The Pope and
religious diversity
The document
jointly signed earlier this month by the Grand Imam of al-Azhar, Ahmed
el-Tayeb, and Pope Francis has caused disquiet in some quarters. “The pluralism
and the diversity of religions, colour, sex, race and language are willed by
God in his wisdom through which he created human beings,” it declares.
Some Catholic commentators were offended by this use of “pluralism” and claimed that the idea that God “willed” the diversity of religions was contrary to Catholic teaching.
On his flight home from Abu Dhabi, Pope Francis told reporters: “I want to restate this clearly. From the Catholic point of view, the document does not deviate one millimetre from the Second Vatican Council.”
He is dead right. Accepting that the diversity of religions is willed by God conforms to the council’s teaching found not only in the Declaration on the Relation of the Church to non-Christian religions (Nostra Aetate), but also in other documents (notably, but not exclusively, in Lumen Gentium, Ad Gentes, and Gaudium et Spes). And accepting religious diversity as willed by God also corresponds to the teaching of Pope St John Paul II, as well as authoritative Catholic theologians.
Some Catholic commentators were offended by this use of “pluralism” and claimed that the idea that God “willed” the diversity of religions was contrary to Catholic teaching.
On his flight home from Abu Dhabi, Pope Francis told reporters: “I want to restate this clearly. From the Catholic point of view, the document does not deviate one millimetre from the Second Vatican Council.”
He is dead right. Accepting that the diversity of religions is willed by God conforms to the council’s teaching found not only in the Declaration on the Relation of the Church to non-Christian religions (Nostra Aetate), but also in other documents (notably, but not exclusively, in Lumen Gentium, Ad Gentes, and Gaudium et Spes). And accepting religious diversity as willed by God also corresponds to the teaching of Pope St John Paul II, as well as authoritative Catholic theologians.
The Belgian Jesuit
theologian Jacques Dupuis’ book, Toward a Christian Theology of Religious
Pluralism, sparked an animated debate over the status before God of other
faiths when it was published in 1997. Is religious pluralism a situation in the
history of salvation directly willed by God (pluralism de iure) or merely
tolerated by God (pluralism de facto)? Although Dupuis never claimed fellow
Jesuit Karl Rahner’s support, a pluralism de iure was expounded by Rahner, a
leading expert at Vatican II and considered by many to be the greatest
theologian of the twentieth century.
In Nostra Aetate the Fathers of the council declare that there are “things that are true and holy in these [other] religions”. The council goes on to make an extraordinarily positive declaration about other religions: their “ways of acting and living, precepts and doctrines often reflect a ray of the Truth that illumines all human beings’ (my italics). Speaking of what is “true and holy” evokes the two dimensions of God’s self-communication: revelation (truth) and salvation (holiness). By referring to the “Truth that illumines all human beings”, the council recalls the prologue of John’s Gospel (1:9) and the Word of God. If Christ the Word of God is the truth for everyone, he must also be life for everyone (John 1:4), and such life means real holiness.
Nostra Aetate recognises in general what is true and holy in other religions. It spells out the truth and holiness that it finds in Hinduism and Buddhism, and then moves on to comment on what Christians and Muslims share. The council preserves the core belief that God has communicated in Christ the fullness of revelation and salvation. But the availability of this fullness through Christian faith and the Church does not mean that elsewhere there is only emptiness and no gifts of God. The teaching of Nostra Aetate is irreconcilable with any such claim.
In Nostra Aetate the Fathers of the council declare that there are “things that are true and holy in these [other] religions”. The council goes on to make an extraordinarily positive declaration about other religions: their “ways of acting and living, precepts and doctrines often reflect a ray of the Truth that illumines all human beings’ (my italics). Speaking of what is “true and holy” evokes the two dimensions of God’s self-communication: revelation (truth) and salvation (holiness). By referring to the “Truth that illumines all human beings”, the council recalls the prologue of John’s Gospel (1:9) and the Word of God. If Christ the Word of God is the truth for everyone, he must also be life for everyone (John 1:4), and such life means real holiness.
Nostra Aetate recognises in general what is true and holy in other religions. It spells out the truth and holiness that it finds in Hinduism and Buddhism, and then moves on to comment on what Christians and Muslims share. The council preserves the core belief that God has communicated in Christ the fullness of revelation and salvation. But the availability of this fullness through Christian faith and the Church does not mean that elsewhere there is only emptiness and no gifts of God. The teaching of Nostra Aetate is irreconcilable with any such claim.
The Council’s
Decree on the Church’s Missionary Activity (Ad Gentes) refers to “the seeds of
the Word hidden in the religious traditions” of various peoples. These are “the
riches which the bountiful God has distributed to the nations”. The disciples
of Christ should “try to illuminate these riches with the light of the Gospel”.
But, for reasons that are not sinful and remain hidden in the mystery of divine
providence, the Gospel may not reach and be accepted by Hindus, Buddhists,
Muslims, and others. Nevertheless, the God-given seeds of the Word and riches
(“distributed” by God through the religious traditions of peoples) remain
present and effective. These others can be saved in and through their
religions.
The teaching of Vatican II is incompatible with such assertions as: “the followers of other religions cannot be saved through their religions but only despite them”, or “God merely tolerates for a time the existence of other religions, and in no sense directly wills their existence”. God wills the salvation of all. For millions of people that can take place only through their inherited beliefs and practices.
The teaching of Vatican II is incompatible with such assertions as: “the followers of other religions cannot be saved through their religions but only despite them”, or “God merely tolerates for a time the existence of other religions, and in no sense directly wills their existence”. God wills the salvation of all. For millions of people that can take place only through their inherited beliefs and practices.
At the Gregorian
University in Rome where I taught for more than 30 years, a Polish student of
mine, Aleksander Majur, had written as his doctoral thesis, The Teaching of
John Paul II on the Other Religions. John Paul II never issued an encyclical on
the world religions. But he repeatedly spoke and wrote about them; Majur had
abundant material for his 350-page volume. In a 1990 encyclical Redemptoris
Missio (the Mission of the Redeemer), he insisted that, while manifested “in a
special way in the Church and her members”, the Holy Spirit’s “presence and
activity” are “universal”. He added: “The Spirit’s presence and activity affect
not only individuals but also society, history, peoples, cultures and religions
(my italics).”
John Paul II’s teaching reminds me of Rahner. Sadly, some critics never move beyond rejecting the term “anonymous Christians”, which Rahner originally suggested and then dropped as a secondary affair. What mattered far more were his reflections on the supernatural, grace-filled elements to be acknowledged in non-Christian religions. Significantly, Rahner added that for a religion to be “intended by God”, it does not have to be “pure and positively willed by God in all its elements” (my italics). Christianity is certainly intended by God. But is it pure and positively willed by God in all the elements that have shown up in its history?
John Paul II’s teaching reminds me of Rahner. Sadly, some critics never move beyond rejecting the term “anonymous Christians”, which Rahner originally suggested and then dropped as a secondary affair. What mattered far more were his reflections on the supernatural, grace-filled elements to be acknowledged in non-Christian religions. Significantly, Rahner added that for a religion to be “intended by God”, it does not have to be “pure and positively willed by God in all its elements” (my italics). Christianity is certainly intended by God. But is it pure and positively willed by God in all the elements that have shown up in its history?
Before rushing to
judgment on the statement of the Pope and the Grand Imam, critics might reread
some relevant texts from Vatican II and Pope John II. The teaching of John Paul
II includes the remarkable speech he made in Morocco in 1985 to more than
80,000 young Muslims. (“We believe in the same God, the one God, the living
God, the God who created the world and brings his creatures to their perfection
… Christians and Muslims, we have badly understood each other, and sometimes,
in the past, we have opposed and even exhausted each other in polemics and in
wars. I believe that, today, God invites us to change our old practices.”) The
document just signed by Francis and the Grand Imam of al-Azhar also ranks as
momentous teaching, which has come from a Pope visiting the Arabian peninsula
itself, the birthplace of Islam.
The Tablet
No comments:
Post a Comment