Development II: Religious Pluralism and society

Question 1

reasons for development into a multi-cultural society

Answer 1

Migration:
- first eg of migration: months before ww2, jews migrated from EU to Britain
- following ww2, Uk was short of labour and provided incentives for migration to increase labour (e.g. being granted free entry) - this prompted families from the Caribbean
- 1950s-60s: Hindus from the Gujarat region, Sikhs from the Punjab, Muslims from Pakistan and Bangladesh
—> in many locations, people tended to live in the same area as those with a shared culture/religion: eg sparkhill is predominantly Muslim

Question 2

figure for multi -faith society

Answer 2

2021 consensus: 46% Chr, 37% no religion, 6% muslim, 2% Hindu

Question 3

What is interfaith dialogue

Answer 3

process of adherents from different religions coming together to develop a deeper understanding of each others’ beliefs, practises, values and ways of living.

Question 4

Aims of interfaith dialogue

Answer 4

Aim that a mutual understanding will enable diff faiths to exist together, thus eliminating prejudice, racism, persecution…

—> to know and understand those who are ‘other’, difference from oneself
—> to overcome prejudice
—> note that aims are diff depending on your theological position: an exclusivist will look for a diff outcome compared to a pluralist BUT there’s still an overall aim to promote/try to bring about a better society

Question 5

the CofE, Sharing the Gospel of Salvation, recognises 4 levels of IfD, what are they?

Answer 5

1. dialogue of daily life- encounters on doorstep at checkout
2. dialogue of the common good- engagement together in tasks beneficial to community
3. dialogue of mutual understanding- more formalised structures/conversations e.g. Scriptural Reasoning
4. dialogue of spiritual life- encountering each other at prayer and worship

Question 6

issues with IfD

Answer 6

• if the aim is differance, this may undermine the faith of each ppt because it implies everyone’s beliefs are temporary and no one may claim the truth
• IfD can be superficial- people may be unwilling to say where others are wrong or where diff are irreconcilable
• can become too theological or too focused on leaders, and then marginalise ordinary members of faith communities

Question 7

what is Sharing the Gospel of Salvation

Answer 7

the CofE response to Interfaith dialogue
- looks at the issue of mission in modern british society and the question of what one must do to share the Gospel of Christ with those of other faiths

Question 8

Aims of SGS

Answer 8

• encourage Christians to speak boldly about their faith and not be hindered by the past of Christian mission - this is bc Chr in 21st century find the idea of evangelism a cause of anxiety so this shows them how to best interact with those of other faiths
• Chr should engage in IfD to promote social cohesion, and adds that conversion is an important part of dialogue- but conversion should be done in a respectful way
• ifd will only work if motivated by a shared sense for the common good for society as a whole, not personal interest

Question 9

key quotes for SGS:

Answer 9

• “legacy of the Crusades have continued to overshadow Christian-Muslim relations” —> recognises past errors have been made,
• “our motive is always rooted in love for God”
• “evangelism starts in the holiness … of Christian’s, but must then include all manner of communicative actions”

Question 10

-ve eval of SGS

Answer 10

• many would criticise the idea of conversion as insensitive and encouraging of social tensions
• Christianity is still benefitting from that history of forced conversion because it now has lots of countries which arte predominantly Chr e.g. in Africa and South America — therefore if Chr really want to apologise for their history, they should stop trying to convert people completely —> Giles Fraser (English Anglican priest) states himself he would not try to convert Jews to Chr because of past history
• CA: would be wrong to an all missionary activity bc it helps people- e.g the Christmas shoe box aid

Question 11

+ve eval of SGS

Answer 11

• supports Chr doctrine to evangelise, esp as their aim is to “express the overflowing love of God”

Question 12

what is Redemptoris Missio

Answer 12

The catholic response - purpose to revitalise and encourage Christian’s in their mission to non-Chr

Question 13

key points in RM

Answer 13

• talks about how Christ is the universal saviour
• To spread the gospel is to love, and how this can be done without any coercion or undesirable elements
• states that inter-religious dialogue is part of the church’s evangelising mission
• dialogue is possible because all religions provide spiritual riches - but dialogue must be motivated by respect + honesty + and desire to overcome injustice
• “the Church sees no conflict between proclaiming Christ and engaging in interreligious dialogue”
• “For missionary action renews the Church, revitalises faith”
• “To serve man by revealing to him the love of God made manifest in Jesus Christ”

Question 14

how does RM emphasise need for mission?

Answer 14

• The consensus where % of Chr decreased from 59% in 2011 to 46% in 2021

Question 15

Difference between SGS and RM

Answer 15

• RM states evangelism should be carried out by proclaiming Christ as saviour, conversion and baptism, forming local churches
• Catholic Church is more clear that you need to carry the word of Christ

Question 16

ifd and restricted access exclusivism

Answer 16

• they would see it as an opportunity to offer the gospel to others in hope of conversion
• in RAE some are selected for salvation and others are damned- but bc we dont know who the elect are, as long as you are bringing people into contact with the faith, ifd is possible

Question 17

ifd and universal access exclusivism

Answer 17

• would say that Chr need to hear the gospel

Question 18

overview/general for ifd and exclusivism

Answer 18

• Michael Barnes: dialogue is a risky option because it means others with question the teaching of the church
• struggle between treating non-Chr with respect but also believing only Chr can be saved
• Karl Barth (protestant) argues that in ifd christians must enter with humility and openness because humans cannot dictate where God reveals himself

Question 19

ifd and structural inclusivists

Answer 19

• David Ford: ifd works effectively once common ground has ben established- then differences can be discussed with a spirit of collegiality
• David Ford: Believes all 3 religions (chr, isl, jud) are united under the biblical covenant and have much to tell each other — seen in these 2 publications:
  —> ‘dabru emet’: jewish statement on Chr- signed by over 150 rabbis- calls for jews to ‘learn about the efforts of Chr to honour judaism’
  —> ‘a common word between us and you’: from muslim scholars to chr- saying the common is the love of god — this generated much interfaith discussions

Question 20

restricted inclusivism and ifd:

Answer 20

• different to structural inclusivism because its ifd work is more individual based rather than dabru emet
• ri balances finding the common ground whilst respecting differences
• BUT for it to be truly effective, christians must not assume any privileged position on the truth

Question 21

pluriform pluralism and ifd

Answer 21

• Keith Ward: ifd is significant for developing a global faith - an attitude of openness by faiths to understand other traditions — by developing this global faith you are not looking for a common ground but actively enjoying differences and thus this avoids the tendency to treat all religions as being the same

Question 22

universal pluralists and ifd

Answer 22

• they do think all religions are part of one underlying reality, so ifd allows the possibility of establishing world please
• they use ifd to develop and promote a global theology

Question 23

ethical pluralists and ifd

Answer 23

• too abstract
• Paul Knitter: the purpose of ifd is not theological but practical — religions must resolve common problems like combatting extremism and then discuss theology

Question 24

overall/general for pluralism and ifd

Answer 24

• issue is for ifd to work everyone would need support the pluralist model— problematic bc this would mean abandoning their faith + seeking a common world religion —> firmly rejected by all christians

Question 25

what is the scriptural reasoning movement

Answer 25

• where different religions and members of other faiths meet in groups to reason about their respective scriptures
• anyone can participate, but works best when there’s 2+ of each religion to prevent discussions feeling one-sided

Question 26

key features of SRM

Answer 26

• “development of strong bonds across faith communities” - this is reinforced bc anyone can participate
• it is pragmatic: “practised globally…including places affected by religious-related tensions”
• underlines the link between the 3 abrahamic religions so can “share the blessings God has given them”

Question 27

aims of SRM

Answer 27

• aim to reduce prejudice
• has an aim to recognise differences not resolve
• does NOT aim to convert/convince one’s scripture is better
• aim is to look deeply into each others’ faiths and dismantle barriers
• aim is not to arrive at a consensus but increase wisdom and understanding of the common good
• 3 key aims
  —> 1. wisdom: members are committed to a common quest for knowledge and wisdom
  —> 2. collegiality: interpretations are presented and discussed equally in groups
  —> 3. hospitality: texts are read and interpreted without value judgement— must be a spirit of openness and allow for views and opinions to be exchanged

Question 28

methods of SRM:

Answer 28

• those involved do not seek to represent their faith in any way
• lack of ‘official’ scripture + heavy reliance on individuals interp
• “reading scriptures… [that] are inexhaustibly rich… [and] can therefore sustain collegiality among… different faiths”
• open and interactive discussion, where ppts can reflect on possible meanings of the text
• no method involved in trying to solve differences —> shows that a pluralist society could work
• group may have a facilitator whose job it is to propose questions and ensure all members are fully involved
• starting point may be shared problems or theological ideas e.g. purpose of worship
• note: there is no set method

Question 29

+ve of SRM: aim to grow understanding of diff religions, whilst recognising differences instead of attempting to resolve them

Answer 29

• aim to grow an understanding of diff religions, whilst recognising differences instead of attempting to resolve them
  —> a useful tool to maintain some form of respect
  —> anyone can ppt
  —> aim is not to convert/convince of another texts’ authority
  —> underlines the link between the 3 abrahamic religions, allowing them to”Share the blessings God has given them”

Question 30

-ve of SRM: no official interp

Answer 30

• no ‘official’ interpretation
  —> interp all down to individual- lack of authority + can allow for differences to emerge
  —> involves too few people and is not representative of the faith
  —> a person does not need religious education/academic background to ppt SO (although this is more inclusive) are the interpretations reasonable?
  —> too much reliance on trust: Chr + muslim relations shadowed since the crusades - so sacred texts could be used for political agendas

Question 31

-ve of SRM: not realistic

Answer 31

• would the same success (of trying to link the 3 abrhamic religions in SRM) be met if Western religious scripture was compared to Eastern religions like Hinduism / Buddhism —> these religions have different roots and textual traditions/interps

Question 32

+ve of SRM: sense of cooperation and collegiality

Answer 32

• no person is to assume authority, but share their own interp
• meeting point is usually a neutral academic space e.g. universities
• sense of collegiality bc disagreements and debates are welcomed -the aim is to look deeply into each others’ faiths and dismantle barriers

Question 33

-ve of SRM: issue of revitalising Chr

Answer 33

• ppts able to reflect on possible meanings of the texts - presents all religions as equally valid —> invalidates religious truth of Chr, especially bc there are some truths like ‘files ex audito’ and ‘sola christ us’ that are specific to Chr
• religious people inevitably going to conflict on sensitive issues like life after death and what that looks like for each religion
• exclusivist would argue Chr is the only truth so time would be better spent helping other religions realise this —> Adrian Thatcher: SRM “may indicate… the further erosion of Christocentric biblical interpretation”
  —> CA: pluralists arg relativising Chr may be a good thing as it helps clarify there are many equally valid paths to salvation
• THEREFORE: as diff theological positions conflict, this alone shows the difficulty and unrealistic nature of SRM

Question 34

list of evals for SRM

Answer 34

1+ aim to grow understanding of diff religions, whilst recognising differences instead of attempting to resolve them
1- no official interpretation
2+ sense of cooperation and collegiality
2- relativises Chr

3- not realistic