"that all may be one"

I present to you my term paper for philosophy of religion:

Religious Pluralism

We in the United States in the 21^st century live in a culture of religious pluralism. The Catholic Church claims to be the only church in which every teaching is true and that contains the fullness of truth. We as Catholics understand that God wills for all his people to be united, as Jesus prayed in John’s gospel “that all may be one” (John 17:21). If we recognize unity as good, and understand that pluralism necessarily entails divisions (or else there would be no need for separate religions), how, then, is it possible for Catholics to get along in a pluralistic society?

One seemingly obvious point which is nevertheless overlooked at times is that truth is truth. This fact allows for Catholics to recognize what is true in other religions, philosophies, ideologies, etc., while rejecting what they find to be false. We share, in common with the rest of Christianity, belief in Jesus Christ: his incarnation, death, and resurrection. Judaism and Islam also profess belief in one, personal God. Even with those who are unaffiliated with a particular religion, we share reason and are thus able to come to mutual understanding of certain principles.

Recognition of these commonalities is one step towards dialogue and unity. Another point which is useful is the importance of the ways in which we attempt to achieve unity. Unity and division are opposites, so we would need to first be clear on what exactly we agree on and where our divisions are, so that we may begin with what is common, address what is different, and if possible, eradicate the divisions and bring about unity.

But how are divisions eradicated? Through mutual love and understanding. How are love and understanding fostered among people? This is an important question and worthy of serious thought.

A big component of authentic love and understanding is the involvement of free will. Let us first consider understanding. I think Plato had it right when he said in the Republic that one cannot simply pour knowledge into the head of another but that the other person must come to knowledge of the Good on his own. Our role in education is to help others turn toward the light. This necessarily involves the consent of their will. Respecting free will means recognizing the possibility that the other will not choose what we judge to be right. But if we hope for authentic understanding, this is something we have to deal with by patiently persevering and remaining in relationship in hopes that we will someday have the unity for which Christ prayed.

The importance of free will in love is hopefully obvious. God created us with free will in order that we could be able to love him in a real way. If he had created us to love him without giving us free will, we would be like robots and our love could not really be called love because it would be something forced on us, or programmed into us. Love must be chosen for it to be real. Still, this makes for the possibility of choosing against what is good, beautiful, and true. So, if we desire authentic unity and not merely the appearance of unity, we must recognize that this means working through differences and allowing others to ultimately come to understanding of truth on their own. This is not to say that they come to understanding or faith without grace, but only that their cooperation is essential.

It seems that the best framework for this authentic unity which includes love and understanding is in human relationships. It is here that we find trust, and the opportunity to be open with each other about our beliefs without fear of judgment. (It is important to note here that many confuse judgment and disagreement. Challenging another’s beliefs or behavior is not the same as judging the state of that person’s soul.) This environment of trust and openness is very important to unity because only when we are honest with each other are we able to have conversations which lead to mutual understanding.

What sort of society allows for the possibility of the type of dialogue needed to foster authentic love and understanding? It seems that a theocracy would not be that society; if people are obliged to believe something under penalty of the law, many problems arise. First, this structure seems to prohibit critical examination of one’s beliefs because any disagreement would be viewed with suspicion and could amount to treason. This would cause fear in those who doubt and because of that fear they would likely be discouraged from voicing their concerns. An ignored or unvoiced division is a division that is allowed to remain. Only when it is brought to light can it be addressed and bring about understanding.

Our current pluralistic society is theoretically (and paradoxically) the most conducive to unity. It allows for the possibility of people expressing their beliefs without the fear of legal persecution. In this framework, there can be discussion and dialogue between people of different faiths and faith traditions and people with no faith tradition (unless you call atheism a sort of faith). Through this dialogue, we may come to understand each other’s beliefs and reasoning behind those beliefs. We may even find that our understanding of our own beliefs is enhanced through this exercise.

While as Catholics we believe that our faith contains the fullness of truth, this does not bar us from living in relationship with those who do not share our faith. If we truly desire “that all may be one,” we must recognize that this open and honest dialogue is essential to unity and therefore, we must be open to understanding what others believe and willing to engage in dialogue with them.