pluralism and society

Question 1

scriptural reasoning movement

Answer 1

Peter Ochs (Jewish theologian)

claimed benefits are promoting learning, understanding and friendship across faith divides, exploring differences within a safe context which humanises those who are different

• enables open-minded dialogue only by suppressing expression of exclusivist faith -
• reading different scriptures as if they are all equal gives the impression that they are all equally true

specific activity with a specific goal - wants to enable mutual understanding across faith divides
BUT - cannot really be full inter-faith dialogue while excluding one of the most important (for conservatives) elements of faith

Question 2

d’costa

Answer 2

D’Costa - points to Ford’s analogy for scriptural reasoning as a “tent” in which different faiths come together
participants are required to suspend or repress a key element of their faith
result is dialogue, but not genuinely inter-faith dialogue. Faith is relativised.

Question 3

secular liberal pressure

Answer 3

Ratzinger claimed that secular liberal culture had begun to view exclusivist belief in Jesus as a threat to tolerance and freedom

Eddy - secular approach is that Christians are socially pressured towards pluralism

Eddy’s comments are part of what led to the Church of England’s document ‘Sharing the gospel of salvation’.

Hitchens - relativistic social pressure on traditional Christians is justified because exclusivist attitudes often cause social problems
Atheists also have the right to try and convert people to atheism.

their view on life is simply their opinion and if they try and convert others, including through inter-faith dialogue, then, in a free society they had better be ready for others to voice their counter-opinion against them.

Question 4

Pope John Paul II’s ‘Redemptoris Missio’

Answer 4

encyclical of Pope John Paul II published in 1990

Missionary activity is vital and must be continued as it is the “primary service” the Church can give to individual people and humanity as a whole.

Some go as far as arguing that trying to convert someone actually fails to respect their freedom of conscience and religion.

JP2 rejects these views. He argues that religious freedom includes the freedom to try and convert others, so long as it is done respectfully and without coercion

Progressive liberals would respond: given the history of Christianity spreading itself through violence, arguably the only way they can really apologise and make up for that is by never attempting to convert anyone again