate; and finally we should have to ask how these basic types relate to one another and whether they present us with basic alternatives, which could then be the subject of philosophical and theological reflections and verdicts.(Bartholomew Senewo 12025T)

Because, we can’t give judgments about other religion. First of all we need to have a overall view of the whole panorama of religions, with it’s development and spiritual structure. And then we try to see whether there was any kind of continuous historical development here  and whether any basic types of religion could be recognized, which we could more easily evaluated. So when we come to know fully about the religion, we could ask some questions and clarify them with our reflections. Finally we can give some philosophical and theological judgement about the religions.(Hrudaya Muthukuru 12053T)

As a student of history of religions, Cardinal Ratzinger thinks that the phenomenological investigation of religions cannot be judged straightaway without first, establishing the core of the problem which is an overall view of the whole panorama of religions with their inner development and spiritual structure.  Surely, religions’ issues need a deeper studies and approaches. The idea of Rahner which sustained that “even the non-Christian is a Christian but not consciously aware of himself” cannot be applied to judge the existence of all religions. Judgment requires certain wisdom in establishing and bringing specific religions together and tries to find some criteria of judgment. Therefore, the historical aspect of religion intends to be prominent and salient (Daniel Kabuya 12065T)

Two opinions: Firstly, to seek an overall view of the whole panorama of religions, with its inner development and spiritual structure (first of all try to see whether there was any kind of continuous historical development and whether any basic types of religion could be recognised) secondly, to ask how these basic types (of religion) relate to one another and whether they present us with any basic alternatives, which could then be the subject of philosophical and theological reflections and verdicts.[John Michael Alibu  12056T}

2.       Name two possible attitudes towards other religions in the light of the Christian conviction that Christ is the only Saviour and salvation of man?

The two possible attitudes are: first, it may address other religions as being provisional and, in this respect, as preparatory to Christianity and, thus, in a certain sense attribute them a positive value, insofar as they allow themselves to be regarded as precursors; secondly, they can of course be understood as insufficient, anti-Christian, contrary to the truth, as leading people to believe they are saved without ever truly being able to offer salvation.(Bartholomew Senewo 12025T)

In this case, two attitudes are possible with regard to the other religions.  One may address them as being provisional. It means the belief is from the beginning, they believed  that Christ is the only saviour and salvation of the man because It was shown by Christ himself with respect to the faith of Israel, to say the religion of Old Testament. The second attitude is preparatory to Christianity. It means they believed in Christ as saviour and salvation of man but still they did convinced fully, so there is a hidden truth in the mythical religion.(Hrudaya Muthukuru 12053T)

In the light of the Christian conviction, the two possible attitudes as regards to other religions are the recognition of the positive value and the anti-Christian position or the insufficiency of the truth. In the aspect of promoting the positive value, Christianity gives respect to other religions in the sense of being provisional or preparatory to its event. On the second hand, the insufficiency is based on the fact that they are contrary to the truth because of leading people to believe they are saved without ever truly being able to offer them salvation. The two attitudes can be shortened as follows: the partial recognition of the starting-point of the religion of the Old Testament somehow, and the decided rejection because of denying Christ in whom the fulfilment and the salvation of man are possible (Daniel Kabuya 12065T)

The first may address other religions as being provisional (preparatory to Christianity,  that is, insofar as they allow themselves to be regarded as precursors).

Secondly, other religions can be understood as insufficient, anti-Christian, contrary to the truth, as leading people to believe they are saved without ever truly being able to offer salvation, (a decided rejection). [John Michael Alibu  12056T}

3.       What does the Christian rejection of gods signify? How is it viewed by the secularised man of today?

The Christian rejection of gods signifies much rather a choice to be on the side of the rebel, who for the sake of his conscience dares to break free from what is accustomed. While the secularized man of today will easily conclude that the recognition of other religions as having a provisional and preparatory character is a sign of arrogance.(Bartholomew Senewo 12027T)

The Christian rejection of the gods signifies much rather a choice to be on the side of the rebel, who for the sake of his conscience dares to break free from what is accustomed. This revolutionary trait in Christianity has perhaps far too long been hidden beneath various conservative models. The Christian rejection of the religion on the other hand will be partisan and disputation attitude of various religions. The man of today is not particular to a religion, which claims to be true, but it is his own choice to choose any religion. He can say that the essence of the religion is same to all the religions.(Hrudaya Muthukuru 12053T)

In the Christian view, the rejection of gods signifies the attempt of man to free himself from God protection for the sake of his conscience. It is a radical decision of man to be the rebel against God. He expresses to shield himself from God instead of leaving himself open to his demands. Placing in the view of today’s man, the rejection of gods is perceived as a sign of arrogance. The latter is expressed clearly in the form of an abrupt No to the recognition of a particular religion’s claim to be true and a personal point of view. For him, all religion is the same in essence. From that, it results each person has to remain in his own and experience it with an awareness that it is, in its basic spiritual core, identical with all the other. According to him, the plurality of religion is a matter of being expressed in symbols. However, their different symbolic expressions, they are still in spiritual aspect of view. Therefore, the outcome of that is to accept that there is static of religion, not progress as underlined by Christianity (Daniel Kabuya 12065T)

The Christian rejection of gods signifies a choice to be on the side of the rebel (by his conscience he dares to break free from what is accustomed).

Today’s man is not impressed with the Christian conception of other religions, that is,  the recognition of other religions as having a provisional and preparatory character is, to today’s man is a sign of arrogance. Today’s man considers all religions, with varied multiplicity of forms and manifestations to mean one and the same thing, that is, a relativistic claim that there are many religions and that each person has his own [John Michael Alibu  12056T}

4.       What is the concept of religion held by “the man of today”?

    

     Today’s man has a concept of religion that is always very much a matter of symbols, heavily spiritualized (p. 24). [Nsa Charles NDIBOWIY  12054T]

A provisional and preparatory character is a sign of arrogance. Most people think all religion with varied multiplicity of forms and manifestations, in the end are and mean one and the same thing. The man of today will not accept a particular religion claiming to be true, he will simply state they are many religion.   A man of today does not see a development from one religion to the other, rather he expects each person to remain in his own and experience with an awareness that it is, in its basic spiritual core identical with the others. He also has a concept of religion that is very much a matter of symbols, heavily spiritualized (Gaspard Machai 12085T)

The dominant impressed by the modern man is that all religions, in spite of all variety of forms and demonstration are the same and are intended for the same goals, which can be seen by everyone apart from the followers. The concept of religion for him is static, he does not consider as possible the development from one religion to another but expects to remain in his own belief and that any religion in its spiritual essence is identical with others, so there is some kind of religious cosmopolitanism. The man belongs to a particular religious “province”, which he does not want to change. He remains in a great reserve to the idea of the mission and in fact he rejects it. [Pawel Gabrys 12038T]

The concept is static; he usually does not foresee any development from one religion to another; rather, he expects each person to remain in his own and to experience it with an awareness that it is, in its basic spiritual core, identical with all the others. Religion appears as a world of symbols which despise the ultimate unity of the language of human symbols, vary in many details but nonetheless mean just the same [Maralf Jimenez 12093]




5.       What is the “future for religions” according to the thinking of Radhakrishnan?

      
     Radhakrishnan envisages the coming of a religion of the spirit which will be able to unite fundamental unity with the most varied differentiation (p. 24).{Nsa Charles]

       

    



      He anticipates the coming a religion of the spirit which will unite the different religions into a fundamental unity with the most varied differentiation. (Gaspard Machai 12085T)

The writings of Radhakrishnan focus on approaching a religion of the spirit, aiming to combine multiple fundamental unity and diversity. Christian theologian is seen as old-fashioned dogmatist, who never give up his point. Contemporary theologians have the awareness of others that despite the fact they are unconscious they are already somehow Christians. The future of religion is close to the heart of a person and if he is convinced in Christianity, not in religion of the spirit, then he will continue to research for gaining a clearer idea of the history of religion and the place of Christianity contained in it. [Pawel Gabrys 12038T]

The religion of the spirit, which will be able to unite fundamental unity with the most varied differentiation. [Maralf Jimenez 12093]