The Ecumenical Review Volume 41 Issue 1 1989 [Doi 10.1111%2Fj.1758-6623.1989.Tb02550.x] D.C. Mulder -- The Dialogue Between Cultures and Religions - Kraemer's Contribution in the Light

7/27/2019 The Ecumenical Review Volume 41 Issue 1 1989 [Doi 10.1111%2Fj.1758-6623.1989.Tb02550.x] D.C. Mulder -- The Dialogue Between Cultures and Religi

1/7

The Dialogue BetweenCultures and ReligionsKraemers Contribution in the Lightof Later DevelopmentsD .C . Mulder

IReligion and religions: Kraemers understanding of the biblical messageIn the preface to Religion and the Christian Faith Kraemer describes his mainconcern as follows: to investigate into the great human fact, religion, in the light ofbiblical revelation, particularly in the light of Jesus, the Way, the Truth and the Life.In the Bible you will not find a theology of religion or religions, let alone aphilosophical or scientific treatment of that great human fact, the existence of religion.W hat we do find is the message of Go ds revelation, centred in Jesus Christ. It is Go d,revealing himself not in ideas or dogmas but in a person. And this person is the crisisof all religion.Jesus Christ is also the criterion by which to jud ge religion. Here the problem arisesas to whether we can speak of Gods general revelation besides this special revelationin Jesus Christ. Kraemer finds general revelation a misleading term (p.341), alien tothe Bible. Revelation in the Bible is objective divine action, decisively in the personand work of Jesus Christ the word made flesh (p.345). Nevertheless, there areevidences of Gods revealing activity within the domain of the religions (p.348); thereis a self-disclosure of God in the past, the present and the future through nature,history and conscience (p .337 ). Here Kraemer w ants to take som e distance fro m KarlBarth, as he understands him. Th e Bible knows other modes of revelation but they allfind their source, their meaning and their criterion in Jesus Christ.We might ask whether there is a difference between Kraemers ideas in Religion andthe Christian Faith and his earlier book The Christian M essag e. Kraemer writes in thelater book: A s a whole I continue to hold strongly to the main theses of The Christian0 Dr Mulder, formerly a professor at the Free University in Amsterdam, is currently moderator of theNetherlands Council of Churches.Religion and the C hrisfian Faith, London, Luttenvorth Press, 1958.* The Christian Message in a Non-Christian World , London, Edinburgh House Press, 1938.

13


2/7

THE ECUMENICAL REVIEWMessage in u non-Christian World (p.232). But he wants to set right somedeficiences in the earlier book . H e ackn owled ges that he had to som e extent neglectedthe awareness of God which is to be found in non-Christian religions. He wants tospeak in a more dialectical way about the world of religion and religions.One may wonder, however, whether Kraemer succeeds in doing so. He speaksabout a yes and a no in religions, the positive and the negative, as they appear in thelight of revelation (p.334). But he also contends that in the perspective of biblicalrevelation all religions are beside the mark, religiofalsu (p.340). In all religions wediscover striking religious and moral sincerity but in regard to the issue of ultimatetruth, this has no significance whatever.In this connection i t is interesting to give some attention to Kraemers view ofthe relation between theology and the science of religion. Kraemer has wrestledduring his whole life with this relation. On the one hand he is full of admirationfor the achievements of the science of religion. He has learned a lot from i t andhas an astonishingly wide knowledge about the world of religions. But on theother hand he wants to remain a disciple, a captive of Jesus Christ, also in theinterpretation an d evaluation of non-Christian religions (p . 144). Ch rist is themeasure of true religion. The religious history of the human race can only berightly understood in him. This may sound intolerant, but according to Kraemer i tis not. He even contends that in principle Christianity is the only tolerantreligion, because it is based on Gods forbearance and his seeking love.Moreover, every philosophy or view of life must be in the last resort intolerant inthe sense of being exclusive.Ideas about syncretismFor K raeme r syncretism is a fundamen tal problem in the en counter of Christianityand other religions, in mission and missiolog y. Well known is the distinction he m adebetween the so-called monistic, naturalistic religions of self-realization on the onehand and the prophetic religions, the religions of revelation, on the other hand.Syncretism belongs to the first category, whereas the prophetic religion of biblicalrealism does not show this syncretistic, relativist trend. Such was Kraemers stand-point before the second world war. We find it in The Christian Message and in hisinaugural address of 1937. In Religion and the Christian Faith he again deals with theproblem. Kraemer distinguishes between absorption and syncretism. Great worldreligions like Christianity and Islam have absorbed many e xtraneou s elemen ts. That isthe inevitable by-product of culture-con tacts. But Christianity and Islam are by natureexclusive, immune to the syncretistic spirit. It is clear that syncretism with Kraemerhas a pejorative con notation. It means taking up of elem ents which are contrary to theauthentic soul of the absorbing religion. That is especially a problem for the churchesin Asia. Kraemer fully realizes that the Christian faith is not identical with WesternCh ristian ity. But he is worried that Christians in Asia (he does not mention A frica) willnot be immune to the subtly syncretistic temptation, because they live in the midst ofthe monistic religions of self-realization. The only way to avoid that temptation isdeeper delving into the Bible. So it is not a matter of Western Christianity againstAsian Chr istian ity, but of faith in biblical realism , to use that term ag ain, which shouldstrike roots in Asia through absorption, and should itself guard against the danger ofsyncretism.14


3/7

THE DIALOGUE BETWEEN CULTURES AND RELIGIONSThat subject is amply dealt with in the book World Cultures and World Religions.Here he deals with the relations of Eastern cultures and religions with the West in the

past, and then goes very thoroughly into the response of the East to the Westerninvasions, the response of the Muslim world, Hindu India, the Buddhist world andChina and Japa n. He also devotes a chapter to the Western response to Eastern culturesand religions. Kraemer is fully aware of the developments after the second world war,the coming of independence to colonized nations, the search for identity, theresurgence of the religions. It is remarkable that in the late fifties he ob serves alreadythat one finds conservative trends in the Eastern religions, especially in Islam, whichrefuse to come to terms with the modern world. From that side unexpected explosionsand developments are always possible, said Kraemer, and we all know how right hewas.Intercultural and inter-religious encounterLet me confine myself to the issue of dialogue. In the last part of the last bookKraemer wrote, he gave special attention to the coming dialogue.

He makes first some very pertinent observations about what he calls the comingworld-civilization. In the West he notices a strong anti-religious and especially anti-Christianity feeling, and a tendency to fill up the religious vacuum with new religiousideas, mainly of the Eastern type. In the East he finds the resurgence of religions, ofIslam, Hinduism and Buddhism. Within Christianity there is a strong self-criticismand a deep awareness and merciless analysis of its own religious and cultural crisis,jwhereas in the East one finds an apologetic self-assertion. But fundamentally allreligions are in a period of lasting crisis, they all face secularization and thus thenecessity to reinterpret their unalterable, fundamental positions (pp.348-35 1). Thismakes inter-religious dialogue all the more necessary. In this dialogue two aims maybe distinguished: a pragmatic and a fundamental one. The pragmatic aim is to removemutual misunderstandings and to serv e commo n human tasks. The fundamental aim isthe open exchange of witness, experience, cross-questioning and listening (p.356).

Christians, acco rding to Krae me r, cannot enter this coming dialogue except w ith theconviction of the exclusivist claims of the biblical message. This exclusiveness hasnothing to d o with religious arrogance, intolerance or dogmatic assertions (p.36 5). Ithas to be acknowledged that philosophically speaking there is a weakness in theChristian position: it is founded on historical revelation. Asian religions, on thecontrary, are religious philosophies. They teach the sublimity of unqualified Beingwith the mystic or sa ge triumphant through his or her victory in self-awakening. Overagainst this image arises the Christian image of the humility of God, incarnate in thehumble suffering servant, Jesus Christ.In this context it is interesting to quote an observation of Kraemer about Islam:5The time of Christian missions in the Muslim World, as an organized determined effortfor Muslims and as inherited from the nineteenth century, is, as far as I can see, past in the

post-colonial era . A radical rethinking and reshaping is therefore imperiously demanded, ifwe discern the signs of the time.World Cultures and World Religions: the Coming Dialog ue, London, Luttenvorth, 1960.Ibid. , p.341.51slamic Culture and Missionarj A dequacy, in Muslim World, Vol. L, No. 4, October 1960, p.250.

15


4/7


5/7


6/7

THE ECUMENICAL REVIEWat religions in a dialectical way, trying to discern the good and the bad in our ownreligion in the first place and eventually in the religions of people of other faiths.

2. I must confess that I have my doubts about Kraemers distinction betweenabsorption and syncretism and about his view that syncretism belongs to the monisticreligions of the Eas t, while in the case of Christianity we should speak of absorption. Itwould appear to be more precise to speak about the phenomenon of interpenetrationand use that term (a t least within the field of the history of religions) in a neutral s ense .Wh erever religions meet or wherever a religion born in one culture spread s to anoth erculture, you will find this phenomenon of interpenetration. Most religions have beenable to absorb elemen ts from other religions. That was already true about the religionof Israel in the time of the Old Tes tam ent; it was equally true abo ut Christianity in theearly centuries of its history and about Western Christianity. So there is no specialreason for Western Christians to warn Asian or African Christians against the dangersof syncretism. As Christians in East and West, in North and South, we all face theissue of interpenetration and we all have to ask ourselves where interpenetration isacceptable and where it endang ers the core of the Christian m essage. Here Ch ristiansfrom the South h ave equal reason and right to be critical of developments in NorthernCh ristian ity. T o put it in a positive way: it is one of the great blessings of the g enes is ofworld wide Christianity that now we can h elp each other to look through o ur regionalidiosyncrasies, to probe again for the core of the biblical message - or biblicalrealism if you want - nd at the sam e time to relate that me ssag e to the contex t of ou rtime, globally and locally.

3. I come to my last point: the terms and aims of inter-religious dialogue. Let mestart by stressing that Kraemer had a very open mind. When dialogue primarily can bedescribed as a mood, an attitude, then we can do no better than emulate Kraemersattitude toward s people of other faiths and other cu ltures.Kraem ers formulation of the two aims of d ialogue is helpful. Th e practical aim is,as we saw, to remove mutual misunderstandings and to carry out common humanresponsibilities. It is quite clear that these hav e become m ore urgent than ev er. Th emutual misunderstandings are still ma ny, and so me tim es even grow ing. Just think ofthe misunderstandings amo ng Christians about Islam and the tendency to equate Islamwith a special, fundamentalist brand of it, or on the other side the tendency to equateChristianity with Western Christianity or even with Western imperialism. Our com-mon human responsibilities have become more pressing than ever in view of the lethalthreats I mentioned before.The WCC has launched a conciliar process on Justice, Peace and the Integrity ofCreation. We should be aware of the fact that these are issues common to al lhumankind and that Christians must pursue them with others. Here the importance ofdialogue with people of other faiths and oth er convictions is absolutely clear.

As for the fundamental dialogue, Kraemer is right in observing that Christiansshould enter it with their conviction regarding the importance of the biblical message.Dialogue is a meeting of commitments, to use the phrase coined by Stanley Samartha,and a relativist attitude towards ones own religious tradition and conviction is no tconducive to genuine inter-religious dialogue. I hesitate, however, to speak about theexclusivist claims of the biblical message as Kraemer did. Exclusivist claims give theimpression that there is no truth whatever in the non-Christian religions and noredemption or salvation outside the Christian faith. If we take the stand that in the18


7/7

THE DIALOGUE BETWEEN CULTURES AND RELIGIONSreligions of the world w e find a response to God s revelatory act s, we can not close ourmind to the possibility of finding true experiences of God outside the circle of thebiblical message or of Judaism and Christianity. We then also have to allow for thepossibility of the salvific activity of Gods Spirit outside the circle of Christianity andthe Christian faith. If that is true, then dialogue means also an openness for the work ofthe Spirit in the life of our partners-in-dialogue. Salvation in the broad sense of H eil,of harmony, of wholeness, comes ultimately from God, and in Jesus Christ werecognize God as Saviour, as Healer, as bringer of salvation. That is our Christianconviction and in dialogue with people of other faiths we need not be ashamed oftelling the story of Jesus, the more so when we are challenged to give account of ourfaith. But this should not prevent us from being o pen to the w itness of our partners indialogue. It also leads us to try to discern between good and bad in all religions,including our own. Th e criterion of this discernment could be formulated a s opennessfor God and for our neighbours. Wh ere we find that openness, we may assume thatGo ds Spirit is at work.

19

The Ecumenical Review Volume 41 Issue 1 1989 [Doi 10.1111%2Fj.1758-6623.1989.Tb02550.x] D.C. Mulder -- The Dialogue Between Cultures and Religions - Kraemer's Contribution in the Light

Documents