OPENNESS TO OTHER FAITHS QUESTIONED
OPENNESS TO OTHER FAITHS QUESTIONED

Summary/Abstract: In this essay, we review and critique the Moyaert-D’Costa debates as a way of answering a pivotal question still very much pertinent to contemporary biblical scholarship: to what extent, if at all, can the tensive relationship between faith identity and openness to other faiths be realized. We begin by reviewing Moyaert’s initial argument that various soteriological models within the theology of religion assume this problem can and should be solved a priori through hermeneutical openness. The model of comparative theology, on the other hand, questions this a priori assumption that hermeneutical openness is the precondition for soteriological openness. Then we present the counterarguments of D’Costa and other theologians who claim that these theological models don’t address the implicit epistemological issues involved in interreligious dialogue. Soteriological openness is not a precondition for methodological openness, and ‘openness’ itself is not a precondition for interreligious dialogue. These models assume that institutionalized interreligious dialogue is desirable without any clear, explicit biblical mandate and that it is even possible to achieve a balance between faiths in dialogue.

• Details
• Contents