Jaarboek Thomas Instituut 1997 - Thomas Instituut te Utrecht

More documents

Recommendations

Info

12 PIM VALKENBERG the doctrinal authorities writing about dialogues. Small wonder that adherents of other religions are often sceptical and even suspicious when they hear Christians talk about their devotion to interreligious dialogue", Is this only because they remember too well the past history of Christian colonialism, anti-judaism and exclusivism? Or is the reality described as dialogue in fact not as friendly and harmless as the modem usage of this word seems to indicate? A glance into the history of interreligious dialogue in the Middle Ages strongly suggests the probability of the latter. It is my contention that the practice of interreligious dialogue is not, as is often suggested, the opposite of some historical manners of dealing with other religions, such as apologetics and polemics. It is just another manner of defending one's own faith by putting oneself in the position of an adversary who raises objections because he/she has another faith or no faith at all. This interpretation of dialogue as a form of apologetics may seem strange to those who see dialogue not as a means but as an end in itself. For those among us who are inclined towards relativism, dialogue is the opposite of polemics, because it looks for similarities and convergences instead of oppositions and divergences. But among the theologians who are seriously engaged in a Christian theology of religions, there is some consensus that an interreligious dialogue is only meaningful between believers, that is: between those who are willing to defend a certain religious tradition, who are willing to speak for themselves as well as to listen to each other. An interreligious dialogue, properly understood, should not only consider the points of agreement, but the real differences between religions as well'", While it may be true that See the analysis by P. Knitter, mentioned before, and J. Dupuis S.J., in his Jesus Christat the Encounterof WorldReligions, Maryknoll NY 1991, and more recently in Toward a Christian Theology of Religious Pluralism,Maryknoll NY 1997, especially pp. 358-384. 9 Cp. P.J. Griffiths, Christianity through Non-Christian Eyes, Maryknoll NY 1990 10 See R. Arnaldez, Trois messagerspour un seul Dieu, Paris 1983; J.A. DiNoia O.P., The Diversity of Religions: A Christian Perspective, Washington DC 1992; S.M. Heim, Salvations: Truth and Difference in
AQUINAS AND INTERRELIGIOUS DIALOGUE 13 the traditional literary genres of Christian apologetics and polemics may be called 'divergence literature', whereas the modem preference for interreligious dialogue tends towards 'convergence literature'!', there is more continuity between apologetic works, written by Jews, Christians and Muslims in the Middle Ages. and books on interreligious dialogue written by modem, even pluralistic theologians than the average user of the word 'dialogue' would think. Accordingly, someone as interested in interreligious dialogue as Paul Griffiths wrote a short defence of the traditional discipline of apologetics as an essential component of interreligious dialogue" If it is true that there is much continuity between polemics and apologetics as manners of defending one's faith in the Middle Ages and interreligious dialogue as a manner of communicating one's faith to believers of other faiths (and vice versa) in modem times, the study of apologetic and polemical texts, and also of dialogues in the Middle Ages gains a new relevance. In this respect, several authors have pointed out that the Middle Ages, although ferocious and belligerent in many aspects, may teach us some lessons on how to practice interreligious dialogue. Sometimes, the name of Thomas Aquinas is mentioned in this context as well", With respect to the relations between Jews, Christians and Muslims, one may even say that the Middle Ages form a privileged era for interreligious communication, because there was at certain times and places a kind of intellectual equilibrium between these groups that has disappeared from the fifteenth century onwards. Therefore, some of the exchanges of Religion, Maryknoll NY 1995; D. Carpenter, Revelation, History, and the Dialogue of Religions: A Study of Bhartrhari and Bonaventure, Maryknoll NY 1995. II See T. Work, "Christian-Muslim Convergence as Tradition- Constituted Enquiry", Studies in Interreligious Dialogue 7 (1997) 200-216, p. 204. 12 P.J. Griffiths, An Apology for Apologetics: A Study in the Logic of Interreligious Dialogue, Maryknoll NY 1991. 13 J. DiNoia, o.c., p. 126; T. Work, a.c., p. 213.
Page 2 and 3: Bestuur Prof. dr. H.A.G. Braakhuis
Page 4 and 5: Redactie Dr. H.J.M. Schoot (hoofdre
Page 6 and 7: H. W.M. ten Have WIE KENT DE KRACHT
Page 8 and 9: 8 H.I.M. SCHOOT cornerstone of any
Page 10 and 11: 10 PIM VALKENBERG This wider perspe
Page 14 and 15: 14 PIM VALKENBERG thoughts in the M
Page 16 and 17: 16 PIM VALKENBERG wanted to investi
Page 18 and 19: 18 PIM VALKENBERG Christian in the
Page 20 and 21: 20 PIM VALKENBERG hand them over to
Page 22 and 23: 22 PIM VALKENBERG religions=", Whil
Page 24 and 25: 24 PIM VALKENBERG in front of the H
Page 26 and 27: 26 PIM VALKENBERG Aquinas remains b
Page 28 and 29: 28 PIM VALKENBERG 2.3 The rules of
Page 30 and 31: 30 PIM VALKENBERG of the subject-ma
Page 32 and 33: 32 PIM VALKENBERG the Qur' än come
Page 34 and 35: 34 PIM VALKENBERG encourage and str
Page 36 and 37: 36 PIM VALKENBERG arguments are of
Page 38 and 39: 38 PIM VALKENBERG The reference to
Page 40 and 41: 40 PIM VALKENBERG almightiness - th
Page 42 and 43: 42 PIM VALKENBERG The first name wh
Page 44 and 45: 44 PIM VALKENBERG Finally, we meet
Page 46 and 47: 46 PIM VALKENBERG Christians in Spa
Page 49 and 50: KOM EN ZIE WAAR IK WOON! Aantekenin
Page 51 and 52: DE TOEGANG TOT CHRISTUS 51 geen bet
Page 53 and 54: DE TOEGANG TOT CHRISTUS 53 het begi
Page 55 and 56: DE TOEGANG TOT CHRISTUS 55 dan bij
Page 57 and 58: DE TOEGANG TOT CHRISTUS 57 overtuig
Page 59 and 60: DE TOEGANG TOT CHRISTUS 59 c) Een d
Page 61: DE TOEGANG TOT CHRISTUS 61 SUMMARY
Page 64 and 65:
64 M.A.J.M. BUIJSEN de natuurrechts
Page 66 and 67:
66 M.A.J .M. BUIJSEN de eerste plaa
Page 68 and 69:
68 M.A.I.M. BUnSEN II, q.90 a.2c va
Page 70 and 71:
70 M.A.J.M. BUUSEN worden, is het b
Page 72 and 73:
72 M.A.I.M. BUIJSEN qq. 90-97,16 da
Page 74 and 75:
74 M.A.I.M. BUUSEN hebben bij het v
Page 76 and 77:
76 M.A.J.M. BUUSEN echter niet geze
Page 78 and 79:
78 M.A.J.M. BUUSEN vermogens van de
Page 80 and 81:
80 M.A.J.M. BUUSEN zij tot het geme
Page 82 and 83:
82 M.A.] .M. BUUSEN dat een wet in
Page 85 and 86:
WIE KENT DE KRACHT VAN UW TOORN? Ov
Page 87 and 88:
WIE KENT DE KRACHT VAN UW TOORN? 87
Page 89 and 90:
Page 91 and 92:
Page 93 and 94:
Page 95 and 96:
Page 97 and 98:
Page 99 and 100:
Page 101 and 102:
kwestie' .20 WIE KENT DE KRACHT VAN
Page 103 and 104:
Page 105 and 106:
Page 107 and 108:
WIE KENTDE KRACHTVANUW TOORN? 107 d
Page 109:
Page 112 and 113:
112 ANTONIE VOS loyal to Saint Thom
Page 114 and 115:
114 ANTONIE VOS different (20). The
Page 116 and 117:
116 ANTONIE VOS what is thus far sa
Page 118 and 119:
118 ANTONIE VOS used in ordinary sp
Page 120 and 121:
120 ANTONIE VOS describe and to ana
Page 122 and 123:
122 ANTONIE VOS with the divine wil
Page 124 and 125:
124 ANTONIE VOS ancient Greek philo
Page 126 and 127:
126 ANTONIE VOS church and society
Page 129 and 130:
AQUINAS ON NECESSITY AND TIME A Res
Page 131 and 132:
A RESPONSE TO ANTONIE VOS 131 done-
Page 133:
A RESPONSE TO ANTONIE VOS 133 take
Page 136 and 137:
136 THOMAS F. O'MEARA but this pres
Page 138 and 139:
138 H.W.M. RIKHOF continue. The thr
Page 140 and 141:
140 H.W.M. RIKHOF Peccatum" Joseph
Page 142 and 143:
142 H.W.M. RIKHOF (Hogeschool Holla
Page 144 and 145:
144 H.W.M. RIKHOF 7. Publications i
Page 146:
PRlI'ITED ON PERMANENT PAPER· IMPR
show all

Jaarboek Thomas Instituut 1997 - Thomas Instituut te Utrecht

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?