A theological evaluation of “revelation” in
other religions
Ratzinger, Joseph, “The Unity and
Diversity of Religions: The Place of Christianity in the History of Religions,”
in Truth and Tolerance. Christian Belief
and World Religions, San Francisco: Ignatius Press, 2004.
Comprehension questions
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)?
In Ratzinger’s idea, one should seek the overall
concept of a religion with its inner development and spiritual structure. He
should, first of all, try to study, to examine, and to see whether there is any
continuous historical development which can be evaluated in such a religion.
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 first attitude of a Christian towards other
religions could be seen in two ways: positive and negative. The first attitude is
a positive attitude whereby other religions are seen as a preparation towards perfection
which is Christianity. That is to say those religions are still in the process
of becoming.
The second attitude is a negative attitude whereby other
religions are seen as anti-Christians., as religions that lead people away from
the ultimate truth, to believe that they are save while they are not. Here
Christians hold that salvation is possible only for Christians.
3.
What
does the Christian rejection of gods signify? How is it viewed by the
secularised man of today?
A Christian rejection of gods could be seen as a rebellious
attitude, as a person who, in order to maintain his conscience, try to break
free with what is accustomed. But for man of today, this seems to be an arrogant
attitude, an expression of the partisan and disputatious attitude, one trying to
assert itself at the expense of other but unable to see that in reality all religions
are one and the same. For him no religion has truth in its absolute.
4.
What
is the concept of religion held by “the man of today”?
The concept of religion held by the man of today,
according Cardinal Ratzinger, is static, a relative view that all religion, in
essence, is one and the same. He does not believe that religion could
development into another. For him each person should remain in his religion and
experience it with awareness that it is, in its basic spiritual core identical
with all the others.
5.
What
is the “future for religions” according to the thinking of Radhakrishnan?
Radhakrishnan view for the future for religion is that
there will be a religion of the spirit which will bring the unity of all religion,
that is to say a religion that will be able to unit fundamental unity with the
most varied differentials.
The Place of Christianity in the History of Religion
6.
What
is the first perception of the man of today when he looks at the plurality of
religions? What is the next impression?
The first impression of man of today, when he looks at
the plurality of religions is the
absolute overwhelming over the unlimited varieties of religions which leads him
to the question of truth, for each one claims to have grasped the totality of the
truth about God and exclude others. For him, truth becomes illusory. The next
impression is the hidden identity of these religions which distinguish one from
another in name and superficial images but not in their fundamental symbol or
what they stand for.
7.
“This
mystical interpretation of religion forms the background of the idea of
religion of man today.” Elaborate on this statement.
The mystical interpretation of religion held that
there are two forms of religions: the first hand religion (direct experience of
God) and second hand religion (indirect experience of God). The first hand is
mysticism while other religions fall under the second hand. Our question is
whether this interpretation is correct? Although one can say to some extent
that a large part of phenomenon of religion is quite correctly thus conceived,
it is equally clear that the whole phenomenon cannot be thus conceived, rather
any attempt to do so would result in a false simplification.
8.
According
to the mystical interpretation of religion, what is “first hand religion” and
what is “second hand religion”?
Frist hand religion is the direct experience of God in
the mystical form, i.e. direct form of coming in contact with God. While in the
second hand religion the knowledge of God is passed on. There is no really
personal experience of God (no significant of its own).
9.
Name
and explain the stages of development history of religion.
- The first stage is the primitive stage where god
is seen being far and fearsome. In order to keep relationship with him one
must keep on appeasing the deities.
- The second stage is the mythical stage where the experience of God is put into symbols.
10. What are the three ways of moving beyond the myth of
religions?
- Mysticism: here religion is based on the mystical
experience of God, in which myth is stripped of its illusion and replaced
by absolute unnameable experience.
- Monotheistic Revolution: God breaks into our
history. Here myth is rejected as man-made and lacking authority.
Monotheistic Revolution breaks through in the history and revealed by the
prophets.
- The third stage is the enlightenment stage where religion is view in the light of reason. It develops into the theory that scientific knowledge is the only valid knowledge and become denial of the absolute value of religion. And thus religion and religious values become meaningless.
Mysticism and belief
11. What is the Christian approach to “mysticism” in
religions?
The mysticism in the Christian understanding is an
experience of surrender/subordination. In as much a mystic remains a Christian
he accepts a subordinate position, a total surrender in God. He will be able to
say to God “I am thine” not “I am thee”.
12. Why is the monotheism of Israel a sort of “revolution”
in the history of religion?
The monotheism of Israel is considered as a sort of
“revolution” in the history of religion because it was the first departure from
the polytheistic and mythological way of the old religions. It brought with it
a new awareness of one and only God and thus it represent a separate
development in the history of religion.
13. How is the monotheism of Israel different from that of
Hinduism of ATR?
The monotheism of Hinduism is directed towards
mysticism. Secondary, it arose not as a revolution rather as evolution i.e.
between peaceful balance of monotheistic and polytheistic belief. On the other
hand the monotheistic religion of Israel was as a result of revolution of few
people who were filled with a new religious awareness. It shattered the
mythology of the primitive religion and overthrown the gods of whom the myths
were spoken.
14. How does monotheism and mysticism differ from each
other radically? What is the core of their difference?
The core difference between monotheism and mysticism
is based on the passivity of the divine and the activity of man on one hand and
the activity of God and the passivity of man on the other. What does it mean? In
mysticism, it is man who plunges into God. God does not act. He is purely
passive in relation to man. Whereas, in the monotheism God is the one who took
initiative, he is the one who calls. Man is the passive element upon whom God
acts.
The structure of the two great ways of Religion
15. What does Jean Daniélou say about Christianity in
contrast to the great non-Christian religions?
Jean Daniélou stressed that the truth which Christianity
proclaims is based on the event of time, that is, it is accessible and
historical, while other non-Christian religions maintain the existence of truth
that stands in opposition with time. The fact of the eternal breaking into
time, which gives the duration and turns it into history, is unknown to them.
16. Mention the obvious difference between the patriarchs
and prophets of Israel and the great founders of East Asian religions. What
does this say about the structure of the way of mysticism and belief in one
God?
What made the patriarchs and prophets of Israel and
the great founders of East Asian religions is the approach and understanding of
God. Here God seeks man amidst his weaknesses and develop a relationship with
him.
17. Why does Christianity not recognise the distinction
between “first hand religion” and the “second hand religion” as viewed by
mysticism?
Christianity does not recognise the distinction
between “first hand religion” and the “second hand religion” as viewed by
mysticism because that kind of mystical experience is also found in other
religions.so it does not deal with the real distinctions. The distinction of
such can exist but it is merely a secondary distinction because it does not
distinguish religions according to their possession of religious reality and
mere borrowed piety. That is, it does not give the essence of religion. The
main issue is not one’s own experience but the divine call and each is being
called in the same way. While in mysticism, the mystic alone has the first-hand
and other believers second-hand, in contrary only God deals with first-hand.
All men without exception are called: they are servants of the divine call.
18. In brief, what is the place of Christianity in the
history of religions?
Christianity
serves as the entirety of the revelation of God. “In the olden days God spoke
to our ancestors in the dream and through the prophets but in our own time he
has spoken to us through his son.” It is God who seeks man, who comes to dwell
among his people. This apex of self-manifestation surpasses every kind of
mysticism. When the Magi found Jesus, did not the religion knelt before Christ,
as it were, in their persons, recognizing itself as provisional or rather as proceeding
towards Christ. Instead of clinging to the mystical experience which may not
have sole validity, Christianity teaches the absolute value of the divine call
which has been made audible in Christ. It is he who brings salvation to me and
whoever believes stand at higher level than the great ascetics. As Jean Daniélou would say that there may be great
religious personality outside Christianity but that means nothing, what counts
is obedience to the Word of Christ. Other religions are seen as a preparation
towards perfection which is Christianity
No comments:
Post a Comment