Twentieth Century Christian Responses to Religious Pluralism

Difference is Everything

David Pitman

• Publisher: Routledge
• Year: 2016
• ISBN:
  9781317005889
• Edition: 1
• Topic: Teologia e religione
• Subtopic: Religione

Twentieth Century Christian Responses to Religious Pluralism begins with the recognition that the traditional three-fold typology adopted by Christians in responding to other living world religions is no longer adequate and offers a much more sophisticated and developed approach. This is accomplished with particular reference to ten key Twentieth Century theologians, each of whom had significant influence in the field of inter-religious studies, both during their lifetime and beyond. The author rejects the exclusivism and triumphalism of traditional Christian approaches and argues strongly and persuasively that the future for inter-religious relationships lies in what he describes as 'classical pluralism', and in an understanding of the importance of difference for inter-faith dialogue. Presenting an accessible introduction to the contemporary issues and challenges facing all those engaged in the further development of inter-faith relationships, dialogue and partnership between the world religions, Pitman argues that the future of world peace and prosperity depends on the outcome.

Chapter 1 The Exclusivist Response

DOI: 10.4324/9781315549521-2

There are major differences between the world religions, and only the Christian revelation expresses ultimate truth in its declaration that there is salvation in Jesus Christ alone.

In the book of Acts, two incidents are described which indicate that from its earliest days the Christian church struggled with the question of who could belong and who should be excluded. The first of these accounts concerns the visit of the apostle Peter to the home of the gentile centurion Cornelius which resulted in the whole household becoming believers and being baptised (Acts 10:34–5). In that setting Peter declared: ‘I truly understand that God shows no partiality, but that in every nation anyone who hears him and does what is right is acceptable to him’ (Acts 10:43).

In isolation, this statement suggests a very open and inclusive stance on Peter’s part. However, in the total context of the passage, it becomes clear that Peter interpreted God’s attitude to the faithful in the light of the Jesus event, because ‘everyone who believes in him receives forgiveness of sins through his name’ (Acts 10:43). The emphasis in this story is that nationality, culture and language are no barrier to those who hear and believe the gospel of Jesus Christ.

The second occasion concerns a meeting of the apostles and elders in Jerusalem, at which it was determined that gentiles like Cornelius who became Christians could be admitted to membership of the church without the necessity for circumcision in the Jewish tradition (Acts 15:1–35). These were significant events in a church still very much in the process of forging an identity in a largely alien environment. However, they are, at the same time, stories that indicate the prevailing conviction of the early Christian church that salvation was to be found in Christ alone. In this conviction can be found the origins of the exclusivist stance in relation to other religions.

As we shall see, the exclusivist position was not the only response to other religions evident in the life of the church. However, it was a significant one and has been a strongly advocated and clearly discernible stream of thought in the church from then until now. ‘The heritage of Christian exclusiveness runs deep into the New Testament and dominates the tradition from earliest times to the present’ (Braaten 1981, 70).

Davis proposes:

In the doctrine of the supremacy of Jesus Christ there is a tension between universalism and particularity. The higher the position granted to Christ, the more widespread must be his presence and action. The supreme exaltation outlined in Colossians implies a universal active presence throughout creation and in the whole of human history. … Along these lines lies the possibility of a Christian universalism that in all religions would see the work of Christ. On the other hand, the exalted Christ is the same Jesus who died on the cross. … How, then, can men be saved unless they hear of the man Jesus and his saving work and have faith in his name? The historical particularity of Jesus … is the source of Christian exclusiveness. (1970, 40–41)

Exclusivists argue that the New Testament witness in general points strongly to a faith that understands Jesus to be the unique, incarnate Son of God. They contend that the gospel stories are grounded in just such a conviction and that the preaching of the early church takes the incarnation of Christ (in the sense of the total story of his birth, life, death resurrection) as its major point of reference. Braaten makes this emphasis explicit:

We hold certain truths to be solidly based on divine revelation attested by Holy Scripture. We propose four dogmatic propositions to which all Christians ought to subscribe if they are faithful to God’s revelation in Jesus Christ: First, Jesus Christ is the personal event in whom God’s final revelation has already occurred. Second, faith in Jesus as the Christ means real participation in God’s eschatological salvation. Third, the church is the community of believers who must proclaim Jesus of Nazareth as the sole Saviour of humankind until God’s Kingdom arrives in its final glory. Fourth, God’s will is that all shall be saved and that the whole creation, now in a struggle for life, will at last reach its fulfilling future in the reign of God through Jesus Christ our Lord. (1992, 3)

There is a generous resource for exclusivists in those specific texts that seem unequivocally to declare that there is salvation in Christ alone. Amongst those commonly quoted are: ‘Jesus answered him, “I am the way, the truth and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me”’ (John 14:6) and ‘There is salvation in no one else, for there is no other name under heaven given among mortals by which we must be saved’ (Acts 4:12). Down through the centuries, this particular biblical witness has been the foundation for the conclusion that only Christianity can claim to have an exclusive hold on truth and that all other religious truth-claims are fallible and in error. Arthur Glasser is one of those who support this contention.

It is the uniqueness of the truth claims of biblical Christianity that evangelicals regard as non-negotiable. Regardless of how religiously plural their communities and countries become, evangelicals will continue to regard the essence of their faith as the unique revelation of God, equally valid for all peoples. (Glasser and Amaladoss 1989, 2)

Shortly, we will consider in more detail the main themes of the exclusivist response: firstly, a conviction regarding the uniqueness of Christ; secondly, the assertion that Christianity is the one, true religion – a position adopted on the basis of the authority given to scripture and an emphasis on the centrality of faith. Thirdly, the contention that salvation is effected through Christ alone.¹ These themes are not necessarily given the same degree of attention and emphasis by all those who represent the exclusivists, but they do, in general, illustrate the convictions and conclusions of that group.

¹ In regard to this third theme, we will also note the particular stance of the Catholic Church, most clearly enunciated by Pope Boniface in the thirteenth century, which effectively declared that salvation through Christ alone and salvation through the church were synonymous. This interpretation prevailed as official doctrine in the Catholic Church until the Second Vatican Council.

Historical Perspectives

The exclusivist response has found expression in various ways in the life of the Christian churches. We need to consider a number of these before moving on to study the special contribution of certain particular individuals. Firstly, we should consider the attitude of the Roman Catholic Church. Knitter writes: ‘Risking the dangers of generalization, one might describe the attitudes of the Roman Church toward other faiths, from the patristic age to the twentieth century, as teeter-tottering between two fundamental beliefs: God’s universal love and desire to save, and the necessity of the church for salvation’ (1985, 121).

Citing various sources from the first three centuries of the Christian church, Knitter points to evidence in the writings of the Church Fathers which indicate openness to the possibility of genuine revelation and salvation in other traditions. He notes that the Council of Arles in 473 condemned any thought that ‘Christ our Lord and Saviour did not undergo death for the salvation of all peoples’ and declared that Christ ‘does not wish anyone to perish’ (Knitter 1985, 121). There were contrary views, however, as we see in the declaration of Origen, taken up by Cyprian, that ‘outside the church, there is no salvation’. This emphasis was reiterated by Fulgentius: ‘There is no doubt that not only all heathens, but also all Jews and heretics and schismatics who die outside the church will go into that everlasting fire prepared for the devil and his angels’ (cited ibid. 122).

Küng notes that the same strong exclusivist voice is apparent centuries later in the papal bull Unam sanctum of Pope Boniface VIII (1234–1303). ‘We are required by faith to believe and hold that there is one holy catholic and apostolic church: we firmly believe it and unreservedly profess it; outside it there is neither salvation nor remission of sins’ (cited in Küng 1967, 26). At the Council of Florence (1438–45), the declaration of Fulgentius was reiterated and it was further stated: ‘No persons, whatever almsgiving they have practiced, even if they have shed blood for the name of Christ, can be saved, unless they have remained in the bosom and unity of the Catholic Church’ (cited in Knitter 1985, 122–3).

Gradually, however, evidence appeared of attempts to soften this hard exclusivist stance. The Council of Trent (1545–63) affirmed that pagans who lived good moral lives and were true to their conscience received the baptism of ‘implicit desire’ and could, therefore, be saved even though they had not heard of Christ (cited in Knitter 1985, 123). It is this more inclusive attitude that was carried into the twentieth century. Knitter says:

What took place was a development in Roman Catholic theology from an exclusive to an inclusive understanding of the church as the sole channel of grace. To state it differently, Catholic belief moved from holding ‘outside the church, no salvation’, to ‘without the church, no salvation’. (1985, 123)

We will explore this response more fully in the ‘Inclusivist’ section, with particular reference to the Second Vatican Council and the work of Karl Rahner.

Secondly, the exclusivist voice was heard very strongly in the various World Missionary Conferences held during the first half of the twentieth century: Edinburgh (1910), Jerusalem (1928), Tambaram (1938), Whitby (1947), Willingen (1952) and Ghana (1958). These conferences, while ranging over a wide variety of subjects and issues, consistently reaffirmed the absolute and unique revelation of God in Christ and the conviction that salvation is possible through Christ alone. Reports from all the conferences seek to identify and affirm the ‘value’ in the other religions, but understand this essentially as a point of contact for evangelisation or as preparation for receiving the Christian gospel.² The Tambaram Conference, for which Hendrik Kraemer wrote The Christian Message in a Non-Christian World (1938), provides a response typical of these gatherings:

² For a summary of the major themes which emerged at each of the conferences, see Newbigin 1969, 25–35. Regarding the value in other religions as a point of contact for evangelism, see IMC 1939, 44.

The end and aim of our evangelistic work is not achieved until all men everywhere are brought to a knowledge of God in Jesus Christ and to a saving faith in Him. There are many non-Christian religions that claim the allegiance of multitudes. We see and readily recognise that in them are to be found values of deep religious experience, and great moral achievements. Yet we are bold enough to call men out from them to the feet of Christ. We do so because we believe that in Him alone is the full salvation which man needs. (IMC 1939, 43–4)

Twenty years later, at the Ghana Assembly of the International Missionary Council, the language and emphasis remain unchanged. The report declares:

That Christ be proclaimed has been the purpose which has held us together beneath many divergences. For we are convinced of the centrality and the urgency of the continuing missionary task. That urgency has received many different expressions amongst us. … But we are all agreed that this is an hour in which Christians must go out into the world in the name of Christus Victor. (cited in Orchard 1958, 183)

We should note, however, that the language of the ‘Common Call’ emanating from the most recent conference held in Edinburgh, is much softer overall. It calls for ‘authentic dialogue, respectful engagement and humble witness among people of other faiths – and no faith – to the uniqueness of Christ’ (World Missionary Conference 2010).

Thirdly, in the latter part of the twentieth century, exclusivism was clearly affirmed in three successive world gatherings of evangelicals. The first of these was at Frankfurt in March 1970. A statement, entitled the ‘Frankfurt Declaration’, was formulated by Peter Beyerhaus and adopted by those present. In regard to other religions it contends that inasmuch as ‘salvation is due to the sacrificial crucifixion of Jesus Christ, which occurred once and for all for all mankind’, and inasmuch as this salvation can be gained ‘only through participation in faith. we therefore reject the false teaching that the non-Christian religions and world-views are also ways of salvation similar to belief in Christ’ (Theological Convention of Confessing Fellowships 1970). The ‘Frankfurt Declaration’ contains a further strong statement urging all Christians to accept their obligation of taking the gospel to the ‘non-Christians’ of the world. There is the clear inference that those who do not hear and believe the gospel are eternally condemned and lost (Knitter 1985, 79).

An International Congress on World Evangelisation was convened at Lausanne, Switzerland, in July 1974, in reaction to what were seen to be liberal trends in the World Council of Churches. The emphases that emerged were consistent with those found in the ‘Frankfurt Declaration’. The possibility of salvation through other religions was specifically rejected. While the congress identified the need for sensitive dialogue with the adherents of other faiths, it was understood that such dialogue was intended primarily as a vehicle for evangelism (Knitter 1985, 79).

A further congress, conducted in Manila in July 1989, produced a statement, the ‘Manila Manifesto’, which incorporated 21 affirmations. Several of these are of particular significance:

5. We affirm that the Jesus of history and the Christ of glory are the same person, and that this Jesus Christ is absolutely unique, for he alone is God incarnate, our sin-bearer, the conqueror of death and the coming judge.

7. We affirm that other religions and ideologies are not alternative paths to God, and that human spirituality, if unredeemed by Christ, leads not to God but to judgement, for Christ is the only way.

21. We affirm that God is calling the whole church to take the whole gospel to the whole world. So we determine to proclaim it faithfully, urgently and sacrificially, until he comes. (LCWE 1989, 110–12)

No doubt this kind of language, and the intention it expresses, is very inspiring to those Christians who believe that they are called by God to participate in the conversion to Christ of every human being on the face of the earth. Developments over the past 20 years, as has been illustrated above, clearly indicate that there is an evangelical resurgence around the world. Paul Knitter comments:

What might appear as extreme in this voice flows from a deep concern for what Evangelicals deem to be the heart of Christianity – especially as that heart beats in the churches of the Reformation. To dismiss Evangelical attitudes as out-dated is simply to ignore the fact that these attitudes do represent a strong, and an increasingly louder, voice within the Christian population. (1985, 75)

It is important that we be aware of both the manner in which this ‘voice’ is expressed and the reactions, intended or not, which it engenders in people of other faiths. Bishop Arne Rudvin presented a paper to a joint Christian–Muslim consultation, putting forward a case for Christian mission to Muslims:

The Faith of the New Testament is that Jesus is Lord, and that everything and everybody rightly belongs to him. Mission, therefore, is to bring all mankind to acknowledge Jesus as Lord, because he owns us all, and has a just claim on us all. Here we have the real motivation for mission. … The real motive in the New Testament for mission is that the crucified and risen Jesus is Lord. This is substantially more than saying that Jesus gives us a saving knowledge, or that he reveals something from God. … The real New Testament motivation for mission is that Jesus Christ himself is God revealed. … Jesus is Lord through whom everything is created and one day everyone shall acknowledge him as Lord. (Rudvin 1976, 377)

For Rudvin, mission is proclamation. The message about Jesus Christ is to be preached to all people everywhere. He therefore excludes from his understanding of mission both diakonia, or service, which he properly argues should be exercised without discrimination or expectation...