Respect for Religious Diversity: Christian

Respect for Religious Diversity: Christian

Winkler, Ulrich, Respect for Religious Diversity - Christian Attitudes to
Other Religions (Yogyakarta Lecture), in: Hammer, Stefan/Husein,
Fatimah (Ed.), Religious Pluralism and Religious Freedom. Religions,
Society and the State in Dialogue. Contributions to the AustrianIndonesian Dialogue, Yogyakarta/Vienna 2013, 132-161.
Respect for Religious Diversity:
Christian Attitudes to Other Religions
Ulrich Winkler
I am glad for the contacts and all the pleasant conversations
we have been able to have over the past few days of this
conference, since it is often in the first stages of getting to know
o~e another that the foundation of sustainable relationships is
lald. No matter how small the beginning, such a small seed can
grow into a monumental tree. I am especially pleased that six
students from Indonesia took part in the 2nd Vienna International
Christian-Islamic Summer University that took place last summer at
the mon~stery of Altenburg. lt is a wonderful feeling to come
to a fore1gn country where one already has some dear friends.
1. lntroduction and Short Biography
I couldn't begin this lecture without a short introduction
and a brief glimpse into my biography. This is not because I
think so much of myself or am so important. Rather, with
this I want to offer a starting point for communication, since a
lecture can also be a form of dialogue, albeit in limited form.
This morning's schedule also allows us time for discussion
afterwards. If you take part in this discussion, I would like to ask
you to say a sentence or two about yourself or your biography.
Ulrich Winkler
I hope that this first step toward a more unusual topic will
help bridge the thousands of kilometres and the cultural gaps
between us. But perhaps it is this common ground, our common
humanity, which helps build a bridge for enriching encounters
despite our differences and mutualiy foreign cultures. The
bewildering variety of cultural and religious traditions has made
us very uncertain: do our religions have a common essence? 1
But what we do know for certain is that we share a common
humanity, no matter how different our cultures may be. So I
would like to make a start and begin by telling you about myself.
I grew up in a very rural area. My parents owned a smali
farm, and the animals on the farm were important friends in
my childhood. My parents, now over 80 years old, are both
still alive. I just visited them recently, during the last vacation
with my children. My parents are simple, religious Christians Catholics, to be precise.
I attended a parochial grammar school. Up to that point,
I had lived in a very homogenous, Catholic environment that
Historically, the essentialism of religion has two roots: Edward Burnett Tylor's (18321917) anthropological definition "belief in spiritual beings" (Primitive Culture, 1871)
and James G. Frazer (1854-1941) (The Golden Bough. A Study in Magie and Religion,
London 1890 /Der goldene Zweig, Leipzig 1928) on the one hand, and all the different
approaches to a phenomenology of religion, on the other hand: Leeuw, Gerardus van
der, Religion in Essence and Manifestation. A Study in Phenomenology, an Application of Philosophical Phenomenology to Religion, London 1938 [Phänomenologie der
Religion, Tübingen 1933], including: Rudolf Otto's mysterium tremendum et fascinans
and ?\1ircea Eliade's experience of the sacred (Traite d'histoire des religions, Paris 1949).
- See chapter 3 in McCutcheon, Russell T., Studying Religion. An Introduction, London/
Oak:ville 2007; Figl, Johann, Einleitung. Religionswissenschaft - Historische Aspekte,
heutiges Fachverständnis und Religionsbegriff, in: ibid. (ed.), Handbuch Religionswissenschaft. Religionen und ihre zentralen Themen, Innsbruck/Wien/ Göttingen 2003, 1S80. - Critique on essentialism of religion, see: Braun, Willi/McCutcheon, Russell T. (ed.),
Guide to the Study of Religion, London u.a. 2000; Handbuch religionswissenschaftlicher
Grundbegriffe 1-5, eds. Hubert Cancik, Burkhard Gladigow, Matthias Laubseher, with
the cooperation of Günter Kehrer und Hans G. ICippenberg, Stuttgart/Berlin/Köln
1988-2001; McCutcheon, Russe!, The Imperial Dynamic in the Study of Religion. Neocolonial Practices in an American Discipline, in: Richard King (Hg.) Postcolonial America, Chicago 2000, 275-302; Nehring, Andreas, Religion und Kultur. Zur Beschreibung
einer Differenz, in: ibid./Valentin, Joachim (ed.), Religious Turns - Turning Religions.
Veränderte kulturelle Diskurse - neue religiöse Wissensformen (ReligionsKulturen 1),
Stuttgart 2008, 11-31.
132
133
Respect for Religious Diversity
is very typical for Austria. Austria, a very small country with
a population of 8 million, has a Catholic majority. Protestants
constitute a small minority. This is somewhat different in the
German-speaking regions as a whole, which include about 100
million people. In those regions, taken as a whole, the number
of Catholics and Protestants are about even.
Although many immigrants came to Austria and Germany
as migrant workers up until the 1970s, the public failed to
recognize them with their own culture and religion in our
society. This topic has received more political attention in our
countries in the past few years. In the meantime almost 20 % of
our population have immigrant backgrounds. Muslims make up
about 4-5 % of the population, amounting to around 400,000
people in Austria and 3.2 million in Germany.
Soon after I started my theological studies, I studied
for a year in Jerusalem, where the co-existence of the three
monotheistic religions Judaism, Christianity, and Islam made a
great impression on me. Since I have always been very interested
in political correlations as weil as theology, it was clear to me
long before the public debates on religiously motivated terrorism
began that the fascination exerted by religions also holds a
great ambivalence. Religions can produce saints who selflessly
stand up for justice, humanity, and love among human beings.
But they can also suppress reason and give in to a fanaticism
that spreads blind zealousness, violence, and suffering among
human beings. 2
People and how they live their faith interested me even
more than the teachings of the religions themselves. I made a
2
134
See, for instance, Juergensmeyer, Mark, Terror in the Mind of God. The Global Rise
of Religious Violence (Comparative Studies in Religion & Society 13), Berkeley 2000;
Juergensmeyer'. Mark, Global Rebellion. Religious Challenges to the Secular State, from
Chnstlan Militias to Al Qaeda (Comparative Studies in Religion & Society), Berkeley
2008; Kitts, Margo/Juergensmeyer, Mark (Ed.), Princeton Readings in Religion and Violence, Princeton 2011;
Ulrich Winkler
great many Christian and Muslim friends, especially among the
Palestinians, who had very different ways of living their faith
and their culture.
Today I teach Dogmatics in the Theological Department
at the University of Salzburg. In addition, I have devoted many
years of work to founding the "Center for Intercultural Theology
and the Study of Religions" at our university. 3 The focus of our
work is the topic of plurality: Christianity and the multiplicity
of religious traditions around the globe.
When I was still a student, there was not a single lecture
or seminar on other religions required in my Catholic Theology
degree course programme (this was also the case in Germany).
I was determined to get this changed. Ever since our centre was
founded nobody can study theology in Salzburg without taking
courses in Judaism, Islam, Hinduism, Buddhism, Chinese
religions, African religions, etc. Our centre's curriculum is not
optional but is required for every student studying Catholic
theology. Our subjects are as important as the Bible or the
dogmatic tradition of the Church. Each theologian must be able
to account for the relationship between his or her own faith and
other religions and be familiar with the esteem in which the
Catholic Church holds other religions. There are no longer any
priests or teachers who haven't studied this. And it is this very
theology of religions that I would like to speak about today.
But before I do so, I would like to teil you another detail
about my life. My wife is also a Christian. But she's not Catholic;
she's Lutheran. Like me, she's a theologian, but she's also a
pastor. You can imagine that not only did we have to discuss
many controversial theological topics, which have been issues
of conflict between our churches over the last 500 years. We
also had to find a way to live our faiths with all their differences,
3
See Winkler, Ulrich, Zentrum Theologie Interkulturell und Studium der Religionen an
der Universität Salzburg- theologische Konzeption, in: SaThZ 11 (2007) 58-73.
135
_ _ _ _ _ _••„.„,.„„,,_••
~„„~~'"'~"''
~„„.„,.,„_,„„,
''"''""'"
1
Respect for Religious Diversity
Ulrich Winkler
1
whic~ forms to choose for our spirituality and, not least of all,
whicH church we would raise our children in.
1
Nthough the differences between the Catholic and
appear small when viewed from the outside,
theywere, in any case, large enough that Protestant and Catholic
armid fought each other 400 years ago, and a true genocide
took Jblace in Europe, with almost half of the population in
Germ~ny killed. Despite the manifold reconciliations 4 between
the chµrches, we still carry the burden of this history in ourselves
in a dqep and hidden way.
Prote~tant churches
made the other's church a second home to each of us. Learning
to understand the other does not mean just knowing something
about him or her but living with him or her to a certain degree in his
or her house of faith as a guest. An objective description of the
other's beliefs is not sufficient for understanding: understanding
demands seeing the other as a believer, taking his or her competence as a participant seriously and also sharing experiences in the
other's faith as much as possible.
1
Because of this, it was important to us to proceed especially <±arefully and responsibly while searching for a very personal path for dealing with our different confessions. It became
increas,ingly clear to us that mutual understanding does not just
mean ~stening but also entering the other's house of faith and
living there. In so doing, our respective churches became second
homesl for each of us. 5 Learning to understand the other does
not jus~ mean knowing something about the other but living at least
partly ip. the other's house of faith as a guest. Both of us visited
the wohhip services of the other's church many times and that
1
4
5
136
See, fbr instance, the comprehensive studies „Lehrverurteilungen kirchentrennend": Lehmann\ Karl/Pannenberg, Wolfhart (ed.), Rechtfertigung, Sakramente und Amt im Zeitalter
der Reformation und heute (Dialog der Kirchen. Veröffentlichungen des Ökumenischen
Arbeitskreises Evangelischer und Katholischer Theologen 4. Lehrverurteilungen - kirchentrenn~nd? 1), Freiburg/Göttingen 1986, 3rd ed.,1988; Lehmann, Karl (ed.), Materialien zu
den qfaverurteil=.gen und zur Theologie der Rechtfertigung (Dialog der Kirchen. Veröffentli<jliungen des Okumenischen Arbeitskreises Evangelischer und Katholischer Theologen 5.]Lehrverurteilungen - kirchentrennend? 2), Freiburg/Göttingen 1989 / Justification
by faith : do the sixte:n~-century condemnations still apply? New York 1997; Pannenberg,
Wolfhtirt (ed.), Matenalien zur Lehre von den Sakramenten und vom kirchlichen Amt (Dialog def Kirchen. Veröffentlichungen des Ökumenischen Arbeitskreises Evangelischer und
KathopscherTheologen 6. Lehrverurteilungen - kirchentrennend? 3), Freiburg/Göttingen
1990; :Pannenberg, Wolfhart/Schneider, Theodor (ed.), Antworten auf kirchliche Stellungrn\hmen (Dialog der Kirchen. Veröffentlichungen des Ökumenischen Arbeitskreises
Evangelischer und Katholischer Theologen 8. Lehrverurteilungen - kirchentrennend? 4),
Freibuirg/ Göttingen 1994.
See, f4r instance, Norbert Hintersteiner's stuclies - accorcling to Alasdair C. Maclntyre
- on the development of a „second first language: Hintersteiner, Norbert, Traditionen
überschreiten. Angloamerikanische Beiträge zur interkulturellen Traclitionshermeneutik,
Viennlf 2001.
Of course, my own personal experiences cannot be simply applied to the differences between religions. But these experiences have shaped me deeply with respect to how I approach
the topic of other religions as a theologian. In addition to all
the knowledge that we must acquire, which understanding cannot do without, understanding one another is a much broader
activity in which I want to take the participants' perspective
and competence seriously: on the one hand, the participants of
other religious traditions and their faith and, on the other, my
own perspective as a participant and my own faith.
Two projects that I have been working on for the last few
years have emerged from this. One is on the theological level:
there I am trying to develop a comparative theology. 6 Theology
can no longer be practised in the isolation of one's own church
and religion; rather, it is becoming more and more important
to listen to the answers of other religions when explaining our
traditional theological questions. This will bring about major
adjustments in one's own theology that must be accompanied
with a great sense of responsibility.
6
See Winkler, Ulrich, What is Comparative Theology?, in: Ch:etham, David/Winkl~r,
Ulrich/Leirvik, Oddbj0rn/Gruber, Judith (ed.), Interreligious Hermen_euncs in
Pluralistic Europe. Between Texts and Pe~p~e. (Curr~nts of Encounter. Studies on the
Contact Between Christianity and other Religions, Beliefs, ar_id Cultures 40), Amsterdam/
New York 2011, 231-264. - Clooney, Francis X., Comparatlve Theology. Deep Learning
Across Religious Borders, Chichester 2010.
137
Ulrich Winkler
Respect for Religious Diversity
The other project is directing a voluntary study programme
of "Spiritual Theo!ogy in Interreligious Process and Encounter''i. It is a
three-year programme that is taught in both Austria and Switzerland. Because it is a very successful programme, we are planning more courses for the next few years. In this programme
we study theological, philosophical, sociological, and psychological fundamentals of spirituality we become acquainted
with sources of spirituality in the history of Christianity, and
we study in particular the spirituality of four other religions:
Judaism, Islam, Hinduism and Buddhism. This programme is
important to me because I am convinced that theology is not
just an academic field for reflecting on doctrine and dogma. It is
also connected to the practice of faith. A practice of faith that
encounters followers of other religions will not remain static
and unchanged. I do not, however, wish for one's own faith to
be levelled, threatened, or dissolved in this process but that it
be deepened in the encounter with others. This process must
be accounted for. How can I manage it so that I no longer
encounter other religious traditions with the hermeneutics of
suspicion but with an assumption of truth (in other religions)?
mitted to one's own standpoint and the truth of one's
own faith. 8
2) The second task is connected to the first: theology of
religions asks about one's self-conception on the basis of
the relationship to other religions. 9
3) Third, theology of religions provides justification for a
respectful spiritual attitude towards other religions that is
open to learning from them. 10
2.2. Problems and Questions
I will explain these definitions because there are numerous
problems and questions connected with them.
What does it mean to
theologically'?
2.2.1. Theology of Religions can mean two things,
grammatically speaking
1) It could be the theology that religions have. We would
then be concerned with the theology of Judaism, of
Islam, of Buddhism, etc.
This brings us to straight to the topic of this lecture:
How does Christian theology deal with religious pluralism? Is
theology even capable of this? This is the question treated by
the theology of religions.
2. Theology of Religions
2.1. First of all, 1will begin with a definition
1) The first task of theology of religions is to determine
theologically the relationship of Christianity to other
religions.
The adverb "theologically" means that the theology of
religions is a theological enterprise in which one is com7
138
See www.uni-salzburg.at/ ztkr-ulg.
'determine a relationship
2) It could also mean a theology about other religions. It is
this second meaning that we have in mind with theology
of religions. Christian theology11 deals with other religions
and asks what its relationship to other religions is.
8
See Dupuis, Jacques, Toward a Christian Theology of Religious Pluralism, 6"' edition,
New York ZOOS [1997].
.
.
9 „Also in question here is how Christians will come to comprehend and apprec1ate their
own religion and their own personal self-identity in new ways as a consequence of
their encounter with their non-Christian neighbours." Gorski, Eugene F., Theology of
Religions. A Sourcebook for Interreligious Study, New York/Nahwah 2008, vi.
10 This is a third task of mine in addition to the two very common and highly accepted
ones.
11 The theology of religions is a task of Christian theology. "Of religions" is und_erstood
as genitive of the object (genitivus obiectivus), a Chrrntian theology about religwns, as
distinguished from the genitive of the sub1ect (genzttvus subzectzvus) as the theology that
religions have.
139
Respect for Religious Diversity
Ulrich Winkler
2.2.2. Can Theology Be Fair to other Religions? Or would
Religious Studies be better?
A second decision and a second problem are connected
to this first definition. Is theology even in a position to view
other religions fairly? 12 If theology is always an enterprise that
proceeds from one's own religious standpoint, wouldn't other
religions necessarily be portrayed in a false and distorted way?
Does not every adherent, after all, want his or her own religion
and its theology to appear in the best possible light? This is why
other religions are often portrayed in a disadvantageous and
condescending/ deprecatory way.
This is a major problem. I can speak only for my
own religion and church here: almost the entire history of
Christianity is marked by this depreciation of other religions 13
and the unquestioning partiality for one's own faith.
This is why, in the 19th century, the study of religions
developed as a separate academic field alongside and over
12 A fair representation of other religions in Christian theology is a central concern of
Robert Cummings Neville at Boston University: Neville, Robert Cummings, Behind the
Masks of God. An Essay Toward Comparative Theology, Albany 1991; Idem, On the
Scope ~nd Truth of Theology. Theology as Symbolic Engagement, New York 2006;
Idem, Ritual and Deference. Extending Chinese Philosophy in a Comparative Context,
Albany 2008. - See also Hetzel, Peter G./Yong, Arnos (Ed.), Theology in Global
Context. Essays in Honor of Robert Cummings Neville, New York/London 2004;
Winkler, Ulrich, Grundlegungen komparativer Theologie(n) - Keith Ward und Robert
C. Neville, in: Bernhardt, Reinhold/Stosch, Klaus von (ed.), Komparative Theologie.
Interreligiöse Vergleiche als Weg der Religionstheologie (Beiträge zu einer Theologie der
Religionen 7), Zürich 2009, 69-98.
13 The 17'h Ecumenical Council of Florence (1438-1445) crowns this sad tradition in the
Bull Cantate Domino (Pope Eugene IV): "It firmly believes, professes and preaches that
all those who are outside the Catholic church, not only pagans but also Jews or heretics
and schismatics, cannot share in eternal life and will go into the everlasting fire which was
prepared for the devil and his angels, unless they are joined to the Catholic church before
the end of their Jives; that the unity of the ecclesiastical body is of such importance that
only for those who abide in it do the church's sacraments contribute to salvation and do
fasts, almsgiving and other works of piety and practices of the Christian rnilitia produce
eternal rewards; and that nobody can be saved, no matter how much he has given away
in alms and even if he has shed his blood in the name of Christ, unless he has persevered
in the bosom and the unity of the catholic church." Decrees of the Ecumenical Councils,
Vol. 1, p. 578; Denzinger 714 / DH 1351.
against theology14, which set itself the goal to study religions
in as objective and neutral way as possible. We know now that
there is no such thing as a neutral standpoint. Even the scholar
of religions adopts a certain perspective that has been strongly
influenced by scientific ideals. Thus, many religious scholars
have chosen empirical methods. 15 The study of religions has
14 The pioneer of comparative religion, Friedrich Max Mülle~, .had ~,very. clear notion of
the theologians' perfidious partiality representmg. other relig10ns: .No 1udge, lf he had
before him the worst of crirninals, would treat him as most histonans and theolog1ans
have treated the religion of the world. Every act in the Jives of their founders which
shows that they were but men, is eagerly seized and judged w1thout mercy; . every
doctrine that is not carefully guarded is interpreted m the worst sense that lt will
bear; every act of worship that differs from our own way servmg God lS held up to
ridicule and contempt. And this is not clone by acc1dent'. but with a set purpose, nay,
with something of that artificial sense of duty whICh stlmulates the counsel for the
defence to see nothing but an angel in his own client, and anything but an angd m
the plaintiff on the other side. The result has been - as lt. could not be otherwise a complete rniscarriage of justice, an utter rrusapprehens10n of the real character
and purpose of the ancient religions of mankind; and, as .a necessary consequence, a
failure in discovering the peculiar features which really distingmsh Chnstiaruty. from
all the religions of the world, and secure to its founder his own peculiar place m the
history of the world, far away from Vasishtha, Zoroaster, and Buddha, from Moses. and
Mohammed, from Confucius and Lao-tse. By unduly depreclatlng all other relig1ons,
we have placed our own in a position - which its founder never mtended foot; we have
torn it away from the sacred context of the history of the world; we have lgnored, or
wilfully narrowed the sundry times and divers manners m \Vhich, m tlmes past, God
spake unto the fathers by the prophets; and instead of recogmsing Chnstiaruty. as commg
in the fulness of time, and as the fulfilment of the hopes and [148/149] des1res of the
whole world, we have brought ourselves to look upon its advent as the only broken
link in the unbroken chain which is rightly called the D1vme government of the world.
N ay, 'worse than this: there are people who, from mere ignorance of the anc1ent relig10ns
of mankind, have adopted a doctrine more unchnstian than any that could be found m
the pages of the religious books of antiquity, viz. that all the natlons of the earth, before
the rise of Christianity, were mere outcasts, forsaken and forgotten of their Father. in
heaven, without a knowledge of God, without a hope of salvatlon. If a comparatlve
study of the religions of the world produced but this one r.esult, that lt drov~ this godless
heresy out of every Christian heart, and made us see agam m the whole history of the
world the eternal wisdom and love of God towards all His creatures, lt would have clone
a good work." Müller, Friedrich Max, Introduction to the Science of Religion. Four
Lectures Delivered at the Royal Institution in February and May 1870, London [1873]
New Edition 1882, 148f.
.
.
.
.
15 Especially since the cultural turn in religious studies. See Bonnell, V1ctona E./füernacki,
Richard (ed.), Beyond the Cultural Turn. New Directions in the Study of Soc1ety and
Culture (Studies on the History of Society and Culture 34), Berkeley 1999; BachmannMedick, Doris, Cultural Turns. Neuorientierungen in d.en K~lturw1ssenschaften,
3'd, reworked edition, Reinbek bei Hamburg 2009; Sadz10, Maik, Kulturenwende.
Transkulturelle und transreligiöse Identitäten, München 2010; Lynch, Gordon, Livmg
with Two Cultural Turns. The Case of the Study of Religion, in: Roseneil, Sasha/Frosh,
Stephen (ed.), Social Research after the Cultural Turn, New York 2012, 73-92. - For
140
141
Respect for Re/igious Diversity
great merit for religions. But the question remains: Shouldn't the
perspective of the participant also be taken more into account
for an adequate understanding of religions?
Despite the unpleasant history of theology with other
religions, I pin my hopes on theology.
1. In the first place, theology and the church have
abandoned their earlier path and recognized their faults. 16
Theology has changed.
2. Second, I believe that theology can develop competence
and sensitivity not just for its own faith but also for other
faiths.
Ulrich Wink/er
world religion 17 of Christianity, Judaism, Islam, or Hinduism?
Hinduism would be a good example here: one can easily show
that "Hinduism" 18 is a term scholars of religions invented to
identify the numerous religious cultures on the other side of
the Indus River. Wi!fred Cantwell Smith 19 and - weil known here
in Indonesia20 - Clifford GeertZ} 1 andJZ. Smith22 have essentially
postulated that the term "religion" is an invention from o~tside
that is not necessarily consistent with the self-understanding of
the believers within that religion. lt is impossible to reduce the
diverse traditions of Hinduism to a single concept of religion.
This is precisely what is being attempted with Islam. But
this is clearly a polemic, since Islam is not a uniform religion but
2.2.3. On the Notion of Religion
Furthermore, it must be critically asked if it is at all
possible to determine a relationship to such a complex entity
like another religion. Does it make sense to speak of "the"
a critical discussion in the German-speaking context see: Nehring, Andreas/Valentin,
Joachim (ed.), Religious Turns - Trning Religions. Veränderte kulturelle Diskurse - neue
religiöse Wissensformen (ReligionsKulturen 1), Stuttgart 2008.
16 See the confessions in the Second Vatican Council's Nostra aetate on the Jews and Muslims
in article no. 4, 7 ("Furthermore, in her rejection of every persecution against any man, the
Church, tnindful of the patrin:10ny she shares with the Jews and moved not by political
reasons but by the Gospel's spiritual love, decries hatred, persecutions, displays of antiSemitism, ditected against Jews at any time and by anyone.") and no. 3,2 ("Since in the
course of centuries not a few quarrels and hostilities have arisen between Christians
and Moslems, this sacred synod urges all to forget the past and to work sincerely for
mutual understanding and to preserve as weil as to promote together for the benefit of
all mank:ind social justice and moral welfare, as weil as peace and freedom."). See also
Pope John Paul's II "confessions of sins and ask:ing for forgiveness" on March 12, 2000.
"IV Confession of the Sins Against the People of Israel: Let us pray that, in recalling
the suffermgs endured by the people of Israel throughout history, Christians will
acknowledge the sins committed by not a few of their number against the people
of the Covenant and the blessings, and in this way will purify their hearts. . ..
V Confession of Sins Committed in Action Against Love, Peace, the Rights of Peoples,
and Respect for Cultures and Religions: ... Let us pray that contemplatingJesus, our Lord
and our Peace, Christians will be able to repent of the words and attitudes caused bv
pride, by hatred, by the desire to dotninate others, by enmity towards members of oth;r
religions and towards the weakest groups in society, such as immigrants and itinerants."
http:/ /\VW\V.Sacredheart.edu/pages/12654_pope_john_paul_ii_asks_for_forgiveness_
march_12_2000_.cfm
142
17 See for instance, Auffarth, Christoph, „Weltreligion" als Leitbegriff der
Rehgionswissenschaft im Imperialismus, in: H.eyden, Ulrich van der/Sto·~·cker,
Holger (ed.), Mission und Macht im Wandel politischer. Onentlerungen.. Europaische
:Missionsgesellschaften in politischen Spannun.gsfeldern m Afrika ~nd Asien zwischen
1800 und 1945 (Missionsgeschichtliches Archiv 10), Stuttgart 200:i, 17-36; Fitzgerald,
Timothy, The Ideology of Religions Studies, New York/Oxford 2000; Masuzawa,
Tomoko The Invention of World Religions. Or, How European Uruversalism was
Preserv;d in the Language of Pluralism, .Chicago/London 2005.
.
,
.
18 See K:ing, Richard, Orientalism and Religion. Po.stcolorual Theory, India and The Mystlc
East', London/New York 1999; Sharma, Arvmd, What is Hmdmsm'. m: Idem (ed.),
The studv of Hinduism, Columbia 2003, 1-19; Nehrmg, Andreas, Onemahsmus und
:i'vlission. Die Repräsentation der tamilischen Gesellschaft und Religion durch Leipziger
Missionare 1840-1940, Wiesbaden 2003; Flood, Gavm (ed.), The Blackwell Comparuon to
Hinduism, Oxford/Malden 2005; Malinar, Angelika, Hinduismus (Studrnm Religionen),
Stuttgart 2009.
. .
19 Smith, Wilfred Cantwell, The Meaning and End of Religion, New York 1963. 1
20 The most popular essay on Indonesia / Bali: Geertz, Clifford, Deep play. Notes on
the Balinese Cockfight, in: Daedalus 101/1 (1971) 1-38'. reprmt: Daedalus 134 (2005)
56-86; Geertz, Clifford, Deep play. Beiträge zum balinesischen Hahnenkampf, m:
ibid„ Dichte Beschreibung. Beiträge zum Verstehen kultureller Sy.steme'. Frankfurt
1987 202-260. See also: Gottowik, Volker, Clifford Geertz m der Kntik. Em Versuch,
seine~ Hahnenkampf-Essay „aus der Perspektive der Einheimische.n" zu verstehen, rn:
Anthropos 99 (2004) 207-214. -See also: Geertz, Clifford, The. Religion of Java, Chicago
1960; Idem, Agricultural Involution. The Process of Ecological Change m Indonesia,
Berkeley 1963; Idem, Peddlers and Princes. Social Change and Econon:uc Moderruzatlon
in Two Indonesian Towns, Chicago 1963; Geertz, Hildred/Geertz, Clifford, Kinship rn
Bali, Chicago 1975; Geertz, Clifford, Negara. The Theatre State in Nineteenth-Century
.
.
Bali, Princeton 1980.
21 See Geertz, Clifford, Religion as a cultural system, rn: Banton, Michael (Ed.),
Anthropological Approaches to the Study of Religion, London.1966._ 1966, 1-46 [r~prmt
2004] / Geertz, Clifford, Religion als kulturelles System, rn: ibid„ Dichte Beschreibung.
Beiträge zum Verstehen kultureller Systeme, Frankfurt 1983, 44-95.
.
22 See Smith,Jonathan Z„ Imagining Religion. From Babylon to Jonestown, ChKago 1982.
143
Ulrich Winkler
Respect for Religious Diversity
is made up of the abundance of Arab, African, Indian, Persian,
and, clearly, also Indonesian traditions. Islam herein Indonesia23
itself is already an example of a wonderful diversity, which is in
turn distinguished from other Islamic cultural traditions.
This is why I use the term "religion" only seldom and speak
rather of "religious traditions". The individual participant's
perspective of each follower of a specific period of time in a
specific cultural group can be taken into account better in this
way.
A theology of religions will not be able to assess the
relationship of 2,000 years of Christianity to 4,000 years of
Hinduism · or to 1,300 years of Islam following empirical
methods. A theology of religions can, however, give a theological
justification of a general attitude towards other religions, which
must then be applied to the respective individual questions and
fields of relationship. This is the task of comparative theology,
which I mentioned briefly above.
2.2.4. Determination of the Relationship on the Basis of
Common Ground
A simple philosophical reflection already shows that two
things can be meaningfully compared with each other only
if there is some common point of reference. Philosophical
speculations on a common "essence" of religions have become
problematic today. Does a common religious primal experience
of dependency24 serve as the basis of religions? Do all religions
23
See the important works of Clifford Geertz to the history of religion quoted below.
More recent see: Assyaukanie, Luthfi, Islam and the Secular State in Indonesia (Institute
of Southeast Asian Studies), Singapore 2009; Hadi, Umar u.a. (ed.), Islam in Indonesia.
A to Z Basic Reference (National government publication. Department of Foreign
Affairs of the Republic of Indonesia : / Centte for Dialogue and Cooperation among
Civilisations),Jakarta 2009; Azra, Azyumardi/Dijk, Van Kees/Kaptein,J. G. Nico (ed.),
Varieties of Religions Authority: Changes and Challenges in 20th Century Indonesian
Islam, Institute of Southeast Asian Studies, Singapore 2010.
24 See D.F.E. Schleiermacher's (1768-1834) notion of religion as „Gefühl der schlechthinnigen Abhängigkeit" (Schleiermacher, Friedrich, Der christliche Glaube nach den Grundsätzen der evangelischen Kirche im Zusammenhang dargestellt (1821/22), hg. v. Hermann
adhere to a common transcendent final basis 25 of all reality? Is
the connecting factor common humanity, which I talked about
above? These are a few of the many answers so far.
As a theologian whose ideas are grounded in my own
faith I understand all of humanity to have been created by
a be~evolent God who bestowed an unalienable dignity on
humans, who created the world with good and salvific intent,
who speaks his word to the world so that it can become just
and holy, and who generously gives his spirit to the w~r~d, .to
humanity, and their cultures. 26 I do not assume Chnstiaruty
to be the onlv form that God's self-expression takes but hold
that God als~ speaks and acts in other religions. 27 No single
religion in history has realized God's call faithfully and without
fault, so also today we must critically assess where people and
religions truly let themselves be moved by proper guidance an~
forgiving mercifulness, and where they sin against God, their
fellow human beings, and also against creation.
I will end this discussion on the definition of a theology
of religions with a quote from the Catholic Magisterium. The
International Theological Commission writes in the document
"Christianity and the Religions" [1996], Nr. 102: The "respectful
confrontation with this .„ truth claim of the religions cannot be
a marginal or partial aspect of theology .„ [ but] must play a
Peiter (Kritische Gesamtausgabe I,7 /1-2), Berlin/New York 1980; 2na edition (1830/31),
ed. Rolf Schäfer (Kritische Gesamtausgabe I, 13/1-2), Berlin/New York 2003). -See ai.so
S. Wendel's notion of religiousness as a sense of being owed; religtousness „als Gefühl
der Verdanktheit von einem Unbedingten zu bestimmen, das im Selbstbewusstsem aufkommt". Wendel, Saskia, Die Wurzel der Religionen, in: FZPhTh 53 (2006)_21-38: 31;
Wendel, Saskia, „Sinn und Geschmack fürs Unendliche" (Schleiermacher). Religios1tat als
Existenzial bewussten Lebens, in: Bijdragen 65/ 4 (2004) 442-460.
25 See Heim, Mark, Salvations. Truth and Difference in Religions, Maryknoll 199~.
26 These are the theological stepping stones of the Second Vatican Councils s Nostra
aetate.
f
f hi
(pl li
27 See the discussion by J. Dupuis of the religious pluralism as _"a act_o
st,ory _ ura ~1;;
de facto)" versus "as ... a raison d' erre in its own nght (pluralism de 1ure o~h m prmc1ple )
Dupuis, Jacques, Toward a Christian Theology of Relig10us Pluralism, 6 pnnting New
York 2005 [1997], 11, see also 208.312.386f.
145
144
Respect forl Religious Diversity
Ulrich Winkler
role in the center ef the dai!J work ef theo!ogy .... This respect before
the 'otHerness' of the different religions is at the same time
condition~d lry one's own truth c!aim."
My own Christian faith demands that I recognize the truth
of othe:t religions. That is why the Catholic Church has also
establis4ed the "Pontifical Council for Interreligious Dialogue"
at the v~ry highest level.
3. Mod~ls for a Theology of Religions
3.1. Differentiations
i
For my next point, I would like to present a few important
discussitjns within the theology of religions and provide some
clarificatjons. The models of exclusivism, inclusivism, and
pluralistlf have become the most weil known. First of all, there
is a majqr debate on if these models are sufficient for classifying
positions in the theology of religions. 28 Second, another discussion
is if the !position of inclusivism or pluralism provides the best
view of ione's own faith. I admit that the church leadership is
foilowing this discussion with great concern. 29
i
Te~ms are often used differently and confused in these
discussiops, causing a great many misunderstandings. Because
of this, I:will start off with a very important differentiation.
Th~ terms exclusivism, incluslvism, and pluralism can be
used in two different ways: 1) as epistemological terms or 2) as
terms in llieology of religions.
!
28 See Scrurpdt-Leukel, Perry, Theologie d;r Religionen. Probleme, Optionen, Argumente (Beiträge zur Fundamentaltheologie und Religionsphilosophie 1), Neuried 1997, 6597; Ideml Grundkurs Fundamentaltheologie. Eine Einführung in die Grundfragen des
christlich)!n Glaubens, München 1999, 181-204; Idem, Zur Klassifikation religionstheologischer !Modelle, in: Catholica 47 (1993) 163-183; Gott ohne Grenzen. Eine christliche
und pluralistische Theologie der Religionen, Gütersloh 2005, 62-71.
29 During tl:ie last two decades some proponents of the theology of religion were examined
or accuse~ by the Vatican Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith: 1995 Anthony
de Mello ~J (1931-1987); 1997 Tissa Balasuriya O.M.I. (*1924); 1998 Jacques Dupuis SJ
(1923-2004); 2000 Roger Haight SJ (*1936); 2004 Peter C. Phan (*1946).
In my opinion, most problems arise when the epistemic
and theology of religions decisions are confused.
In theology of religions the terms mean the foilowing:
Exclusivism: there is only one true religion;
Inclusivism: there are many religions that contain truth,
but my religion is superior to all others;
Pluralism: there are many religions of equal value.
One must choose between these positions. I will show
how I represent the pluralist position.
3.2. Epistemological Usage
These positions within the theology of religions must not
be confused with epistemological processes 30, since the latter
are completely different from the theological positions.
1. Anyone who wants to have a rational discussion must
foilow exclusivism regarding the theory of truth. This
theoretical or logical exclusivism requires that I do not
hold the opposite of my assertions to be true as weil.
2. 'Epistemic inc!usivism' is likewise necessary for every
philosophy and worldview, since each consistent
understanding / every theory can only grasp the world
within one's own horizon and from one's own standpoint.
This epistemic inclusivism does not, however, mean that
one must adopt an inclusivist position in the theology
of religions, since viewing the world from one's own
standpoint does not mean in any sense that I claim an
exclusive highest validity for my own religion and that all
others are only of lesser salvific quality.
3. As one can plainly see, pluralism would be nonsense in
the context of epistemology. This is exactly the accusation
30 See also Schmidt-Leukel, Gott ohne Grenzen 64ff.
146
147
Ulrich Winkler
Respect for Religious Diversity
for passing on information as is the case in technology. 31
This concept completely neglects the role of the speaker
and his or her context, on the one hand, and the role of
the participant, the receptor32 , on the other, and, in the
case of theology, of believers, who believe within the
context of their whole life histories. I will come back to
this when explaining pluralism.
made against pluralists - namely, that each statement has
the same validity and thus all religions would be true for
them without any differences. This is a typical confusion
be~een pluralism in the sense of theology of religions
and m that of epistemic pluralism. Pluralists by no means
claim that all religions are true in the same way.
3.3. Classic Models of the Theology of Religions
3. The best-known exponent in the world of a pluralist
theology of religions is John Hick 33 • His most important
assumption is that all religions are in epistemological
solidarity with one another because it is impossible for
humans with their limited knowledge to recognize God in
His infiniteness. God cannot be grasped directly, as He is
in Himself but can only be made accessible through our
experience. Our experience is always an "experience as,"
meaning we use our different cultural contexts to express
this experience of God. Subsequently, Hick explains the
diversity of religious answers to this experience.
: . Exclusivism means that revelation and salvation exist only
m one single religion, specifically mine. All other religions
are lies and sin. Actually, they aren't even religions.
The Catholic Church held this model of exclusivism for
a long time but today emphatically rejects it. Nonetheless
. .
'
lt 1s popular in fundamentalist circles in all religions.
Evangelical movements in particular, which are also very
active in Asia, follow this model.
2. In the model of inclusivism, revelation and salvation
are present in many religions, but they exist in a unique
highest validity in only one religion, which is mine. The
other religions remain deficient.
Hick wants to unify the personal and impersonal religious
In manifold variations a binary notion of sign was effective form Aristotle until
Ferdinand de Saussure. Most linguistic concepts were higher sophisticated tban the
simple aliquid-stat-pro-aliquo-model. They reflected tbe detour from notion to the thing
via imagination. But tbe relation between tbe signified and the signifier remains binarily
related. - See Meier-Oeser, Stephan/Frank, Hartwig, Zeichen, in: Ritter, Joachim (ed.),
Historisches Wörterbuch der Philosophie 12, Basel 2004, 1155-1179; Nöth, Winfried/
Meier-Oeser, Stephan/Hermes, Hans, Semiotik, Semiologie, in: Ritter, Joachim (ed),
Historisches Wörterbuch der Philosophie 9, Basel 1995, 602-610.
32 Charles S. Peirce's (1839 - 1914) pragmatism and semiotic introduced „tbe third", tbe
interpreter, and developed a triadic notion of sign. " Semiosis - he defined as "„an
action, an influence, which is, or involves, a cooperation of three subjects, such as a sign,
its object and its interpretant, this tri-relative influence not being in any way resolvable
into action between pairs". Peirce, Charles Sanders, Pragmatics and Pragmaticism
(Collected papers 5, edited by Charles Hartshorne and Paul Weiss), Cambridge 1960,
484. - See Pape, Helmut, Charles S. Peirce zur Einführung, Hamburg 2004. - Eco,
Umberto, Einführung in die Semiotik [La struttura assente 1968]. German edition by
Jürgen Trabant, Paderborn 9th ed. 2002 [1972]; Eco, Umberto, A Theory of Semiotics,
Bloomington 1976; Idem, Semiotics and the Philosophy of Language, London 1984.
33 See Hick, John, An Interpretation of Religion. Human Responses to tbe Transcendent,
New Haven 1989.
31
The official Catholic doctrine follows this model.
However, decisive advances beyond this were made by
Pope John Paul II in most recent decades before his death.
I call these two models (exclusivism and inclusivism)
"models of competition". They fight a struggle to maintain
relig~ous identity by mutually denying the true and saving
relation to God through a philosophy of exclusion.
I assume that lying behind them is too simple a concept
of language and of the function of signs. Signs are not
just a simple communication between sender and receiver
148
149
Ulrich Winkler
Respect for Religious Diversity
concepts 34 in the ground of all reality by using a common
term; he thus speaks of the REAL.
The quote contains everything that I would like to add to
the pluralistic theology of religions.
In order to apply this impressive model to the different
religions, religions must be freed of their exclusivist
ideas. Thus, Hick makes formidable changes in the case
of Christianity in the area of Christology. He has great
admiration for the historical person of Jesus and praises
his trust in God and his humanity. But he eliminates all
parts of the Christian faith that profess a divine nature
in Jesus alongside his human nature. 35 There are many
objections to Hick for this reason. Similar theological
"disarmaments" must also be required of other religions.
The quote begins: "if you know who you are". Prerequisite
for a theology of religions is the examination of one's own
standpoint. It is not about giving up one's own convictions in
encountering others.
I personally consider it important to develop a bettet model
of a plutalistic theology of religions. I will demonstrate
this in my last section.
4.2. True Knowledge of God despite our Ultimate Finitude
4. A Differential Hermeneutical Model of a Christian and
Pluralist Theology of Religions
I will begin with a quote by Nurcholish Ma4Jid (1939-2005),
who died too soon in 2005 at the age of 66 and was an important
forerunner of Islamic Neo-Modernism in Indonesia:
"If you know who you are, you can understand others
and learn from them. But if you are nobody in particular, or
just anybody at different times, you can neither learn from
others nor teach them." 36
34 See Hick, John, The Real and It's Personae and Impersonae, in: Tessier, Linda (ed.),
Concepts of the Ultimate, London 1989, 143-158.
---35 In order to show the absurdity of the Christological dogma Hick calls the for;;_.;ula of the
Chaldecon's council a quadrature of a circle: „that the historical Jesus of Nazareth was
also God is as devoid of meaning as to say that this circle drawn with a pencil on paper
is also a square", Hick,John,Jesus and the World Religions, in: Idem (Ed.), The Myth of
God Incarnate, London 1977, 178.
36 Simone Gröschl, Islamische Reformdiskurse in Indonesien. Vom Neo-Modernismus zum
"Netzwerk Liberaler Islam", Saarbrücken 2010, 36; Taheri, Amir, A man of light passes
away in Indonesia, 2005, in: Asharq Alawsat http:/ /www.aawsat.com/ english/print.
asp?artid =id 1615 [07 .05 .2009], http://www.freerepublic.com/ focus f-news / 1481048 /
posts [05.01.2012]
150
Therefore, I propose the following changes to John Hick's
plutalist model.
4.1. God, Not the REAL
I do not speak of the REAL, but of God, whom I believe
in andin whom Abraham, Jesus, and Mohammed believed.
Although I do share the epistemological insight that we
cannot captute the unfathomable in out finite language and that
all language about God is marked with the signatute of time,
exactly because it is so I am more optimistic than Hick that
God at times expresses himself truly and in a concretely salvific
way, as when he freed the people of Israel from Egypt, when
he came close to humans through Jesus, and when he spoke
through Mohammed in Arabia. lt is always a concrete message
in a concrete time as an answer to concrete questions.
The Infinite does not fall to earth like a fireball and
destroy everything finite, but expresses itself concretely and
understandably in time in finite reality. lt is out responsibility as
humans to pass on his word in out time in an understandable
way.
Islam especially emphasizes the human ability to reason,
which makes independent thought possible. The human being
is a halifa - God's representative on earth37 • Because of this
37 See Gröschl, Reformdiskurse 52.
151
Respect for Religious Diversity
Ulrich Winkler
the process of igtihdd was developed in the Islamic historv of
law, serving to upd_ate norms in each period. This concep; has
been taken up agam by contemporary Muslim theologians m
Indonesia.
between them, and that should not be explained away. These
spaces between religions are not just a problem, but can also be
understood as loci of theology. I will return to this subject of
differences as loci of theology.
Abdurraham Wahid (1940-2009), also a father of NeoModernism in Indonesia, endeavoured to translate this
c~nt.extu_ality and concreteness of the message of the Koran for
his time lnto the concrete context of the Indonesian present.38
~s Maqjid says, "the Quran doesn't come down to the Prophet
1n a vacuum. So one of the ways to understand the message is
to understand the context." 39
All religions are silent in the face of the unfathomable
mystery of God. It is a silence, a stillness that arises out of awe,
not out of contempt. It points to the greatness of God and
carries within itself the knowledge that we cannot exhaust the
mystery of God with all our talking, thinking, and praying.
. Because of this, I am much more optimistic than Hick.
I beheve that the Infinite really does reveal Himself in finite
concrete time, that we can experience him and that he guides u;
and leads us to justice and love.
4.3. Differences between Religions as God's Praise
Because of this, the belief in one and the same God
even within o~e religion can only be realized in the diversity of
cultures and t1mes. Even more, all religions are not the same. In
fact, real differences remain, despite all the successful dialogues
Mujiburrah~1an,
Ab~urrahman \Xah1d,
38 See
Islam and Politics . in Indonesia. The political thought of
m: Islam and Chnst1an-Muslim Relations 10-3 (1999) 339-352·
Groschl, Reformdiskurse 52. - Wahid Abdurrahman Islam PolitJ.cs d D
'
· l
,. .
,
.
. '
'
,
an
emocracy
m t1e 19:i0s and 1990s, m: Bourchier, David (ed.), Democracv in Indonesia: 1950s
and 1990s, Clayton 1994, 151-155; Idem, Religions Tolerance i~ a Plural Societv in:
I<:.i.ngsb1ury, Darmen/Barton, Greg (ed.), Difference and Tolerance. Human Rights I;~ues
m Soutneast Asia, Geelong 1994, 38-43.
39 S~eed, Abdullah, Ijtihad and innovation in neo-modern.ist Islarnic thought in Indonesia,
m. Islam and ChnstJan-Muslim Relations 8-3 (1997) 279-29' 28r·
G·„ hl
R j)
cli k
~,
:i, see
rase
. e orm s. un:e 56. - Madj.id, N;ircholish, The Issue of Modernization among Musli.J.~;
m Indonesia. From a part!c1pant s Point of View in: Ibrahinl Ahm d (E ') R di
I ]
· s h
. ·
.
'
,
a
a. , ea ngs on
s am 1n out east Asia. Instttute of Southeast Asian Studies, Singapore 1985, 379-387;
Idem, falam1c Roots of Modern Pluralism, in: Studia Islamika 1-1 (1994) r 5„ 77 ·b d Th
Ne
in. f R
. , l . Th
:i
.,i i „
e
ought and Reinvigorating Religions Understanding in·
cess ·/ o enewmg is anuc
Kurzman, Charles (Ed), Libernl Islam. A Sourcebook, New York 1998, 284-289; ibid.:
Islam 1s a Hybrid Rebg10n, Jar!ngan Islam Liberal 2001. http:/ /islamlib.com/ en/ article/
~slam-1s-a-hybnd~rehg10n [05.01.2012]; ibid„ Indonesian Muslims Enter a New Age,
n. Hooker, V1rgrn1~/Sa1kal, Armn (ed.), Islamic Perspectives on the New Jlvfillenn.ium.
Institute of South East As1an Studies, Singapore 2004, 74-88.
Therefore, I assume that the differences between religions
can bring us to this silence or stillness where we literally no
longer know what we should say. Even with this perplexity,
with this dumbness, we can become witnesses to the infinite
God with our differences. This stillness then becomes our
silent prayer before God when we endure these differences in
mutual respect towards one another, when we do not want to
proselytize them away, and when we do not use violence. Our
differences can become a blessing from God. With our silence
we can praise the Almighty.
4.4. Different Proximity to other Religions
Religions are not all the same, and Christianity is not
related to all other religions in the same way. We are connected
to the family of monotheistic religions through a common
history.
Judaism, Jesus' religion is especially close to us. Jesus was
not a Christian but lived as a Jew, remained a Jew his whole
life, and died as a Jew. Jesus never intended to leave Judaism.
His Bible is the Holy Scripture of the Jews, and it is the Holy
Scripture of the Christians. Christians incurred grave guilt by
consideringJews tobe rejected by God for almost two millennia
152
153
Respect for Religious Diversity
Ulrich Winkler
and actively persecuting them or tolerating their persecution. 40
Jews are our brothers 41 and sisters. Theology must learn to
understand this. Also, every theology of religions that does
not often take due note of this close relationship to Jews and
Muslims, must learn from that.
Our next closest relatives are Muslims. Since our sources
of the New Testament came into existence before Mohammed
we cannot extract any message directly from those Scriptures.'
Thus, it is highly significant that the Catholic Church clearly
made a statement on this subject for the first time in the Second
Vatican Council. 42
I quote a short passage by the Council from the Dogmatic
Constitution of the Church Lumen Gentium:
"But the plan of salvation also includes those who
acknowledge the Creator. In the first place amongst these there
are the Mohammedans, who, professing to hold the faith of
Abraham, along with us adore the one and merciful God, who
on the last day will judge mankind." LG 16
40 See. for instance the 4 volumes of Heinz Schreckenberg: Schreckenberg, Heinz, Die
christlichen Adversus-Judaeos-Texte und ihr literarisches und historisches Umfeld [1]. 1.11. Jh. (Europäische Hochschulschriften 23/172), Frankfurt 4. Aufl. 1982 [1999]; Idem,
Die chnstlichen Adversus-Judaeos-Texte (11.-13. Jh.), (Europäische Hochschulschriften
23/335), 2. Aufl., Frankfurt/M. 1991; Idem, Die christlichen Adversus-Judaeos-Texte
und ihr literarisches und historisches Umfeld (13.-20. Jh.) (Europäische Hochschulschriften 23 / 497), Frankfurt/M. 1994; ibid., Die Juden in der Kunst Europas. Ein historischer Bildatlas, Göttingen u.a. 1996.
41 "I am Jpseph Your Brother" (Gen 45,4), these were Pope John's XXIII words greeting
a delegation of Jews prior to the Second Vatican council. Pope John Paul II visiting the
Jewish Synagogue m Rome 1986 addresses the Jews as "the older brothers" too.
42 See the most extensive collection of official documents of the catholic church
encountering Islam: CIBEDO (ed.), Die offiziellen Dokumente der katholischen Kirche
zum Dialog mit dem Islam. Zusammengestellt von Timo Güzelmansur. Mit einer Einleitung von Christian W Troll, Regensburg 2009. - See also Vöcking, Hans (Hg.), Nostra Aetate und die Muslime. Eine Dokumentation, Freiburg/Basel/Wien 2010; Gioia,
Francesco (ed.), Interreligious Dialogue. The Official Teaching of the Catholic Church
from th.e Second Vatican Council to John Paul II (1963-2005), Boston 2006; Secretariat
for Non-Christians, Guidelines for a dialogue between Muslims and Christians, Roma
1969; Waardenburg, Jean Jacques, Muslim-Christian Perceptions of Dialogue Today.
Experiences and Expectations, Leuven 2000.
Christians and Muslims share a common belief in the
one God to whom we pray together, in God the creator and
the merciful judge. Christians and Muslims are the heirs of
the faith of Abraham. Thus Pope Gregory VII greeted the
Emir of Mauretania Al-N asir in the 11 th century as "Brother in
Abraham." 43
The Council's second text is significantly longer and is
found in Article 3 of the Declaration on the Relation of the Church
to Non-Christian Religions. Nostra Aetate:
"The Church regards with esteem also the Moslems. They
adore the one God, living and subsisting in Himself; merciful
and all-powerful, the Creator of heaven and earth, who has
spoken to men; they take pains to submit wholeheartedly to
even His inscrutable decrees, just as Abraham, with whom
the faith of Islam takes pleasure in linking itself, submitted to
God." (NA 3)
The Council places belief in one God at the centre: not
just that He exists somewhere, but that He is God the Almighty
and Merciful Creator, who turns to humans and to whom
humans submit. The Council uses here the term that the word
islam means: submit. The Church holds this faith in high esteem.
This is not a matter of course and it was not always so.
That's why the Council mentions at the conclusion of this
article the past and enmity that must come to an end:
"Since in the course of centuries not a few quarrels and
hostilities have arisen between Christians and Moslems, this
sacred synod urges all to forget the past and to work sincerely
43 See Troll, Christian W, Nostra Aetate. Mehr als konziliare Judenerklärung. Das Verhältnis zum Islam und die vom Konzil angestoßenen Entwicklung der katholischen Lehre
über den Islam und den christlich-islamischen Dialog, in: Henrix, Hans Hermann (ed.),
Nostra Aetate - Ein zukunftsweisender Konzilstext. Die Haltung der Kirche zum Judentum 40 Jahre danach (Aachener Beiträge zu Pastoral- und Bildungsfragen 23), Aachen
2006, 83-109, here 85.
154
155
Respect for Religious Diversity
Ulrich Winkler
for mutual understanding and to preserve as weil as to promote
together for the benefit of all mankind social justice and moral
welfare, as weil as peace and freedom." (NA 3)
Pope John Paul II began the period of Lent in 2000 with
a large confession of sins of the Catholic Church. 44
He spoke of "pride and hatred,'' "the desire to dominate
others," and of "enmity towards members of other religions."
Christians have thus "often denied the Gospel; yielding to a
mentality of power, they have violated the rights of ethnic
groups and peoples, and shown contempt for their cultures and
religious traditions." 45
There is nothing more that can be added to this clarity.
Some conservative circles in the Catholic Church were shocked
about this. But this pope meant it seriously, which is why he is
going down in history as the holy pope of reconciliation with
religions.
4.5. A Single History of Salvation
many different gods and many paths of salvation isolated
from one another. Instead, the One God acts in all of creation
and in the whole history of humankind. It is a single history
of salvation that unfolds in many human answers. Christians
associate God's speaking and healing with Jesus, the Word of
God, and the Holy Spirit. Muslims understand this speaking
through Mohammed, and Jews, in turn, through the Torah.
Other religions have other answers.
This is a Christian theological concept: to conceive of a
unity of salvation history in the plurality of religions. Every
religion with its own theology develops its own concept for
this. Theology of religions is not about everybody sharing the
Christian conceptions of God, Jesus, and the Spirit; instead,
each theology conducts its own theology of religions out of its
epistemological inclusivist position. The next step is the exciting
discussion between these different theologies of religions must
now take place.
These quotes and this entire lecture are too short to
present the theological grounds for a theology of religions, so I
will only discuss one point briefiy.
So theology of religions is not a disguised proselytizing of
others. The Second Vatican Council thus declares a completely
different task awaiting the Church. It is written at the very
beginning of the Council's Nostra Aetate text:
Jews, Christians, and Muslims confess the One God, who
does not remain within Himself but turns outward, brings forth
creation, expresses Himself to humans through his word, and
gives us abilities and spiritual gifts so that we can use them for
a just world.
"In her task of promoting unity and love among men,
indeed among nations, she considers above all in this declaration
what men have in common and what draws them to fellowship.
One is the community of all peoples". (NA1)
Even if Jews, Christians, Muslims, and the many other
religions view and believe this relationship between the Infinite
and the world in very different ways, we do not assume that
44 See footnote no. 16 above.
45 http:/ /www.sacredheart.edu/pages/12654_pope_john_paul_ii_asks_for_forgiveness
march_12_2000_.cfm [05.01.2012]
-
The new calling of the Church is not to spread the Catholic
Church but to facilitate community and love among the peoples
and thus also the religions. Christians need to make an effort at
this. So the Church should not look at what separates but is to
begin with what we have in common. Here the Church and the
religions have truly entered a global era that, all over the globe,
places us before the challenge of living together in peace as a
156
157
Respect for Religious Diversity
Ulrich Winkler
community.
I found a very similar notion in N urcholish lviacf;id, who says
that the Muslim faith (iman) and reason ( 'aq~ must be applied to
cultivate the human community of all peoples (maslaha). 46
4.6. Participant Perspective and Comparative Theology
Nonetheless, this general theological perspective of a
salvation history and the general task of cultivating the human
community should not be misunderstood in such a way that
~fferences and detailed perspectives are erased. The opposite
1s the case. Because we can draw upon a common basis and
follow a common goal, we cannot treat the questions at issue at
the general level of world religions but must instead turn to the
p~rticipant perspective of the believers. I have already pointed
this out. ,Encountering the belief of the believers is part of
understanding another religion. It is known that John Paul II
was deeply and personally moved by the heartfelt witness of
the faith in the encounter with Muslims in many audiences.
The theology of religions must thus take the next step
and turn to the concrete questions of details between religions.
This is the duty of comparative theology, which no longer
practices theology with the status of an observer but with the
largest possible participation in another faith. The main pillar is
firmly rooted in one's own faith, the other in a deep encounter
with another faith.
The large position of points of the theology of religions
must pass the practical test in concrete situations and with
concrete questions.
4. 7. Hermeneutics of Differences
Why do I consider the position of the participant / the
believer to be so important? First of all, the general reason is
46
See Gröschl, Reformdiskurse 56.
that religions never exist for themselves but only exist because
people believe. The other reason has to do with the peculiarity of
our language, since language does not only have an informative
function. That would be only a very simple, primitive, and
technical concept of language. 47 If one understands the
language of religions in this way, then one can do nothing else
but fight about who received the correct information from
God. Unfortunately, many fundamentalist arguments function
in this way.
But in order to understand language or a sign, it is
necessary to have, along with the signified and the signifier, a
third instance, which is the recipient or the participant. 48 A sign
only works in interaction, in this triangle of signified, signifier,
and interpreter.
There is something else as well: semiotic communication
can never be mothballed or closed down, because signs receive
their meanings through the designation via other signs. This
process modifies their meaning, along with other things. A sign
thus only functions in difference from and in relation to other
signs. Umberto Eco calls this process the "process of unlimited
semiosis" .49
Other philosophical branches have also confirmed
this semiotic theory of language. The language game theory
discovered that there is never an objectively right language.
Rather, one can only understand language within a system of
4 7 See the theories of speech acts, the concepts of performative language and language
games: Austin, John Langshaw; How to Do Things with Words, Cambridge 1962;
Searle, John R., Speech Acts, Cambridge 1969; Wittgenstein, Ludwig. Philosophical
Investigations, Maiden 1953, part 1, § 23. - Recently: G:ilvez,Jesus Padilla/ Gaffal, Margit
(ed.), Forms of Life and Language Games. Heusenstamm: Ontos Verlag 2011. - See also
footnotes no. 31 and no. 32.
48 See the third of C.S. Peirce, footnote no. 32.
49 Umberto Eco's term "unlimited semiosis", see footnote no. 32; see C.S. Peirce: "series
of successive interpretants" ad infinitum; J. Derrida "difference"; "Aufpfropfung" /
"grafting" in recent cultural studies stands for the hybridity of knowledge.
158
159
Ulrich Winkler
Respect for Religious Diversity
rules. Languages are always embedded in a reference framework
that determines its meaning. When one speaks of a dog, for
example, the meaning is completely different in the reference
framework of biology than it is in the reference framework of
an Arabian argument.
Semiotics has made a specific contribution to showing
that signs never generate their meaning as direct copies of
reality but instead use other signs, which are altered in turn by
this application.
Diverse and lively traditions in the religions have emerged
from this process. And so I return to the quote from Nurcholish
Ma4Jid that I cited above:
"If you know who you are, you can understand others
and learn from them. But if you are nobody in particular, or
just anybody at different times, you can neither learn from
others rior teach them."
The person who stands secure in his or her faith can engage
in these processes of change. The person who is uncertain in
his or her identity or, as Macfjid expresses it, is a nobody, will
want to statically hold on to his or her identity forcibly. Here,
the fundamentalist overlooks the fact that his or her identity
vanishes through this very attempt. Belief is not about fighting
over the right information about God. In fact, talk of God uses
perforniative language. Belief brings change. It is not as if we
receive the information that God is all powerful, merciful, and
whatever else, and then go back to our daily business, and this
information has no effect whatsoever. No, language of faith is
performative. Talk of God is a message that brings something
about, that changes something and urges us to change ourselves
and our lives for a more just world.
Whoever understands their own faith in this vital
performance is able to learn from other faiths as weil as learning
from their own, as Macfjid says.
4.8. The Spiritual Attitude of Valuing Other Religions
I wanted to make it clear by this understanding of
theology of religions that cultivating thriving relationships with
other religious traditions is not just something demanded by
tolerance and world peace. Rather, that theology of religions
arises out of an attitude of an innermost personal conviction of
faith. My own faith commands me to value other.s'.I no lon~er
encounter the other with condescension and susp1c1on but wlth
an assumption of truth because I am convinced on the ba.si~ of
my own faith that God also acts salvifically in other. re~g1ous
traditions. True and false, good and evil is no longer distnbuted
between my religion and other religions. Instead, I am called to
critically examine, to recognize the good, to name the bad, and
to confess my own guilt or sin.
Encountering other religious traditions and people of
different faiths with an openness to learning issues from an
attitude of faith. I call it a spiritual attitude. The foremost task
of a theology of religions is to substantiate and enabl~ .this
spiritual attitude for encountering other believers and r~~g1ons
with a high sense of responsibility, in order to, as Ma4Jzd says,
obtain identity.
161
160
RELIGIOUS PLURALISM AND
RELIGIOUS FREEDOM
Religions, Society and the State in Dialogue
Contributions to the Austrian-Indonesian Dialogue
Stefan Hammer and Fatimah Husein (eds.)
miversität
w1en