Okay, fellow scholars…let’s get a roundtable discussion going, shall we?
Any interreligious scholar worth their salt must address the dreaded list. You recall the list, don’t you? We can blame (or thank) Alan Race for its modern incarnation, although such lists have gone back to antiquity in practice if not explicitly in form.
• Exclusivist, inclusivist, pluralist (Alan Race, Christians and Religious Pluralism, 1983)
• Pluralist, pluralist, pluralist (John Hick, A Christian Theology of Religions, 1995)
• Replacement, Fulfillment, Mutuality, Acceptance (Paul Knitter, Introducing Theologies of Religion, 2008)
• Exclusivism, Inclusivism, Parallelism, Interpenetration, Pluralism (Raimon Panikkar, Intra-Religious Dialogue, 1999)
• Exoterism, Esoterism (Frithjof Schoun, The Transcendent Unity of Religions, 1984)
• Sheep, Goats (Matthew 25.33)
• Straight path, crooked path (Sūratu al-Fātihah)
(And many, many others)
Generically speaking:
In your opinion, what (if any) place do such lists have at the interreligious table? Do you consider it helpful to know where you stand in relation to the religious other before coming to the interreligious table or is such specificity harmful? Have the academic minds that have gone before us exhausted all the possible forms of “interreligious outlook” or is there ground yet unexplored? Where do you personally stand?
Specifically speaking:
Knowing that there are millions (if not more) of religious and non-religious individuals who comfortably stand in each of the various vantage points (in other words- there are folks who exclusivists, who are pluralists, who are inclusivists, who are esoteric, who think all religions are equally valid, who think all religions are equally wrong, etc.), how can State of Formation properly respond in the future? (We’ve even seen evidence of “list-diversity” already in some of our posts…a hopeful sign of things to come!)
How do we create a table where all are welcome short of our pretending not to be who we really are? After all- sitting at a table full of individuals suppressing their voice isn’t something that sounds appealing- I’d rather (to use a Thanksgiving metaphor) sit at the kids table where we can burp and laugh at will…
Peace, and to those who are traveling- be safe!
This, “How do we create a table where all are welcome short of our pretending not to be who we really are?” made me say, “Hmmmmmm…”
In my work, as I have sat across from people from different countries and religions, I have found myself at times not being true to myself. Sometimes because I am intimidated, or because I don’t want to ruffle feathers, or because I am not understanding what is being said/asked, or because i just want to appease the person I am talking with because, sometimes, that is easier than challenging them. I have since learned that if I am just myself – Karen…tah dah…here I am folks…take me or leave me…then I sit at the table as who and what I am. There are no gimmicks, no games, no hullabaloo. I think that comes with practice though, and allowing grace on all sides, and being honest, and asking questions, and listening, and hearing, and…
I think creating a table where all are welcome must first come from within ourselves. Put aside the insecurities, the truth claims, the “what can I tell them” attitude, and the little voice that says, “You-hoo, you are in a realm that is uncomfortable,” and go with that feeling of being uncomfortable. Embrace it. Embrace the table. Embrace who is at the table. Not easy, but, possible. 🙂
Hold your horses, evnryoee.1. First, the map is not quite inaccurate, in that as far as we can gather, man has always been religious (eg by analysis of burial sites etc ) so the map should not begin with a neutral’ colour as if people had been unspoiled’ as yet by religion.2. Secondly, much of the spread of all faiths, including Islam, was peacefully spread. People often saw something good in the new religion (Buddhism and Christianity in particular) which they wished to adopt for themselves. Western culture and learning came from the rise of Christian monasticism, for example.I am not disputing, of course tensions that naturally arise as the borders (these are of course not consistent with national borders but between growing groups of believers) became more defined.This is, of course, precisely what is happening now with the so-called New Atheism, which is becomming particularly agressive 3. Thirdly, the attempt of both Hitler and Stalin to manipulate believers is (hopefully) not meant to be a proof that their atrocities were motivated by a pious Christianity! (I have already commented on these villains in other posts on this site, so will refrain here).4. Fourthly, to my knowledge it was a Palestinian politician who claimed that Bush had told him to invate Iraq. Regardless, it would surely be an overstatement to argue that Bush was attempting to convert Iraq to Christianity by the invasion which would apparently be the point of linking this with the article about the timeline. Indeed many Christian leaders (including, very prominently, Pope John Paul II) condemned the war.5. Lastly, atheism produced more Christian martyrs (those unwilling to deny their faith for political expediency) in the 20th century than were martyred in the other 19 centuries combined. This is particularly astounding given the very small percentage of atheists until the latter part of the century. Perhaps State Atheism should be added to the map? At least in this case the borders are real and the wars were real wars.
I think that the fear people have is that there may be truth in the Other that makes a real claim on them. That kind of fear can only be dispelled when we have the courage to recognize that all growth, all creative advance is a risk that involves an intensification of some value but, every decision incurs some loss. Meanwhile, when we are so sure of who we are that we do not risk our identities, and cling to some past manifestation of ourselves, some authority– some dogma– that is a kind of security, we must realize that this is nothing but a kind of atrophy, a kind of death. The only life is in the creation of new forms. I hope we in this blog will be an example that proves it is worth the risk!
Paul and Karen-
My apologies for never replying to you both. Life sort of slipped away from me over the Thanksgiving break. Thank you for your thoughts, insights, and comments.
Peace.