Religious pluralism, the phenomenon in the world of having so many different faiths, has been an issue for most of civilization. Orthodoxies and orthopraxies both had to deal with what to do with those that didn't follow their tenets. In many places in the world, in any given population, there may be a multitude of faiths and creeds to be found.
I have an honest question, one that has bothered me for awhile. It has to do with religion. Firstly, because of the ambiguous nature of the term religion, I will use the terms "belief system" or "faith" for the rest of this discussion. My question goes something like this; what do people that believe in the truth of whatever faith they follow think of people that follow other faiths? Furthermore, how can you place your confidence in any one faith?
Do they think that they are wrong? That these people will "fail" and suffer whatever consequences that faith has established for non-believers? Do they then just think that other faiths "misunderstand" and will be grandfathered into whatever final destination because of their true intentions? For me, such explanations do not hold. Most faiths have claims about some authority that gives their faith credence, but it seems impossible to determine which faith has the correct authority, given the notoriously difficult nature and origins of such entities, writings, or oral traditions.
How then can anyone feel confident in believing a faith? There are so many valuable lessons that can be garnered from each that limiting myself to one is terrifying. And if I did believe in one faith, then how could I honestly approach another and try to learn? I would be forced to adopt one of the outlooks above, and as I have said they are unsatisfying in the highest degree.
A somewhat popular conception of belief systems, at least among people my age, is that all faiths are attempting to reach the same truth and just have different ways about doing so. But this demeans all faiths, by saying that they are all wrong. I find this just as distasteful. In addition, some faiths are so different from one another that to say they are heading for the same ultimate answer is nonsensical (for example, Confucianism and Christianity or Buddhism and Islam). Generalizing about faiths is dangerous. Even saying they all have some higher power is dubious and misconstrues some aspects of eastern faiths by redefining them in western terms.
Even smaller differences, such as those between Catholics and Protestants, or sects of Protestantism (Lutheran vs Methodist) matter. If they didn't, we wouldn't have ever witnessed the birth of these faiths. This is something else that cannot be ignored. What makes you a Catholic, and what do you think of Lutherans? And if the differences don't really matter, why are they there? From what I know, there are not different levels of heaven, so if both Lutherans and Catholics are going to the same place the Protestant Reformation was a waste of time and life. Somehow I feel like Luther would disagree with me on that one.
And in reference to the various forms of non-belief, while certainly no less legitimate than any faith, I find it hard to say that some form of atheism has it right. Appealing to no authority hardly gives you more validity than appealing to one. It just removes a source of skepticism. I do not think (like some of the more virulent strains of atheism) that the world would be a better place without the world's faiths. That overestimates their problems, and underestimates their contributions over history. And so often, these types of people hate on Christianity, or even more specifically, Catholicism, while sparing other faiths their ire. Not to mention the hate that gets thrown the atheists' way.
The only way I understand one could feel such strong emotions towards someone is if they are reasonably certain in their rightness. As I have said, I do not understand how one could feel so certain.
So, what do you think?
No comments:
Post a Comment