This is the final short paper for my Philosophy of Religion class. This has been a great experience and I have learned so much. In this essay, I am considering Paul J. Griffiths' thoughts on the uniqueness of religious doctrines.
----------------------------
Griffiths answers those who subscribe to the pluralistic view of religions. His main point, and the focus of his essay, is that many religions include a number of particularist and exclusivist doctrines which contradict the pluralist view. Griffiths argues that there are five important dimensions of religious doctrine. While they overlap, each has its own unique contribution to doctrine. Griffiths uses Christianity – specifically the Anglican variety – as well as Buddhism as his primary examples.
The first dimension addressed is Religious Doctrines as Community Rules. Religious doctrines function as rules which outline the conduct of the members of the religious community who subscribe to a particular faith. Griffiths states: "This dimension of religious doctrines is perhaps the most basic of all; from it the others flow." (p. 590) While all five dimensions have areas where they overlap, this first dimension significantly impacts the other dimensions more than any other. It is the central dimension of all five.
Next, Griffiths discusses Religious Doctrines as Definitions of Community Boundaries. Religious doctrines are central to dictating the boundaries for behavior and belief. Often these boundaries are created to exclude things from the community which are considered untrue, inadequate, or misleading. They are the barriers that protect the community from unwelcome behaviors and beliefs. For the Christian, these can include topics such as the understanding of the person and work of Jesus Christ or the Trinity.
The third dimension, Religious Doctrines and the Spiritual Experience of Communities, entails the spiritual experiences that shape the doctrines of and are formed from the doctrines of a religious community. One way Griffiths illustrates this dimension is by discussing how the prayer practices of Christians have both shaped and been shaped by doctrines about the Virgin Mary. Spiritual experience can have a significant impact on what a community believes.
The fourth dimension is Religious Doctrines – Catechesis and Evangelism. These two areas of this dimension focus on making members of religious communities. Catechesis is the process of teaching and training with regards to the doctrinal and practical aspects of the religion. This can include elements of creeds, liturgies, religious practices, and more. The ultimate goal of catechesis is the formation of a faithful Christian or adherent to whatever religion is involved.
Evangelism is the process which converts a person to a particular religion. For those who were not raised in a certain spiritual community, this is the process which recruits new members to that community. When evangelism is successful, new members begin the process of catechesis. Doctrine is generally central to both aspects of this dimension.
The final dimension Griffiths discusses is Religious Doctrines and Salvation. While it may look significantly different for various religious communities, almost every community of faith addresses the subject of salvation in some form. This dimension is one that is especially troublesome for pluralism because doctrines – especially those involving salvation – often cannot be abandoned by a religious community which takes its beliefs seriously. Since many religious groups have a specific doctrine of salvation, they cannot ignore that belief and accept the pluralistic view.
While most religions share these five dimensions, Griffiths does go on to address the uniqueness of Christian doctrine. Christianity is unique because, in the words of Griffiths, "a strong and interesting doctrinal claim is being made here, a claim as to the singularly and salvific centrality of a particular historic event." Christianity makes a unique claim which cannot logically co-exist with any other doctrine of salvation. It teaches that salvation is found in the person of Jesus Christ and through his death, burial, and resurrection. This specific of a salvific doctrine is unique to Christianity.
If we are going to have serious dialogue with other religious groups, the unique nature of Christianity must be a part of the discussion. If we ignore the uniqueness of our faith, then our discussions with other religious communities will be hollow and of significantly less value.
Not only do I affirm Griffiths' position, I feel that his position makes the pluralist position logically impossible. Unless one is willing to discount Christianity as a false religion, she cannot be a pluralist and remain consistent. Either Christianity is a false proposition, or pluralism is a false position. One cannot advocate a philosophy that accepts all religions when at least one of those religious communities accepts an exclusive salvific event.
Religious doctrines are indeed unique as outlined by Griffiths in his essay. While many religions will share some similarities which produce common ground for dialogue, we must acknowledge that many religions, especially the Christian faith, include doctrines which nullify the possibility of pluralism and make a claim for exclusivity.
Unfortunately, some who disagree with pluralism will swing to the other extreme and take exclusivity to the point of arrogance and judgmentalism. We must always approach inter-religious dialogue with a sense of humility balanced with a firm belief in our position. This requires us to be diligent students of our beliefs as well as those with whom we disagree. If we want others to honestly listen to our position, we must be willing to accord them the same attitude of openness. We can listen with an open mind without sacrificing our position or affirming their views as ones to which we subscribe.
One last issue Churches of Christ must consider in the pluralism/exclusivism debate is our exclusivity as a religious community. This is not unique to our tribe, but we have been well known in the Christian community for our claims of exclusivity. While we have our unique doctrines that shape our community as Griffiths discussed, we must be careful not to draw firm lines and distinctions where God has not. If we have a healthy attitude that acknowledges traditions as traditions rather than salvific issues, we can respect our heritage while maintaining healthy dialogue with the rest of the Christian community. We must always be willing to examine every aspect of our doctrine and heritage against the Word of God. While God’s nature will never change, our understanding can and will change as our approach to Scripture and the culture we live in continues to change around us.
No comments:
Post a Comment