Wrogemann Intercultural Theology, Volume Three

1. Auflage 2019
ISBN: 978-0-8308-7310-4
Verlag: InterVarsity Press
Format: EPUB
Kopierschutz: Adobe DRM (»Systemvoraussetzungen)

E-Book, Englisch, 528 Seiten

Reihe: Missiological Engagements

Ten Outstanding Books in Mission Studies, World Christianity and Intercultural Theology for 2019 - International Bulletin of Mission Research (IBMR) Christianity is not only a global but also an intercultural phenomenon. In this third volume of his three-volume Intercultural Theology, Henning Wrogemann proposes that we need to go beyond currently trending theologies of mission to formulate both a theory of interreligious relations and a related but methodologically independent theology of interreligious relations. Migratory movements are contributing to an ongoing process of religious pluralization in societies that tended to be more religiously homogenous in the past. Interreligious platforms, movements, and organizations are growing in number. Meanwhile, everyday life continues to be characterized by very different modes of interreligious cooperation. Coming to a better understanding of such modes is a major concern for societies with high levels of religious and cultural plurality. Wrogemann's conviction is that much would be achieved if we posed new and different questions. When it comes to interreligious relations, what is significant, and what is meaningful? What exactly is a dialogue? Which factors are at play when people from different cultural and religious traditions come into contact with each other as physical beings in real-life situations? What about the different images of the self and of the other? Which interests and hidden motives underlie which claims to validity? Exploring these questions and more in masterful scope and detail, Wrogemann's work will richly inform the study of interreligious relations. Missiological Engagements charts interdisciplinary and innovative trajectories in the history, theology, and practice of Christian mission, featuring contributions by leading thinkers from both the Euro-American West and the majority world whose missiological scholarship bridges church, academy, and society.

Henning Wrogemann (DTheol, DHabil, Ruprecht-Karls University of Heidelberg) is a world-renowned missiologist and scholar of religion. He holds the chair for mission studies, comparative religion, and ecumenics at the Protestant University Wuppertal/Bethel in Germany, where he also heads the Institute for Intercultural Theology and Interreligious Studies. He is the chairman of the German Society of Missiology.

Autoren/Hrsg.

Wrogemann, Henning

Leseproben

1

A Theology of Religions or a Theology of Interreligious Relations?

The terms globalization and pluralization describe the changes societies are undergoing in the twenty-first century. Economic interrelationships, the internet, and other media are helping to integrate even the most remote areas into the global exchange of information. It is becoming almost impossible for people to claim they are living traditional lifestyles, since the global marketing industry, the global human rights discourse, and global discourses on issues such as minorities, gender issues, and on what constitutes a good life in general are always part of the mix. People have to coexist; they cannot avoid each other (any longer).

These underlying conditions given within the present framework also refer to the self-understanding of the different religious configurations in the plurality of their current and local manifestations. Christian internet forums provide advice and information on a variety of different issues; Buddhist and Islamic chatrooms discuss topics related to spiritual praxis and to current lifestyle. An Al-Azhar scholar complains to me about online publications claiming to speak with authority about what is Islamic and what is not. After all, he contends, they, the scholars of the most venerable educational establishment in the Islamic world, are in fact the real authorities on the subject.

In the context of these changes, large educational and social institutions are being founded by religious actors such as the Da‘wat-e-Islami, the Muslim brotherhood, or large church assemblies such as Protestants, Catholics, and Pentecostal churches. We could also mention Buddhist revitalization movements, Hindu activists, and many others. The general assumption seems to be that in the face of plurality and the wide range of interpretation facilitated by plurality, the only relatively stable way to safeguard one’s identity is through education. Severe, sometimes even violent quarrels are raging in many different societies over what the proper role of religion is. For instance, in northern Pakistan, where approximately 95 percent of the population is Muslim, real culture struggles take place when one city allows Western signboards featuring unveiled women, while another city prohibits them entirely because armed fighters are forcing it to comply with their definition of an “Islamic” public sphere.

So what role do religions play in societies? How do followers of different religious traditions treat each other? Which validity claims do they make to the local population? What kind of public spheres do they try to establish? How are power struggles over interpretive sovereignty fought out—socially, politically, or symbolically? And what significance can or will be attached to reflections from the perspective of the theology of religion on these kinds of correlations? Which type of theology of religion will be seen as a meaningful contribution to peaceful coexistence? What is the minimum amount of self-relativization necessary for people of different origins and life practices to live together? And not least: If we say that the only way for people to reach a goal is by dialoguing with each other—openly, reciprocally, with a willingness to learn from each other, and on an equal footing, as we say in English (incidentally, this turn of phrase is not applicable in all cultures)—what do we mean by dialogue? These are issues we will need to address.

The basic concern of this book is: Will theology-of-religion models adequately interpret these correlations? Our aim will be to defend the hypothesis that both a progressive theory of interreligious relations and a theology of interreligious relations are needed to meet the challenges we have raised. Before we introduce the subject matter, let us first take a look at some impressions gained from different dialogues in order to get an overview of the problems facing us here.

IMPRESSIONS GAINED FROM DIALOGUES: LONDON, KANDY, LAHORE

I am taking part in a multireligious dialogue conference held over several days in a part of London known as Southall. Christians are talking with Muslims, Hindus, Sikhs, and Buddhists, all of them spending time with one another. The conference is taking place primarily in a church facility belonging to a Pakistani Christian congregation. On the second day, I realize that none of the members of this congregation are actually attending the activities. When I meet a Christian of Pakistani descent, I ask him why they are not taking part in the dialogue conference. “We were not invited because people think we are incapable of dialogue,” he answers. Bewildered, I ask him what made the hosts of the dialogue conference classify them as incapable of dialogue. He responds, “Everyone knows that we are actively engaged in Christian mission in our neighborhood.” “Did anyone talk to you about this before the conference?” I ask. “No,” he says. For me, this encounter, which took place a number of years ago, was an eye opener: In the name of dialogue, the hosts blatantly refused to engage in dialogue with the local Christians of Pakistani descent, giving their refusal in view of the multireligious dialogue conference. The conference organizers operated with the stereotype that “people who are actively engaged in mission are incapable of dialogue.” Because of this stereotype, not only did the organizers not seek to engage the local Christians in dialogue, but they downright refused to do so.

The next day, I had the opportunity to meet a Pakistani Christian woman who told me all about her missionary work. She had grown up in Islamabad, where she had been instructed in Islam at school and had graduated with a master’s degree in Islamic studies. She then moved to London. For a number of years, she regularly visited women with immigrant backgrounds living in London. Her aim in doing so was to support them during their mandatory visits to government offices, to break down the social isolation of many women by visiting them and drinking tea with them, and to make a contribution on behalf of the neighborhood. “From time to time I tell them Bible stories,” she said, “and then we talk about them.” I asked myself whether the dialogue organizers would not have felt ashamed of her prejudices if they had been party to our conversation. It seems to me that this was not just a Christian life witness but also a dialogue of life, where, among other things, Bible stories are told to get people to talk about themselves and to share their perspectives with others. Obviously, this was not a matter of arguing but of exchange, not about preaching to others but about listening to each other, not about rationality but about narrativity, not about forcing some issue down other people’s throats but about talking about issues arising from life itself.

Change of scene. We are visiting a Buddhist monastery in Kandy on the island of Ceylon. The monastery has all the typical features—a Bodhi tree, a stupa, a Buddha shrine house, residences for the monks, and classrooms. The monks are friendly, and we start talking with an elderly monk. He is sitting on a high chair, while we sit on small stools at his feet, as is the custom here. Regardless of what we say, this symbolical framework defines our exchange. I start thinking about spatial arrangements and about how spaces affect people. In many monasteries I see little shrines placed in the entryway of the Buddha house. This is where the Hindu deities who are seen as the guardian deities of the monastery are venerated. In the main building are the oversized Buddha statues—the Buddha sitting down, the Buddha standing up, the Buddha lying down, colorfully decorated. The spaces and the symbolisms communicate. The dialogical continues within—it has a transrational dimension of corporeality.1

The final impression was gained from another conversation held with Pakistani Christians, this time inside Pakistan itself, in the city of Lahore. We talked with many Christians and Muslims in Pakistan. People in the country are afraid; ever since the blasphemy laws were enacted, anyone can be accused with impunity of having insulted either the prophet Muhammad or the Qur’an.2 Granted, it is usually Muslims who are accused of blasphemy, but the number of Christians and adherents of the Ahmadiyya movement who are accused is disproportionately high. What emerged from many conversations with Pakistani Christians is that for quite some time, they have been very careful not to say anything about Muslim traditions at all, neither about the prophet nor about the Qur’an. It is rather obvious that it is difficult, if not impossible, to say anything about one’s own faith under these conditions. We talk with a woman named Rebecca and ask her how she approaches her non-Christian coworkers. She replies that most people go to great lengths to avoid speaking about religious matters in everyday life. Even so, it happens sometimes that, say, a coworker will ask her why Christians insist that Jesus died on the cross, when the Qur’an clearly states that ‘Isa (Jesus) did not die on the cross at all.3 So which is wrong, the Bible or the Qur’an? Furthermore, according to Rebecca, many people believe that without the guidance given in the Qur’an, Christians will probably end up in hell—so why not become Muslim? Rebecca says that she is fully aware of the danger in those kinds of situations and that she prefers not to answer the questions directly. In these cases, she says, she makes references to her own life of faith, admitting that she loves Jesus as her Lord and Savior and...