Compared with exclusivism, inclusivism offers more leeway and variation in beliefs, affirming the chance of salvation independent of religion, and the possibility of knowledge of God within a different belief of Him. Inclusivists hold in common a belief that all people, regardless of their religion, can be saved. An illustration of such a Christian perspective can be found in Acts 10:35, which says, “In every nation whoever fears [God] and acts uprightly is acceptable to Him.” This position was later emphasized by the Council of Trent which identified God, not man, as the final arbitrator, determining who is saved and who is not and highlighting the importance not so much in worshipping God’s name as in doing God’s works. Inclusivists are divided on the debate of other religions’ knowledge of God. Some argue that because other religions do not have or do not hold in the same light certain revelation from God, they cannot truly know Him. Other inclusivists argue for the possibility of true knowledge of God attained from sources other than their own religion; that other religions can lead to partial yet true knowledge of many aspects of God and that their own religion can fill out the gaps and errors. Still other inclusivists believe that a true and full knowledge of God can occur separately from their own religion. To the questions of salvation and knowledge of God in other religions, the stance of inclusivism offers the answer of “maybe”, citing the omnipotence of God as an ultimate force capable of leading those of different faiths to the same truth.
The stance of pluralism holds at its core the concept of a plurality of divine revelations: the idea the God has revealed himself multiple times to multiple religions. From this starting point, all religions based on a divine revelation hold a genuine knowledge of God, making salvation possible for members of all religions. Several variations on the interrelation of religions exist within pluralism, however. Some see the different religions as different paths to the singular Ultimate Reality. Others see the different religions as complementary to each other, completing what is lacking in others’ beliefs, implementing a sort of “value hierarchy” in response to mutually independent truth claims. To the same questions posed to exclusivism and inclusivism concerning knowledge of God and the possibility of salvation for those of other religions, pluralism responds with an emphatic “yes”, viewing the array of religions not as an opportunity for comparison, but rather as an opportunity for cooperation leading all towards the Ultimate Reality.
In a time when religious exclusivism still holds strong in many religions, few clergy/authoritative religious figures have embraced a foreign religion to the extant that Bede Griffiths did. While still holding dear the tenents of his Christian faith, Griffiths also lovingly embraced the world of Hinduism, developing a pluralistic view about the two. What distinguishes Griffiths from the inclusivist point of view is his recognition of real divine revelation present in the Hindu scriptures; revelation as valid as Christian revelation. In his book, The Cosmic Revelation, Griffiths breaks off from long-standing and traditional Christian exclusivism in proclaiming, “When we study the Vedic [scriptures], we must approach them as something which God has given to man”, (Griffiths 8) identifying the Vedas and Hindu scripture as divine revelation. He looks past the apparently contradictory credos of the different religions to the basic impressions and shades of belief behind them and sees them complementing each other, reaching the truth halfway between the two. For example, he sees the need for Hinduism’s focus on God in the fact-obsessed Christianity and the need for Christianity’s emphasis on history and fact in myth-laden Hinduism. Through this “principal of complementarity”, (Griffiths 128) through the combining of and dialogue between the different truths of all religions, man will drawer closer to an unbiased and more fully correct understanding and response to the Ultimate Reality. Griffiths sees multiple religions as valid in themselves, independent of each other but also sees a potentially greater richness result from their intermingling.
I tend to see myself an inclusivist, accepting the validity of some aspects of other religions while still seeing Christianity as containing the whole truth. For me, religion involves walking a line between “nothing else” and “everything else”. On one hand, I can’t believe in a God of infinite mercy and love for all people providing the means of knowing Him and attaining salvation to only a small group. Amos 9:7, in which God says “are you not like the Ethiopians to me, O men of Israel”, is one of several instances showing that God has no innate favoritism for one group. Thus, the exclusivist standpoint, citing themselves as the chosen people, seems egotistical, unsupported, and uncharacteristic of God to me. At the other extreme, while I recognize that certain aspects of other theologies are valid and even helpful if brought into my own religion, I cannot reconcile innate differences between religions and still conclude that they arrive at the same truth. For example, the doctrines of the Incarnation and Avatar both deal with the Ultimate Reality’s earthly dealings with man. However, the character of God portrayed by the two systems is vastly different. On one hand you see a morally good Christ physically suffering for the sake of man’s sins; on the other you find morally ambivalent (and mythical) Avatars doing performing miracles to inspire. While both suggest characteristics of God that are valid, their concurrent truth cannot exist in my thinking. I see Christianity as complete and accurate in its teachings of God and salvation. Other religions do hold valid and true points which may help bolster Christianity’s teachings and, with God’s aid, may lead their followers to salvation. However, in its degree of knowledge of God, Christianity, as based on its divine revelation, has not been matched in its depth.
Throughout history, attitudes towards foreign religions have changed. Initially, many religions emphasized their singularity as the true religion. This belief still has firm roots in many religions, although many are branching out and seeking community with the outside world. Such faiths, including Christianity, have adopted the inclusivist point of view. They and are willing to accept that truth can and does exist in other faiths, though they maintain that their own religion remains the most complete. Stretching further beyond this and taking a more liberal stance, the pluralists see all religions as equally valid in that all are based on their own divine revelations. They look towards a deep and full knowledge of God produced by cooperative dialogue between religions in which complementary beliefs are combined in an effort to arrive at the truth. The question of religions’ interactions is as old and complicated as any in faith and will probably never result in any unanimous conclusion in this world.
Works Cited
Griffiths, Bede. The Cosmic Revelation: The Hindu Way to God. Springfield: Templegate Publishers, 1983.
