Pluralism: First Step in Getting on Dialogue
Knitter journey
Paul Knitter writes that theology can begin from biography. He was right, and he proof that religious journey and its experience can booster one to find theological formation that saves both religion and adherent in the changing times. Globalism and openness are fact of modernization. Religion cannot close the door and avoid outdoor development. What knitter did then he changes theological perspective of Catholicism that inherently exclusive toward pluralism theology.
He moves forward from exclusivist to exclusivist thoughts until finally become a pluralist. He mention that after finishing college studies in 1962 he still an exclusive who think that other religions are false and life in the darkness of Christ light. Then he found that old exclusivist model of Christianity as light of darkness did not fix the facts. Then, after he studied at pontifical Gregorian University and accepts second Vatican council declaration toward relationship between church and other religions that acknowledges non-Christian truth and values.
By following that council, knitter became an inclusive, because belief that there are salvation in other religions. Council decision was influenced by great theologian, Karl Rahner, who proposes inclusive view toward the other. Rahner contends that Christians not only can but must look upon other religion as “legitimate” and as “ways of salvation.” Rahner theory of other religion well-known as “anonymous Christian, that is that non Christian will be saved by grace and presence of Christ working anonymously within their religion.
For knitter inclusive was the bridge to pluralism. He then followed other pluralist, for instance Jhon Hick, to accept the truth of other religions. Muslim pious is not Christian anonym, because of Muslim just follow the truth of Islam. He believes that the divine mystery, God or Theos, is greater than the reality of Jesus. That he conclude that other religions may have their own valid view and responses to the mystery. In that position, he becomes a pluralist. He passed over Christian tradition toward other religions, and then began to learn Hinduism, Islam, etc.
In the way of his journey Knitter found that every religion was not only should respect to the other religions, but also toward earth were people alive. There are bigger problem rather than religious truth, that can arise human awareness in making cooperation toward others, in which was problem of suffering. Destruction of earth, poverty, and injustice are not God deed, but human deed. Human should have responsible manner to other and universe.
Knitter reflection
Reflection to existence of “other religion and human suffering” brings Paul Knitter, a theologian, to new kind of theology of human being that was pluralist and dialogist. Pluralist is because the fact that there are many religions coming from various backgrounds and responding to the world matter with special attitude. Variety of religion obviously seems in the religious doctrine in which completely different each others. Moreover, because human beings live in the some world they sometimes shared common problem.
Knitter comes out from Hick assumption that God should be a core of dialogue. He moves the direction of dialogue from theological center to salvation center. He emphasizes to the “common problem” as basis of establishing pluralism theory and religious dialogue. It was different with Jhon Hick who tried to build dialogue by finding the “common ground” of all religions. Hick argues that various religions come from the same source, the ultimate Reality, but, people have their own privilege reflection and experience toward the ultimate because of cultural boundaries. Otherwise, common problem theory did not see whether truly all religion come from same source or no, but from the view that every religions have it own salvation in which is independent.
Knitter conceptualizes that religious dialogue can begin by analyzing the common problem faced by human being. One should move from theological assumption that all religions have similar source toward conception that all religions have global responsibility to overcome human and earth suffering. Knitter says: “I would now like to plot the course, in this book, of what might called a “multi normed, soteriocentric” (salvation center) approach to dialogue based on common ground of global responsibility for eco-human being.”
In sense of religious dialogue religious person should seek to understand and speech with each other on the basis of common commitment to human and ecological well-being. Global responsibility is not only social justice, but also eco-human justice and well-being. That is wider than doctrinal dialogues aims which just to find out similarities of religious doctrine. Global responsibility therefore includes the notion of liberation intended by traditional liberation theologians. Knitter argues that it does so aware that such project, in order truly to attend to the need of all the globe, must be an effort by the entire globe and all its nation and religions.
Injustice treatments, poverties, and oppressions are dialogue barrier. It is impossible to build healthy dialogue in unequal position. Dialogue between the oppressor and the oppressed one will be like imperialism. In building creational dialogue, cannot begin with one religion claiming to hold all the cards, or to be superior in all respect to the others, or to have the final norm that will exclude all other norms. Thus, hierarchy and oppression are things that should be diminished in dialogue.
In facing that problem, knitter suggests that religion should be an instrument of liberation of those problems. For knitter, sided with the oppressed one is not simply an option, but a demand. He says: “I do theology to the point that I could no longer go about a theology of religions unless it was connected with a theology of liberation.”
My journey
My journey was not as dramatic as knitter in finding the role of religious dialogue and changing my religion perspective as whole. I am just lay people that came from common peasant classes in my village at rural Cianjur West Java. Since child until first high school ages I never move to other district. I get Islamic knowledge since I was in 7th old in little mosque. I learn to read and write al-Quran, Islamic jurisprudence and theology from my Kyai at village. At ages of high school I continued my education to States Islamic School (Madrasah Aliya Negeri/MAN) in other district, and lived at Pesantren. My Pesantern was Sunni and Nahdatul Ulama. I get Islamic knowledge from Pesantern, and little bit from school. There was no significance changing in my religious journey in that time but obedience to traditional doctrine.
After finishing my study at MAN, my school proposed me to continue my study at al-Azhar University, Egypt. But I cannot go there because I have financial problem, I cannot pay flight tickets. It was sad, and I should change my direction and studied at States Islamic university (UIN). I was frustrated and I don’t know what major I should choose at UIN. Finally, because I wan to get new experience at learning religion, I chose and entered to comparative religion department. At comparative religion I get many new things about concept of truth that shaking my faith to God. I was pious Muslim, but after I entered to comparative student class I questioned my belief, God, ritual etc. I learn that there ware various religions with various concepts of truth. It was difficult to determine which one the truth one. I make journey from one sacred religious place to others, sometimes I was in church, and sometimes at Pura. I meet many peoples from different religions in the forum of cross religious student (FORSADA) at Bandung. I participated in the social activities held by people from different religion, I found that there were no reason I should hate them because of I and them different. When tsunami happens in Aceh, I and friend of mind from various religions went to Aceh together to help the people there. I had better relationship with the friend came from Christian Science and even I asked to give a speech after Christmas about the important thing of religious cooperation, especially between students of different religions.
I was active in several organizations both in my university and social institutions. I had awful story when I condemned by such Islamic group, namely Forum Ulama Umat Islam (FUUI), an Islamic radical stream in Bandung. FUUI labeled me and five of my friends as kafir (infidel) and we are should be killed because of gone out from Islam after I give a speech in the new student expectation at my University. I speech in front of around 2500 student: “…You are university students, you have a right to thinks and conducts as well as you are responsible. You are free to follow what kind of stream of school and thought to be your own. There are many religions in the word that have different concept of truth, perhaps Islam in not the truly right one. If you did not proof it in your experience, you cannot see the false and the truth. Here you came in the areas of goddess freedom. You can be Jewish, Christian, whatever if u find in that religion fixing truth.” The most crazy one, my friend added my speech with the appealing to say “anjing hu akbar”, (dog is great) as replacements of “Allohu Akbar” (god is great) to breakdown psychological condition of student. That speech was controversial in my university and brings to hot disputation in local newspaper (Pikiran Rakyat). Appealing to apostate was not my concern, I just wish everyone open the eyes and minds to the reality of the variety of beliefs, systems, and the ways of thinking, just that. But, FUUI classified me as freethinker and far from Islam, so they saw me and my friend as Islamist destructed
My reflection
Perhaps, the most difficult in building dialogue is not between people with different religions, but with or to the people in same religion.
