Abstract
Max Charlesworth’s view in his “Ecumenism between the World Religions” is briefly summarised and discussed. His crucial question being, how can the different and varied claims of the world’s religions be reconciled when they are often incompatible with each other, and how can one come to terms with other religions in the world. Charlesworth sought to preserve the paradigmatic status of religions for their respective adherents yet allow for mutual recognition of value in each other.
This paper seeks to address and test the range of diversity that is allowable in Charlesworth’s position. For this purpose, the paper considers the case of Confucianism for it differs from theistic religions by not being centred on the belief in a deity. Rather, it has more to do with human attainment understood in the context of ritual and cultural forms: becoming human, and creating the community that enables such an attainment constitute the main religious project.
Although Charlesworth’s position is mainly informed by the theistic traditions, the paper concludes by agreeing with him that respect is the key attitude in interreligious dialogues.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Notes
- 1.
“How can all these religious systems be true since their truth claims very often appear to be incompatible with each other?” (Charlesworth 1995, p. 140)
But as Charlesworth has pointed out in the Ecumenism article, he is not specifically concerned about “religious diversity” as a philosophical problem per se (Charlesworth 1995, p. 142). Rather, he is more interested in exploring religious diversity “from within the religious sphere.” Be that as it may, there is much in Charlesworth’s article that contributes to understanding religious diversity from a philosophical point of view.
- 2.
Charlesworth anticipates this critique. See Charlesworth 1995, p. 159.
- 3.
Charlesworth goes on to cite Joseph Wong, “Rahner proposed the theory of anonymous Christianity not for proclamation to outsiders but solely for Christian consumption… to convince Christians that God’s saving presence is greater than humans and the Church” (Charlesworth 1997, p. 42).
- 4.
Nevertheless, it is a crucial aspect of religious life – to commit oneself fully to a particular tradition is the prerequisite in bringing about the kind of personal transformation so desirable to the religious seeker. (This feature is also prominent in the Confucian tradition, despite its apparent humanistic tendencies (C.f. the notions of “cheng 誠” in Zhongyong, and “jinxin 盡心” in Mencius).) The question is, does the Confucian approach require its followers to assent to the claim that their beliefs are true? It appears not. (Neither does this appear to be an important aspect in most sects of Buddhism.)
- 5.
“We saw in the discussion of ecumenism between the Christian Churches that certain values may be developed in one form of Christianity and not in others. So also in the wider sphere of the world religions, certain authentic religious values that are implicitly in the Christian revelation, but which have not been actually developed or actualised within the historical forms of Christianity, may be manifested or expressed in Hinduism or Buddhism or Islam etc. And of course, the same is true of the other religions vis-à-vis Christianity and the other ‘world religions’” (Charlesworth 1995, p. 155, Italics added).
- 6.
C.f. Morny Joy’s article, “Philosophy and Religion” (Joy 2004), in which she explores, with great nuance, how truths are mediated by culture and language.
- 7.
See Charlesworth’s discussion in the sections entitled “A pluralism of autonomous and incommensurable revelations” (Charlesworth 1995, pp. 155–157), and “Multiple revelations: difficulties” (Ibid., pp. 157–158). Charlesworth examines the strategies of Hicks, Pannikar and Henry Corbin in resolving the difficulty. He points out the limitation of Pannikar’s and Corbin’s using a neo-Platonic framework to resolve the problem of diversity: it would never work for religions such as Buddhism or Australian Aboriginal religions.
- 8.
In another place, Charlesworth makes a similar point about mystical experiences which cannot be described independent of context. He writes, “But our basic experiences of the world are not, in fact, ‘theory independent’, since we can experience the world only within a context of non-observational or theoretical factors” (Charlesworth 1997, p. 38).
- 9.
The notion of “incompleteness” might be going too far for Charlesworth, who prefers the view that the Christian Revelation is full but not exhaustive. C.f. Charlesworth’s view, following John Hicks, regarding the non-exhaustive nature of God’s revelation: “Christians can say that God is truly to be encountered in Jesus but not only in Jesus” (Charlesworth 1995, p. 153).
- 10.
C.f. Charlesworth’s 1995 article, in which he discusses the dynamic nature of Christian self-understanding: “The so-called ‘deposit of faith’ is not fixed and static (as the various forms of fundamentalism claim), but dynamic and open to change in the sense that virtualities and possibilities in the original ‘revelation’ are continually being disclosed” (Charlesworth 1995, p. 144).
- 11.
From Zhuangzi, the Chapter, “Autumn Floods” (“Quishui” 秋水), Trans. Roger Ames, in Ames 1998, p. 219.
- 12.
See Anna Sun’s sociological study on Confucianism, especially Sun 2013, p. 23ff.
- 13.
According to the dictionary, Ciyuan《辭源》, the term “zongjiao” first appeared in Buddhist writings to differentiate the teachings of the Buddha (jiao) from those of his followers (zong). When appearing together, “zongjiao” means “the teachings of the Buddha and those of his followers or sects”; i.e. the sum total of Buddhist teachings. On the other hand, the Buddhist scholar, Wu Rujun 吳汝鈞 also mentions other usages of “zongjiao” in the Buddhist world. He locates the term in other writings of Chinese Buddhism, in which zong refers to the schools or sects of Buddhism, and jiao to the dissemination of their teachings. Furthermore, Wu also identifies other usages, in which zong refers to that which cannot be spoken of (prasiddhi); and jiao as the attempts at communicating the unsayable. In view of this, it seems that we need to be careful about the more intuitive reading of zongjiao as “sectarian teachings”.
- 14.
According to the Encyclopedia of Chinese Buddhism (Zhonghua fojiao baikequanshu 中華佛教百科全書): “或指一宗之教為宗教, 如《佛祖統紀》卷二十九有「賢首宗教、慈恩宗教」之說.”
- 15.
‘‘To use kyō [教] in shūkyō [宗教] suggests a Japanese impression that the Western concept of ‘religion’ is more about doctrine or creed than practice… The term ‘shū’ suggests a discrete religious community with common practices and teachings. In fact, the term ‘shūkyō’ was not truly a neologism. There was a rather arcane Buddhist use of the term to mean specifically the doctrines of any particular Buddhist sect or school. Given this etymological context, to inquire in Japanese whether someone is ‘religious’ (shūkyōteki) may seem a little like asking them if they are ‘sectarian’ or ‘dogmatic.’ In choosing such a word to designate ‘religion,’ the scholars who created the neologism might have been thinking of the evangelical and exclusivist aspects of the Western religions they have encountered…’’ – Kasulis 2004, pp. 30–31.
- 16.
See Anna Sun, “The Confucianism as a religion controversy in contemporary China”, in Sun 2013, pp. 77–93.
- 17.
The idea of a Confucian religion, in the Western sense of the term, began as a movement or a series of movements in the early twentieth century China. One of the earliest attempt was Kang Youwei’s formation of Kongjiaohui 孔教會 (The Confucian Church) (my translation), and his attempt at enshrining Confucianism as China’s state religion in the constitution of the newly formed Republic. (See Sun 2013, pp. 42–43.)
- 18.
There is a variety of possible rendering for ren 仁: “perfect virtue” (James Legge), “humanity” (Tu Wei-ming), “benevolence” (D. C. Lau), “noble” (A. C. Graham), “authoritative conduct” (David Hall and Roger Ames), “total virtue” (Robert Eno), and so forth. Rather than adopting one of the foregoing, I propose that ren necessarily involves a certain conceptual vagueness. Moreover, the term is mainly used evocatively in the Analects, and therefore analytical strategies which typically seek to obtain a precise, unequivocal, universally applicable description of the term would be, at best, limited, or at worse, misleading. Instead, I propose that the translation of the term ought to retain an imagistic quality, which in this case is that of the human. This I hope to elaborate in a forthcoming work.
- 19.
There is a question regarding how ethnocentric is the Confucian understanding. How accepting is the Confucian of other cultures? C.f. Analects 14.17: Confucius was reported to have praised Guan Zhong for his work in ensuring that the Chinese culture is intact.
- 20.
The proper Chinese term for the Confucians is “Ru 儒”.
- 21.
Fingarette goes on further to say, “…to act by ceremony is to be completely open to the other; for ceremony is public, shared, transparent…. It is in this beautiful and dignified, shared and open participation with others who are ultimately like oneself… that man realizes himself.” (Fingarette 1972, p. 16)
- 22.
There is a relevant discussion in Catherine Bell’s “Characteristics of Ritual-like Activities”, Chapter 5 of Ritual: Perspectives and Dimensions (Bell 1997, pp. 138–169). Important to this discussion that surveys different ritual activities across cultures is Bell’s conclusion, which states “However, the examples of ritual-like activity suggest that what goes on in ritual is not unique to religious institutions or traditions…” (p. 164).
While one accepts Bell’s view that the scope of ritual covers a broad spectrum, from religious to the secular, and that it is multi-faceted, complex and context dependent, it remains the case that what is most distinctively religious in Confucianism is best considered within the context of ritual performance. Moreover, a narrow construal of “religion” in Western theistic understanding is an obstacle to proper understanding of Confucian values.
- 23.
The notion of “ultimate concern” is normally associated with the work of Paul Tillich. In his book, Fingarette simply mentions this notion without attribution. My thanks to an anonymous reviewer for pointing this out.
- 24.
“Being capable of aiding the transformation and nurturing of the natural world, then they are able to form a triad with tian (the heavens) and the earth.” – Zhongyong 22.
- 25.
The chapter “Below in the Empire” in the Zhuangzi contains a well known four-character phrase that describes the way of the ancients, reckoned by many as an apt summary of the philosophical theme of early Chinese thought – namely, “neishengwaiwang 內聖外王”, which is rendered by A. C. Graham as “inwardly a sage and outwardly a king.” So widely accepted is the phrase that it has become a common parlance, and Confucians of later periods saw no problem in adopting it as a general characterisation of Confucian cultivation.
- 26.
The term “san 參” translated as “triad,” literally means “three.” Thus, the expression “yutian di san 與天地參” is understood to mean forming a party (or partnership) of three with tian and the earth.
- 27.
Xiong Shili is referring to an explicit statement in the Great Learning (Daxue大学) regarding cultivating the person: “From the Son of Tian to the common person, all accept the cultivation of the person as the root. It is not the case that the tips can be in order when the root is in chaos. There has never been the case in which those who are more intimate suffer neglect while those further away enjoy favour. This is called ‘understanding the root’; this is called ‘the arrival of understanding.’” (「自天子以至於庶人, 壹是以脩身為本, 其本亂而末治之者否矣。其所厚者薄, 而其所薄者厚, 未之有也。此之謂知本, 此謂知之至也。」)
- 28.
「(八條目雖似平說。其實,) 以脩身為本。君子尊其身, 而內外交脩。⋯家國天下, 皆吾一身。⋯小人不知其身之大而無外也。則私其七尺以為身。」 – From Xiong Shili熊十力,《讀經示要(上冊)》, 2nd ed. (台北: 明文書局, 1999 (1945)), 頁199–200.
- 29.
「⋯人所以要祭祖, 是因為祖為我們生命的來源。因為祖為我們生命的來源, 所以必須報本, 必須復始。復始者, 不忘生命之原始; 報本者, 不忘其給予生命之恩。」 – Wei Zhengtong 1993, p. 547.
- 30.
C.f. James Legge’s translation, “The Doctrine of the Mean”, in his The four books.
- 31.
The Book of Music (Yueji 樂記) states: “Music (yue 樂) is enjoyment (le 樂).” The sense of this statement on one level is a play on the character “樂”, which, depending on how it is pronounced, could mean “music” or “enjoyment”. On another level, the connection between music and the aesthetic enjoyment that is derived from the playing or listening of it is obvious.
- 32.
I would suggest that the significance of music goes even further. One could speak of a musicality in ritual performance that provides us with a nuanced way of articulating the quality of performances. In fact, the Confucian ren 仁 (being and becoming human) could be understood as the music of the great self. (See Wong 2012).
- 33.
I am grateful to Karyn Lai for her pointing out that syncretism is not inherent to the Chinese traditions.
- 34.
The phrase, “sanjiaoyijia 三教一家”, comes from the Daoist, Tan Chuduan 譚處端, 三教詩. And the phrase “sanjiaoyiyuan 三教一源” comes from the Qing emperor, Yongzheng 雍正. C.f. 「三教合一」 in Wei Zhengtong 1993, p. 82.
- 35.
Take for example, Analects 15.40, “People who have chosen different ways (dao 道) cannot make plans together” (道不同, 不相為謀). Trans. Ames and Rosemont. Here I understand “ways” to be the different religious or philosophical traditions.
- 36.
See also the end of the chapter, “Religion and Religions”, by Paul Rule in this volume.
References
Ames, R. T. (1998). Knowing in the Zhuangzi: “From here, on the bridge, over the River Hao”. In R. Ames (Ed.), Wandering at ease in the Zhuangzi (pp. 219–230). Ithaca: SUNY.
Ames, R. T., & Hall, D. L. (2001). Focusing the familiar: a translation and philosophical interpretation of the Zhongyong. Honolulu: University of Hawaii Press.
Bell, C. (1997). Ritual: Perspectives and dimensions. New York: Oxford University Press.
Chan, W-T. Translator and Compiler. (1963). A source book in Chinese philosophy. Princeton: Princeton University press.
Charlesworth, M. (1995). Ecumenism between the world religions. Sophia, 34(1), 140–160.
Charlesworth, M. (1997). The diversity of revelations. In Religious inventions: Four essays (pp. 23–50). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Fingarette, H. (1972). Confucius: The secular as sacred. New York/Hagerstown/San Francisco/London: Harper & Row.
Joy, M. (2004). Philosophy and religion. In P. Antes, A. W. Geertz, & R. R. Warne (Eds.), New approaches to the study of religion (Volume 1): Regional, critical, and historical approaches (pp. 185–217). Berlin/New York: Walter de Gruyter.
Kasulis, T. (2004). Shinto: The way home. Honolulu: University of Hawaii Press.
Legge, J. (?). The four books. Shanghai: The Chinese Book Company.
Neville, R. (2009). Ritual and deference: Extending Chinese philosophyin a comparative context. Albany: SUNY.
Rhees, R. (1997 (1955)). Gratitude and ingratitude for existence. In D. Z. Phillips (Ed.), Rush Rhees on religion and philosophy (pp. 159–165). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Sun, A. (2013). Confucianism as a world religion: Contested histories and contemporary realities. Princeton/Oxford: Princeton University Press.
Wong, P. Y. J. (2012). The music of ritual practice – An interpretation. Sophia, 51(2), 243–255.
References in Chinese
Xiong, Shili 熊十力. (1999 (1945)). Dujingshiyao《讀經示要》. 2nd ed. Volume 1. Taipei 台北: Mingwen Bookshop 明文書局.
Wei, Zhengtong 韋政通. (1993). Zhongguozhexueqidian《中國哲學辭典》. Beijing 北京: Shuiniuchubanshe水牛出版社.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2019 Springer Nature Switzerland AG
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Wong, P. (2019). A Perspective on Religious Diversity. In: Wong, P., Bloor, S., Hutchings, P., Bilimoria, P. (eds) Considering Religions, Rights and Bioethics: For Max Charlesworth. Sophia Studies in Cross-cultural Philosophy of Traditions and Cultures, vol 30. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-18148-2_17
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-18148-2_17
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-030-18147-5
Online ISBN: 978-3-030-18148-2
eBook Packages: Religion and PhilosophyPhilosophy and Religion (R0)