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)?
A phenomenological investigation frees us from presuppositions that may
overlook important distinctions and some similarities that exist between
religions, prior to any other analysis or reflection on these religions. It
makes a deeper and objective examination whose data helps us give an ‘identity’
to religions, within the context of their historical development, structure,
interrelationships, thus enabling us to have a clearer picture of religions in
our investigation.**
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 possible attitude is that of viewing them as having a
provisional value, acting as precursors to Christianity. Such an attitude gives
partial value to these other religions insofar as they are considered to play a
preparatory role which though, finds purification upon encountering Christ, as
in the example of the Magi.
The second attitude is that of considering them as contrary to Christ
who is truth, thus creating a false conviction of salvation, which in fact is
impossible minus Christ. Such an attitude makes a radical rejection, thus
refusing to recognise any value in these religions.
3.
What does the Christian rejection of gods signify? How is it viewed by
the secularised man of today?
It signifies an attitude that would in this regard be viewed by
contemporary man to be exclusivist, partisan and disputatious. It would be
viewed as an arrogant refusal to acknowledge that all religions, despite their diversity/varied forms ultimately
signify one and the same thing.
4.
What is the concept of religion held by “the man of today”?
Religion is essentially one, though apparently multifaceted. Moreover,
it is a world of symbols, heavily spiritualised. In such a view, religion is
seen as rather ‘static’, and there is no necessity as such for development from
one religion to another. All one has to
do is simply have one’s own experience within one’s religious context in its
form, bearing in mind that it is essentially identical with others. Actually
the trend must be directed towards the realisation of that unity and identity.
5.
What is the “future for religions” according to the thinking of
Radhakrishnan?
The future for religion is one in which will ‘all will be embraced’,
where the underlying unity between all religions is the key element, a
foundation upon which the various spiritual expressions of it are built.
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 of multiplicity and variety, which actually
makes the question of truth seem misleading. This impression though, is soon to
be replaced by that of unity in diversity, in which religious worlds stand for
essentially the same thing – the great fundamental symbols are the same, the
only variety being in the superficial images and outward forms.
7.
“This mystical interpretation of religion forms the background of the
idea of religion of man today.” Elaborate on this statement.
Faced with the plurality and variety of religions, man today puts them
all at the same level seeing an underlying factor of commonality. It is only
logical then (according to this idea) to conclude that within any of the
religions, man can experience ‘the ultimate’ through mystical experience. Thus,
man understands, belonging to one religion or another is not of absolute
importance, but rather, the spiritual or mystical experience, since all
religions are essentially one. Such a view, though attractive to the mind of
contemporary man, is too inclusivist and reduces religion to mysticism.
8.
According to the mystical interpretation of religion, what is “first
hand religion” and what is “second hand religion”?
First hand religion refers to the direct experience of the divine which
a mystic undergoes. In such an experience he ‘ascends’ into a mystical unity
with the divine. Second hand religion is indirect in its nature as it is
‘handed on’ to the believer by the mystic. It is thus not experiential in
nature unlike the former, but rather takes the form of indirect knowledge.
9.
Name and explain the stages of development history of religion.
The primitive stage: Man has scattered experiences in which he recognises the existence of
forces beyond him which have an influence on him. At this stage however, the
‘image or identity of such forces is rather vague. From this recognition, man
makes a transition to a ‘higher’ stage mentioned below:
The mythical stage: In this stage the previously vague and scattered experiences of the
‘supernatural’ takes more defined identity. Through myths the divine is
personified, the varied experiences of the primitive stage are brought into a
coherent overall view of things.
Departure from myth: This marks an important movement from myth and its confines. Here,
with the unfolding of history, man discovers more, and thus can be said to move
closer to the truth, and this stage happens in three different ways, that is,
mysticism, monotheistic revolution and ‘enlightenment.’
10.
What are the three ways of moving beyond the myth of religions?
a)
Mysticism
b)
Monotheistic
revolution
c)
enlightenment
Mysticism and belief
11.
What is the Christian approach to “mysticism” in religions?
The Christian approach to the form of mysticism mentioned in the passage
is that being a matter of faith, it (mysticism) cannot be judged in terms of
its validity using rational terms. At the same time, though, it does not find
accommodation in Christianity since the experience of the divine is almost
entirely dependent on the mystic’s effort, who gets into a fusion of identity
with the deity.
12.
Why is the monotheism of Israel a sort of “revolution” in the history of
religion?
It is considered a revolution because a new religious awareness among
the people of Israel marked a radical departure from myths and a rejection of
other mythical gods, thus such a shift is not open to monistic development.
13.
How is the monotheism of Israel different from that of Hinduism of ATR?
The monotheism of Hinduism and some African Traditional Religions is
directed towards mysticism and ‘God and gods’ are accommodated as not mutually exclusive in these
religions. In this case there is an evolutionary process in divinity, while in
the monotheism of Israel all the other gods are overthrown along with myths
associated with them, thus taking a revolutionary path.
14.
How does monotheism and mysticism differ from each other radically? What
is the core of their difference?
In mysticism, spiritual experience takes an absolute value and one’s
union with the divine is achieved by one’s own effort. The divine is passive in
the process. In monotheism on the other hand, God acts, and man cannot
independently attain salvation without the initiative and action on the part of
God. Man’s role in this case is to respond to God’s call.
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?
He sees Christianity as a ‘historical’ religion, calling it “essentially
faith in an event.” On the other hand the great non-Christian religions view,
in his explanation, the eternal world standing in opposition to the ‘historical
world’, the world of time. Unlike in Christianity where the eternal gets into
human history, in the non-Christian religions such a reality is not possible.
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 patriarchs and prophets were human, with their infirmities and
weaknesses exposed. Their ‘greatness’ lies not in them but in God and the
mission they were sent to carry out, while the founders of the East Asian
religions were men whose greatness is quite manifest, achieved independently.
17.
Why does Christianity not recognise the distinction between “first hand
religion” and the “second hand religion” as viewed by mysticism?
Christianity recognises God as the one who takes the initiative and
calls, and the believer simply obeys and responds to that call. Thus God
becomes the ‘first hand’ actor and the believer, second hand. The focus here is
on the divine call, not one’s endeavours to ‘ascend’ to the divine world and
attain an experience as in the case of mysticism.
18.
In brief, what is the place of Christianity in the history of religions?
Christianity marks an important turning point in the history of
religions and in its understanding insofar as it points out this history as
being in a unidirectional movement rather than circular. There is a spiritual
relationship between religions and this unity and they play a significant role
as pointers to a higher reality in which the divine gets clarity and reality both at the level of knowledge
and experience. Far from being a transitory or provisional stage to some
‘future universal religion’ Christianity brings in a new era beyond myth, symbol
and mystical experience. In other words, the history of religions points
towards it; religions in their multiplicity and diversity played a preparatory
role and without underestimating their value and the role they played, religions
are crowned in Christianity. The divine, who was previously obscure, veiled and
viewed as only reachable through the effort of the mystic in other religions,
becomes the pro-actor, who takes the salvific initiative. God thus enters time,
linking the temporal and the eternal. Thus Christianity becomes the ‘omega
point’ of the history of religions.
No comments:
Post a Comment