From Joseph Oraegbunam
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.
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)?
According to me, I think what Ratzinger meant is that In dealing or studying others religion we are meant to look at other religions
from what we see in them and not just to conclude that we have the best
salvific plan more than them. Study from what we see we help us to understand
other religion in their practices instead of judging them with the view of we
been better.
So we are called to study other religions and not to judge them because
Judgement is for God and not for us. In studying them we are meant to
appreciate what is good in them and not just to condemn them totally. Best is
to study (historical development), appreciate and evaluate and never to judge.
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?
- Christians
see other religions as not fully forms of religion. And Christians also
regard other religions as just people without future even though there are
some elements in them. Christian
also view other religions are not perfect religions but they prepared way
for Christianity.
- Christians
will also see them as anti-Christians because they don’t believe in the
truth of Christ. This according to Christian means that they are leading
people to believe they are saved without ever truly being able to offer
salvation. In other words, there is no salvation in other religion.
3. What does the Christian rejection of gods signify? How
is it viewed by the secularised man of today?
Christian rejection of gods shows present Christians as
a rebellious religion that condemns the belief of other religions in many gods.
Secular man of today will see Christianity as freely breaking way from the costumed
that was already in existence.
It also presents Christianity as an arrogant religion
and a religion that give the expression of partisan and disputatious attitude
of the various religions.
According to man of today, all religion despite its
varied multiplicity of forms and manifestations, at the end are and mean one
and the same thing; which is something everybody can see, expect for them. This
means that no particular religion has the true but all religion are same and
beneath varying forms they are in essence all the same; each person has his
own.
4. What is the concept of religion held by “the man of
today”?
- Man of today sees religion as been 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 other. Thus there is a kind of worldwide religious citizenship
which does not exclude but rather includes belonging to a given province
of religion, which finds any change of religious nationality undesirable,
expect just in certain example instance, and in any case takes a very
reserved attitude toward the idea of any mission and is basically inclined
to reject it.
- Man of today has a concept of religion that is
always very much a matter of symbols, heavily spiritualized. Religion
according to man of today now appears as a world of symbols vary in many
details but nonetheless mean just the same thing and really ought to begin
to discover their deep underlying unity. This once is happened, and then
the unity of religion will be achieved this is the future hope of religion.
5. What is the “future for religions” according to the thinking
of Radhakrishnan?
Future for religion according to him is a spiritual religion which will
be able to unite all other fundamental unity with the most varied
differentiation. Religion that appreciates others rather than condemning them
for their faith. Any religion with this view
including Christianity must ask question in order to gain a clearer idea of the
meaning and direction of the history of religion and its place (Christianity)
within it.
Future for religion therefore means united
religion instead of individual religion.
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 is that one will start to look
beyond the limits of one’s own religion in the limitless plurality, an
absolutely overwhelming multiplicity and variety which makes the question about
truth seem illusory from the very start.
That the question of which religion has the truth is always the first
impression
The next impression is that of the hidden identity of
the religious worlds, which are distinguished from one another in name and
superficial images but not in the great fundamental symbols or in what these
ultimately stand for.
7. “This mystical interpretation of religion forms the
background of the idea of religion of man today.” Elaborate on this statement.
It means that any religion that exist originates in so far it is genuine, has a
form of inner experience of the divine that is experience in its final common
form by mystics of all times and all places. It means that there is no religion
without mystics experience as its foundation.
8. According to the mystical interpretation of religion,
what is “first hand religion” and what is “second hand religion”?
Religions can be
viewed in two forms; (1) direct form of
religion mysticism (this is the first hand religion. Here is the direct
relationship between the God and gods with the founder or the mystics) (2)
indirect form i.e. the form of knowledge only passed on from the mystic to
other, that is to say as faith. This is the second-hand religion.
It is important
to note that Most of the religions are second-hand religion i.e. sharing in a
mystical experience that is in formless; it would be a secondary translation of
this into a multifarious and changing language of forms but without any real
significance of its own. ( from mystics
to the people)
But is religion is not all about mysticism?
9. Name and explain the stages of development history of
religion.
- Primitive religion:
scared stage of religious experience which will be arrange by next stage (
mostly based on the traditional believe of the people)
- Mythical
religions: The experiences of the primitive religion are brought into a
coherent overall view of things. With story, parable etc
10. What are the three ways of moving beyond the myth of
religions?
- Mysticism; stripping
of the illusory form of the myth and given it an unnameable experience. It
proves to be conservative of myth, providing a new foundation for the myth,
which helps to interpret symbols of reality.
- Monotheistic
revolution; here myth is seen as man-made and lacking
authority. The absolute nature of the divine call that is issued through
the prophet is maintained.
- Enlightenment; here, the myth is outgrown as a
prescientific form of knowledge and rational knowledge is set up as the
absolute value. Religion and religious values become meaningless. It is
really full ground in our present day.
Mysticism and belief
11. What is the Christian approach to “mysticism” in
religions?
Mysticism according to Christianity is understood in a
more radical way, as one path in the history of religion, as an attitude that
does not tolerate any other element superior to itself rather, it regards the
imageless, unmetaphorical and mysterious experience of the mystic as the only
determinative and ultimate reality in the realm of religion.
Thus
Christianity didn’t accept mysticism that brings separation between the first
and second class.
12. Why is the monotheism of Israel a sort of “revolution”
in the history of religion?
It is because monotheism of Israel is not based on
mystics (tradition of the earlier religion) but on the prophets. What is
important for monotheism of Israel is not identifying with gods but standing
over the God who calls and who commands (doing his will).
Therefore breaking out of the already existing
tradition is the reason.
13. How is the monotheism of Israel different from that of
Hinduism of ATR?
- Hinduism of ATR is directed towards mysticism,
that is to say, it is open to monistic development and thus may appear as
a mere preliminary stage to something of more permanence, that is, the
experiencing of identity. I.e. Hinduism is monotheism without a clear
identity.
- Hinduism of ATR
arose not through a revolution, as in Israel, but through an
evolution; in consequence, the gods were never overthrown; rather a
peaceful balance between varying forms came about, as between God and the
gods, between monotheistic and polytheistic beliefs. But monotheism of Israel
was the opposite.
14. How does monotheism and mysticism differ from each
other radically? What is the core of their difference?
In mysticism, inwardness holds the first place:
spiritual experience is posited as an absolute. It includes the view that God is purely passive in relation to man
and that the content of religion can only consist of man plunging into God. God
does not act; there is only the Mysticism of men, the gradual ascent to union.
Monotheistic
way starts from a conviction that is the opposite of this: here man is the passive element upon whom God
acts; here it is man who can do nothing of himself, but instead we have
here an activity on the part of God, a call from God and man opens himself to
salvation through obedience in response to the call.
The core difference between the two is that in
mysticism, it is man who takes the initiative but in Monotheistic, it is God
who takes the initiative by revealing himself.
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?
According to him, Christianity is essentially faith in
an event, whereas the great non-Christian religion maintain the existence of an
eternal world that stand in opposition to the world of time. The fact of the
eternal breaking into time which gives duration and turns it into history is
unknown to them.
In order words Christianity has a well recorded
history from its origin up till now and there is great regard for our present
world while other non-Christianity lacks competent historical facts and see our
present world as very negative and evil
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?
The difference is that the patriarchs were called by God in their
imperfection with their immoral life while that of the great Asia founders are
presented as coming to have the
experience of God due to their perfection and good moral life.
It shows that the God of the bible is not seen, as by the great mystics,
but is experienced as one who acts and commands. This is because man does not,
here make his own attempts to rise, passing through the various levels, thus to
seek out the divine in its own place, but the opposite happens: God seeks out
man in the midst of his worldly and earthly connections and relationships;
God, who no one, not even the purest of men can discover for himself, comes to
man of his own volition and enter relationship with him.
Therefore in the belief in one
God, there is no discernment or levels or who is higher than the other. Mystic experience
is not the grantee but faith and believing is higher than that but in the mysticism,
the one with ascetics experience is considered to be more important that the
others
17. Why does Christianity not recognise the distinction
between “first hand religion” and the “second hand religion” as viewed by
mysticism?
It is because in Christianity there is a higher priority
to God who calls everybody to that of religious experience of one person. God
call is for everyone and whoever believes in that call is in the same
situation: each is being called in the same way. Therefore there is no first
and second hand because the call is for all but each person answers it in
different way and no way is superior in God’s presence.
But in mysticism, the mystics have first-hand and the believers
have second-hand religion. God alone deals at first-hand. All men without exception
are dealing at second-hand: servant of the divine call.
18. In brief, what is the place of Christianity in the
history of religions?
Christianity is meant to be religion that not only emphasised the
elements that separate her from other religion, but a religion that appreciate
what unite them with other religion. In other words, Christianity is not meant
to just condemned others religion but also appreciation their good teachings
because all move towards God but in different ways. A religion that welcomes
what is truth from others religion.
Therefore the Christianity place
is to be a path whose direction we call progress and whose attitude we call
hope. Thus Christianity should serve as someone who hopes, who infallibly knows
that through every failure and all human discord, the end of history is being fulfilled
i.e. the transformation of the chaos with which the world began into the
eternal city of Jerusalem, in which God the one eternal God, dwells among men
and enlightens them as the light forever.
No comments:
Post a Comment