christianity, migration and religious pluralism

Question 1

how has migration created a multicultural society

Answer 1

• through the second half of the 20th century, significant numbers of immgirants came from elsewhere to settle in Britain bringing languages religions and cultures
• eg eastern European migrants after ww2, following Indian independence in 1947, winders in 1950s ect
• as immigrant groups became established they retained their own cultural identity - 1980s, general recognition of multiculturalism

Question 2

perceived issues of multiculturalism

Answer 2

• a threat to core national values and traditions and therefore destructive to national identity
• Britain is a christian country with values and traditions that had their roots in christian belief teaching and practice
• it leaves little scope for a society to be held tighter - there is no agreed scheme of thought with which everyone agrees, they argue that this is dangerous because it means society lacks cohesion
• there is also a danger that immigrant communities which flourish without ehcomign assimilated into the culture of the host country can become increasingly isolated and subject to popular discrimination
• it may become difficult to challenge practices (eg social workers or medical professionals) without seeming racist

Question 3

Describe how freedom of religion is a human right in European law

Answer 3

• as the UK is a signatory to the European convention on human rights, everyone has freedom of thought, conscience and religion
• this allows religious pluralism and protects religious beliefs from hateful

Question 4

religious pluralism as a feature of modern secular states

Answer 4

• a mutlifaith society inevitably contains pea;le from different cultures who live close to each other as part of the sane society
• in some parts of the world this may lead to tension and conflict however in modern western nations this tends to develop into multicultualism
  -= this is the view that all cultures are to be respected, celebrated and understood in terms of their origins
• there should be mutual engagement and dialogue, and that society is richer for having cultural diversity
• multiculatrualosm opposes the idea that any culture should have another culture imported on it, or that people should be deprived of the opportunity to express their cultural heritage

Question 5

religious pluralism

Answer 5

it assumes that all religions are to be respected, celebrated and understood as having intrinsic value for their believers
- overlap between multuculturalism and religious pluralism

Question 6

Two controversial issues which could oppose multiculturalism

Answer 6

FGM and forced marriage are both considered illegal as they cause suffering (FGM) and go against British values about freedom of choice (F.M)
- however some people argue that both practices are cultural expressions within specific religious communities, claiming that whether or not they should be allowed is the decision of particular religious communities rather than secular law

Question 7

How does pluralism/multiculturalism influence christian thought

Answer 7

• christians who live alongside people of other faiths need to examine their own faith and the attitude towards the faith of others in order to have a responsible attitude towards others
• Human reason could be used as a judge between religious claims, considering which is more ‘reasonable’, or using reason to decide that one is a more inclusive belief and that the other is a sub-set of that belief so both may be ture
• however the issue with this is that it assumes that religious people will accept the idea that reason can be used to make a judgement about their beliefs
• the claims of religion have been subjected to reason many times in history. Aquinas’ NML points towards a view of christianity ss whole reasonable - however, this kind of reasoning leads to a situation where beliefs, including belief in god, are optional expressions of the value and celebration of human life in the universe
• however, humans have a strong psychological need for certainty - religions are appealing because they offer absolute beliefs and moral principles - this partially explains the recent rise in fundamentalism

Question 8

Dilemma for a thinking person in a multi faith world

Answer 8

• if someone holds religious beliefs with absolute certainty could they accept that their views may be open to challenge ora that their perspective may not be the only true one
• If a person holds no religious beliefs could they accept that they may be wrong, and that someone else’s claim to absolute truth may. be correct
• if someone holds religious beliefs would they be prepared to consider that their beliefs are open to reasoned scrutiny
• if a person knows no religious beliefs but considers that everything should be based on reason and evidence could that person consider the there might be a source of knowledge that is valid but that is not subject to reason or evidence
• from. the basis of experience/authority, each religion is self-validating, so it is only possible to consider competing claims on the basis of reason and evidence - but in that case there is an assumption that reason take priority over religious teaching and experience - areligious person may not be willing to accept that assumption

Question 9

Describe exclusivism

Answer 9

• an exclusivist argues their religion is the only true one
• other religions are wrong even if their beliefs appear to be the same as one’s own
• an inclusivist says that another religion may have aspects of belief that are the same as their own and is therefore true
• however most icnlusivists still claim that their own religion is unique

Question 10

Hick’s view of religious pluralism

Answer 10

• hick pictures religion like mountain paths, people try to get to the top but take different routes
• each route is mapped out through the cultural, family and religious experiences of their life
• eventually all followers will reach the same summit
• hick concluded that all religions are looking for the same god
• Hick agreed with Rahner that a loving god wouldn’t send those who’d never heard of Jesus through no fault of their own to hell - but argues that rahner doesn’t go far enough in drawing out the implications of omnibenevilence, Hick argues that an all-loving god would never send anyone to hell (universalism)

Question 11

exclusivist christianity

Answer 11

• evangelical christians believe the goal of human life is salvation from sin and going to heaven, this is only possible through. personal relationship with Jesus, so only christians can be saved
• some beliefs are mutually exclusive: it is impossible to accept that Jesus is literally the ‘son of god’ and at the same time to uphold the strict monotheism of judaism ect. - these two religiouns are incompatible when it comes to the status of Jesus
• ‘I am the way the truth and the life, no one comes to the father except through me’: this woudl suggest explicit faith is necessary for salvation, and the norm for biblical fundamentalism is that god will condemn all who aren’t committed to christ, making evangelism a priority as it could save people by converting them
• exclusivist christians may accept two exceptions to this: a child who dies before they an understand and commit to christ (the salvation of those children being a sign of god’s mercy) and if someone has never encountered christ (one way of assessing the eternal fate of that person would be to see how they responded to general revelation - the idea that god’s law can bee seen through nature both in natural morality and in a sense of wonder’

Question 12

inclusivist christianity

Answer 12

• god may choose to forgive the sins of those who advent committed themselves to Jesus because they ahem lived good lives, so people of other faiths and none can be saved
• inclusivists hold that their own religion teaches the truth more completely than any other - at the same time there may be elements of truth in other religions
• the second Vatican council issued that ‘the catholic church rejects nothing that is true and holy in other religions’

Question 13

two approaches to inclusivity

Answer 13

• closed inclusivism: one specific religion has all truth but others have some of it too
• open inclusivity: one specific religion has the best grasp of, but not all truth, and so it can learn some truth from the teachings of other religions

Question 14

Problems of exclusivism

Answer 14

• it is seen as intolerant and discriminatory
• would god not be cruel to say that the majority of the population will not go to heaven
• how could a loving god allow anyone to go to hell because they’ve been born into a non-christian culture
• if god is truly free to do whatever he chooses it is illogical to say that he can’t act through either religions, or none: exclusivism limits god’’s potential for forgiveness and salvation - exclusivists justify doing so on the basis of bible texts but this gives the bible priority in deciding who is for heaven/hell - this would then bind god to a particular interpretation of scripture
• it depends heavily on a literal and simple interpretation of the bible text which gives it authority - however the NT itself was developed and edited, it is ultimately a product of the church, so the issue isn’t just what is written, but why and in what context - in this sense it becomes difficult t maintain a position in which the bible can be the basis for any exclusive claim
• the standard argument for exclusivism based on ‘I am the way the truth and the life’ is circular, it can’t offer an independent justification of exclusivism - the nT texts are the product of the church so reflect the commitment of those who are already members, it isn’t necessarily a reliable account, but rather expresses the convictions about Jesus and salvation held at the end of the first century

Question 15

John hick’s criticism of exlcusivism

Answer 15

• it is an insult to people born into families of other faiths because it suggests that the faith they are following is mistaken or faulty

Question 16

how has the exclusivist view changed

Answer 16

• it was traditionally expressed in the Catholic idea ‘extra ecclesial null sales’ (there is no salvation outside of the church) and this has historically defined the relationship between Catholics and other faiths
• this view has been modified but not eliminated through Vatican 2 - exclusivism is now based on the view that all religion and all salvation is judged in terms of the revelation in Jesus christ
• nothing other than n one’s relationship with christ counts when it comes to salvation - whether this commitment needs to be made explicit or whether it can be seen simplicity in a person’s attitudes actions and values - reflecting the debate between justification by faith and works
• if the belief in god’s salvation through christ alone is compromised there may be a decline into relativism, that all religions are seen as equally true or false - an exclusivist is concerned tp avoid this as it goes against the key and distinctive feature of christian thought that god is revealed through christ in a unique way

Question 17

Biblical evidence for inclusivism

Answer 17

‘glory, honour and peace for everyone who does good: first for the Jew, then for the Gentile. For God does not show favouritism’

• This is about judging everyone whether they have a religion or not - a judgement is made on the basis of doing either good or evil

Question 18

the view that all religions are ineffective and the only thing that counts is the grace of god

Answer 18

• Barth takes this position, placing all people regardless of religion in the same position with respect to the grace of god
• the theologian Barth saw revelation in christ as something that abolishes all forms of religion - Barth opposed the liberal approach which sa christianity as one religion among many and instead placed both christianity and other religions under the single judgement of Jesus
• he emphasises the absolute sovereignty of god and the ineffectiveness of religion

Question 19

Rahner and anonymous christians

Answer 19

• agreed with the exclusivist position that christianity is the one true religion as it was founded on god’s revelation through Jesus - but he was troubled by the implications of that for those who hadn’t heard of christ, as how could an omnibemnevolent god refuse salvation for such people due to factors beyond their control - he therefore rejected exclusivism
• religions are ‘lawful’ when it contained god’s grace acting on humans. rahner argued that other religions contained valid natural theology and god’s grace, but mixed with error and depravity so they have a degree of lawfullness
• these adherents are anonymous christians as they respond to the christian god’s revelation in the world and receive his grace in their religion, though they have no awareness of this - but when they come into contact with christianity, rahner thinks they have no more excuse for continuing to believe another religion and so need to convert in order to be saved
• he argued that everyone has SOME awareness of god, but not everyone is CONSCIOUS of god and some people reject god either consciously, or unconsciously - he argued that the INVISIBLE church is bigger than the visible church

Question 20

Hick’s inclusivism - universalism

Answer 20

• Hick agreed with Rahner that a loving god wouldn’t send those who’d never heard of Jesus through no fault of their own to hell - but argues that rahner doesn’t go far enough in drawing out the implications of omnibenevilence, Hick argues that an all-loving god would never send anyone to hell (universalism)
• he believed in a type of purgatory that after death people could consider existing in another life or world whereby they woudl continue to have a chance to redeem themselves and become better (soul-making) - thus, despite the initial challenge that universalism would mean hitler could go to heaven, he wouldn’t instantly go as it may take a very long time to improve morally enough
• although the idea of terrible people going to heaven still doesn’t seem right to many people, human crimes are finite no matter the scale of immorality
• Proportionality: true justice requires punishment proportional to the crime, it cannot be justice for god to give an infinite punishment for a finite crime
• thus hick is correct in thinking that hell is incompatible with omnibenevolence

Question 21

Hick and pluralism

Answer 21

• he began as an exclusivist but after experiencing multi-faith society he met and observed genuine godo people of other religions who were sincerely practicing a different faith, concluding that: ‘essentially the same kind of thing is taking place in them as in a christian church - namely, human beings opening their minds to a higher divine reality’
• pointed to the ancient islamic parable of blind men touching different parts of an elephant and concluding it was a different thing - like different religions and god, they were blind to see that they were touching the same thing in different ways
• argued the same is true for religion, different religions are different human interpretations of the one true divine reality
• the differences between religions are merely cultural

Question 22

Hume’s response to hick’s idea that all religions are true

Answer 22

• all religions cannot be true however since they make contradictory truth claims - eg was Jesus the son of god (if yes, christianity true, if no, island/judaism true)
• the multiple claims of different religions cancel each other out, and make it more likely that none of the religions are true since they cannot all be right but can all be wrong

Question 23

Hick’s response to Hume

Answer 23

• all religions can be right: the particular theological details eg divinity of Jesus/number of gods believed in are part of the ‘conceptual lesson’ that different cultures project onto reality
• they are all pointing to the same divine reality which exists and is true
• He essentially discounts much of the truth claims of religions as cultural projections which aren’t true, but rather what is true in all religions is the central element of people opening their minds to a higher person and good divine reality that demands righteousness and love

Question 24

Criticism of Hick

Answer 24

• he is arguably overgeneralising about the core of religions all being the same
• greek and roman religions arguably aren’t about opening up the mind to a higher reality demanding righteousness and love
• plenty of pagan religions are about making sacrifices in appeasement to capricious spirits and gods, and buddhism is arguably not about a personal and good higher divine reality

Question 25

Evangelical response to the freedom of religious expression in society

Answer 25

- emphasises the importance of personal commitment to christ, the need to be 'born again' and the necessity to become part of the church, the body of christ on earth - it emphasises that christ's kingdom is not of this world and therefore that secular rules have no relevance to personal salvation - likely to prefer the separation of church and state and to all greater freedom of religious expression, often to strongly oppose actions within their society that they see as contrary to their faith eg abortion - salvation is entirely a matter of grace through faith in christ - since personal choice is key, such a view emphases the importance of complete freedom in matters of religion - the government has no p[art to play in the process of salvation - even if the rules of society are in line with christian morality, following them or trying to enforce them is irrelevant because obedience to secular rules isn't the same as a personal relationship with god.

Question 26

Describe the response to increasing freedom of religion from those who see themselves as called to work for the transofrmation of society

Answer 26

- they argue that they should contribute to moral and social debate from their distinctive perspective, wanting to promote civic order on the grounds that it contributes to the common good - Christians see people as created in the image of god and a person's relationship with god is an essential part of who they are. Any attempt to restrict their expression of the christian religion is a restriction on them as a person, preventing them from being fully human - they see it as a christian responsibility to promote christian values within society for the benefit of all - most christians now take the view that individual freedom to practice any religion or none is man essential feature of society, as such freedom is needed for genuine moral choice - thus from both the catholic and evangelical perspectives, freedom from imposed religious conformity and freedom to make a personal choice are necessary requirements for morality and personal commitment

Question 27

Issue with freedom of expression

Answer 27

- The general social good can override the right to express religious convictions publicly - Being offended is subjective - it can sometimes conflict with equality legislation - a christian running a bed and breakfast may object to allowing a homosexual couple to rent a room as homosexuality is a sin - equality legislation favours the gay couple and their right to be treated equally - but this conflicts with the religious conscience of the owners of the hotel - Wearing religious symbols: christians may argue it is not a blatant attempt to make converts or to push religion while interacting with other members of the public but rather simply an expression of their religious identity - however in a multi faith secular society there is the fear that religious symbols could be divisive

Question 28

Dealing with freedom of expression to wear religious symbols

Answer 28

- the central question is whether the particular action or belief is central to the practice of the christian faith, or whether it is only peripheral - eg if christians were banned from meeting for worship that would clearly attack a fundamental feature of the faith - but is not being allowed to wear a cross doing that? - Thus the problem is deciding what is an essential expression of one's christian faith - eg the christian registrar refusing to conduct a civil ceremony argued the church's teaching on marriage was a core feature of her faith whereas the counterargument was that it was a feature of her job rather than an attack on her right to worship as she wished - Should religion be a personal matter or should it be upheld by public attitudes and institutions - however today we assume that society is secular - however politicians weaponise the idea that Britain is a christian country

Question 29

Society today

Answer 29

- it is both liberal and plural - people have a right in law to be treated with equal respect - however cheisitanity includes principles and moral teachings that for historical reasons, or simply because they are based on a narrow interpretation of the bible, appear to go against this assumption of equality - eg churches disapprove of homosexual acts and it can be difficult for some christians to work with the assumption of equality that it is expected in a secular society