Religious pluralism

Religious pluralism refers to

• Theological attempts to overcome religious differences between different religions

• Theological attempts to overcome religious differences between different denominations of the same religion.

A recent theological innovation, held by some religious liberals, is the maximal forms of religious pluralism. This viewpoint holds that that all religions are equally valid and equally true. Critics of this viewpoint hold that this claim is self-contradictory.

More traditional and less extreme forms of pluralism do not claim that all religions are equally true. Rather, it claims that no religion should or can claim to be the only or absolute truth. This claim is based on the notion that religion is not literally the word of God, but rather is mankind's attempt to describe the word of God. Given man's finite and fallible nature, no religious text can absolutely describe God and God's will in absolute precision. Thus, no religion is completely true. In this perspective, there is an infinite Reality, or God, that is beyond the ability of any single religion to accurately capture with total accuracy. Instead, all religions make an attempt at capturing this Reality, but this always occurs within a cultural and historical context that affects the viewpoints of the faith's holders.

In the last century, liberal forms of Judaism and Christianity have modified some of their religious positions. Religious liberals in these faiths no longer claim that their religion is complete and of absolute accuracy; rather the Jews teach that their faith is only the most complete and accurate revelation of God to humanity that we have; similarly, the Christians teach the same thing; the Unitarian-Universalists teach the same thing. The liberal aspect of this positon is that it allows a religious believer to admit that other faiths also have common ground with their faith, and that they may even appreciate some other aspect of God that they might not. Adherents of this religiously liberal position argue that just as scientists must have intellectual humility in order for them to find the truth about a physical law, religions must have theological humility, and admit that they do not have a exclusive path to God. Religious Conservatives in Christianity reject these claims outright, and hold that only their path allows a person to reach God.

Inter-religious pluralism (between different religions)

Classical Greek and Roman pagan religious views

The ancient Greeks were polytheists; pluralism in that historical era meant accepting the existence of and validity of other faiths, and the gods of other faiths. Greeks and Romans easilly accomplished this task by subsuming the entier set of gods from other faiths into their own religion; this was done on rare occasion by adding a new god to their own pantheon; on most occasions they identified another religion's gods with their own.

Jewish views

Classical Jewish views

The Jewish belief in the exclusivity of their religion's truth did not preclude a belief that God would enter into relationships with other peoples. Judiasm held that although only Judaism was true, God had entered into a covenant with all mankind, and that any person had the ability to have a relationship with God, even if they were not a Jew. The Tanach (Hebrew Bible, Old Testament) speaks of prophets that existed outside the community of Israel.

Jews believe that God chose the Jewish people to be in a unique covenant with God; the description of this covenant is the Torah itself. Contrary to popular belief, Jewish people never simply say that "God chose the Jews." This claim exists nowhere in the Tanach (the Jewish Bible) or the Siddur (the Jewish prayerbook). Such a claim would imply that God loves only the Jewish people, that only Jews can be close to God, and that only Jews can have a heaavenly reward (if one exists at all.) The actual claim made is that the Jews were chosen for a specific mission; to be a light unto the nations, and to have a covenant with God as described in the Torah.

Modern (post-enlightenment era) Jewish views

Rabbi Lord Immanuel Jakobovits, former Chief Rabbi of the United Synagogue of Great Britain, describes the mainstream Jewish view on this issue: "Yes, I do believe that the Chosen people concept as affirmed by Judaism in its holy writ, its prayers, and its milennial tradition. In fact, I believe that every people - and indeed, in a more limited way, every individual - is "chosen" or destined for some distinct purpose in advancing the designs of Providence. Only, some fulfill their mission and others do not. Maybe the Greeks were chosen for their unique contributions to art and philosophy, the Romans for their pioneering services in law and government, the British for bringing parlimentary rule into the world, and the Americans for piloting democracy in a pluralistic society. The Jews were chosen by God to be 'peculiar unto Me' as the pioneers of religion and morality; that was and is their national purpose."

Recently, over fifty rabbis from the non-Orthodox branches of Judaism signed a document called Dabru Emet ("Speak the Truth") that has since been used in Jewish education programs across the U.S. Some Modern Orthodox rabbis have made statements in agreement with this document as well, but have not signed. This is because Orthodox Judaism is more strict than the other denominations in regards to the Jewish religious prohibition against inter-religion theological dialogue. (In the past, (many? all?) such dialogues were forced, and (always?) had as their sole motive the conversion of Jews to other faiths.) While affirming that there are substantial theological differences between these two religions, the purpose of Dabru Emet is to point out the common ground between these two religions. It is not an official document of any of the Jewish denominations per se, but it is representative of what many religious Jews feel.

Christian views

Classical Christian views

Christianity teaches that on their own, it is impossible for any person to have a relationship with God, and that the rsult of a lack of such a relationship is damnation. To avoid such a fate, Christianity teaches that Jesus Christ was God made flesh in a literal manner, and that by accepting various beliefs about Jesus and God, a person could then have a meaningul relationship with God and avoid damnation, and earn eternal life in Heaven. All non-Christians, especially Jews, are specifically pointed to as destined for damnation; they complain that such teachings may be considered hateful or anti-Semitic. Christians respon by teaching that it is not they who teach these things or passing judgement, it is God Himself who passes final judgment. Christians teach that the consequence of self-separation from the triune God, who they view as the ultimate source of all life, is eternal death. In Christianity, all humanity shares a common fallen nature and a common predicament. Christians sometimes view their faith as a form of egalitarianism, because it teaches that all humanity potentially has equal access to salvation: a person simply has to renounce their faith and sincerely adopt Christianity.

Christians have traditionaly argued that religious pluralism is an invalid or self-contradictory concept. Maximal forms of religious pluralism claim that all religions are equally true, or that one religion can be true for some and another for others. This Christians hold to be logically impossible. (Most Jews and Muslims similarly reject this maximal form of pluralism.) Christianity insists it is the fullest and most complete revelation of God to Man, that God exists as a Trinity, and that the person of Jesus Christ is not just the best but the only way to encounter God the Father and God the Holy Spirit. If Christianity is true, than Judaism, Hinduism, Islam, and so forth cannot be equally true, although they may contain lesser revelations of God that are true. So the pluralist must either distort Christianity to make it pluralistic, or reject it and acknowledge that one cannot be a complete pluralist.

One image of the Church that was often used by the Church fathers was that of a hospital. In this analogy the doctor does not always care for a patient in the way the patient would like, but in the way best suited to bring about healing to the patient. (Entry into the hospital should of course be voluntary!) Doing what you ask would be somewhat akin to the false "pillow prophets" of the Tanach who prophesied to the king what he wanted to hear, predictions of victory, rather than God's words of certain defeat that could only be avoided through thorough repentance. Thus, Christianity must preach damnation to all outside the Church, in order to help people realize that through conversion to Christianity one will achieve salvation.

Modern (post-enlightenment era) Christian views

Many modern day Christians, including many Catholics and some liberal Protestants, have developed a view of the New Testament as an extended covenant; They believe that Jews are still in a valid relationship with God, and that Jews can avoid damnation and earn a heavenly reward. For these Christians, the New Testament extended God's original covenant to cover non-Jews.

A large Protestant Christian group, the Alliance of Baptists, has broken with traditional Christian theology vis-a-vis the Jewish people. In March 1995 they issued "A Baptist Statement on Jewish-Christian Relations". This document stated that the Holocaust could only have come about because of "centuries of Christian teaching and church-sanctioned action directed against the Jews simply because they were Jews. As Baptist Christians we are the inheritors of and, in our turn, have been the transmitters of a theology which lays the blame for the death of Jesus at the feet of the Jews...a theology which has valued conversion over dialogue, invective over understanding, and prejudice over knowledge...". They then confessed their sins of "of complicity...of silence...of indifference and inaction to the horrors of the Holocaust." Finally, they issues a series of reccomended actions that they asked all Christians to join them in, namely:

• "Affirming the teaching of the Christian Scriptures that God has not rejected the community of Israel, God's covenant people (Romans 11:1-2), since 'the gifts and calling of God are irrevocable' (Romans 11:29);

• Renouncing interpretations of Scripture which foster religious stereotyping and prejudice against the Jewish people and their faith;

• Seeking genuine dialogue with the broader Jewish community, a dialogue built on mutual respect and the integrity of each other's faith;

• Lifting our voices quickly and boldly against all expressions of anti-Semitism;

• Educating ourselves and others on the history of Jewish-Christian relations from the first century to the present, so as to understand our present by learning from our past."

The United Church of Canada issued a statement in May 1998 entitled "Bearing Faithful Witness: United Church-Jewish Relations Today." This position paper goes further than most other liberal Christians groups, and calls upon Christians to:

• Stop trying to convert Jews to Christianity; Reject Biblical interpretations which negatively stereotype Jews, as this leads to anti-Semitism; Reject the idea that Christianity is superior to, or a replacement for, Judaism; recognize that anti-Semitism is an element of historic Christianity, but not an inherent part of it - therefore one can remove it from Christianity and still remain faithful to Christianity.

Many smaller Christian groups in the US and Canada have come into being over the last 40 years, such as "Christians for Israel". Their website says that they exist in order to "expand Christian-Jewish dialogue in the broadest sense in order to improve the relationship between Christians and Jews, but also between Church and Synagogue, emphasizing Christian repentance, the purging of anti-Jewish attitudes and the false 'Replacement' theology rampant throughout Christian teachings."

A number of large Christian groups, including the Catholic Church and several large Protestant churches, have publicly declared that they will no longer proselyatize Jews.

Note that most Christians, including most Orthodox Christians and most conservative Protestants, reject the idea of the New Testament as an extended covenant, and retain the traditional, classical Christian view as described above.

Muslim views

Classical Muslim views

Modern (post-enlightenment era) Muslim views

Intra-religious pluralism (between different denominations within the same religion)

Jewish views

Classical Jewish views

Modern (post-enlightenment era) Jewish views

Christian views

Classical Christian views

Modern (post-enlightenment era) Christian views

Muslim views

Classical Muslim views

Modern (post-enlightenment era) Muslim views

External links:

• The imperative of religious pluralism: A Conservative Jewish view

• Tolerance and Pluralism: A Comparative Study Mission In Israel

• Dabru Emet

• Christians for Israel

• Relations between Christians and Jews

/Talk