Onyeidu corroborated this fact when he averred 'the power of religion to perform its function in any society depends on the type of society and the place of religion in it'. For instance, in a society where the church is politically disadvantaged and is in serious persecution, its achievements might not commensurate with its efforts.
In other words, church's input could be high but the output might become low. The constant killings of Christians with impunity and the wanton destruction of church's properties at any crisis are a setback to church development. It was very difficult for church to develop in the Roman world until AD, when the Edict of Milan was enacted. The Edict made Christianity a ' religio licita ', which gave Christianity equal recognition as the Heathen worship.
According to Boer , the Edict of Milan 'gave the church freedom of worship and returned to her all properties that had been confiscated'. There is no gainsaying the fact that development of church was made easy through a number of factors - firstly being the freedom of worship, which provides conducive environment by proper disciplining. Dysfunction of religion.
In spite of the noble unifying role of religion in human society, it is also dysfunctional in nature and has played a divisive role in the world. That is what Ireoba referred to as another side of religion. This other side of religion 'makes negative recreations, which make religion part of man's problem instead of solution' Ireoba According to Asadu :.
Religion is a functional uniting factor in places where there is a state religion but is dysfunctional in secular states where there is multiple religious sects.
Therefore, in a multi-ethnic society like Nigeria with marked plurality of religious views among the citizens there is the inevitability of clash. Of course, the country has been ravaged by ethno-religious conflict. Religious conflict is completely unnecessary and a misuse of religion, whose consequences abound in polity.
Ody notes that:. It is not difficult to prosecute religious crisis in Nigeria, as the battle axes are readily available.
Certainly, according to Idoko n. Unemployed youths especially the Almajiris are used as war machines to carry out violence in the northern part of the country. They receive their impetus from a promise of a ticket to heaven, should they die in the process. In Nigeria today, positive gains of pluralism are being frustrated because of fanatical tendencies among the various religious groups.
Knitter ed. It is in recognition of this that he, in spite of his advocacy for religious pluralism, has warned that religion should never be used as an excuse to cause social disharmony. In fact, Knitter ed. Thus, for Knitter ed. Religious believers cannot stand aside when people are murdered in the name of God or a sacred cause. When religion is invoked as a justification for conflict, religious voices must be raised in protest.
We must withhold the role of sanctity when it is sought as a check for violence and bloodshed. If faith is enlisted in the cause of war, there must be an equal and opposite counter-voice in the name of peace. If religion is not part of the solution, it will certainly be part of the problem. Thus, 'religions contributed to the underdevelopment and destruction of human society in Nigeria' Ugwuonah None of the adherents of the three religions in Nigeria could be exonerated from its misuse.
However, one has been outstandingly violent in nature. Therefore, Ody wanted to know which religion is causing so much pain for Nigeria. The emergence of these terrorist groups has unleashed heavy calamity in the world.
In Nigeria, the menace has been so devastating and uncontrollable that not even the effort of commander in chief has had any serious impact. In fact, 'since the late s, Kaduna has suffered many episodes of inter-communal carnage and it is now a city sharply divided along religious lines Daily Trust According to Idoko :.
The crisis which many suggest has a religious undertone spread to other parts of the state on Sunday leading to the imposition of a hour curfew on Kaduna metropolis and its environs. The violence comes weeks after a similar incident occurred in neighbouring Plateau State, which led to scores reported dead. Nyitsse explained that it was a grand plan 'to destroy or completely obliterate Christianity. The herdsmen are used as arrow-heads to cause injury and penetrate before the rest of the body will enter'.
In these religious crises and indeed the previous ones in the North, both federal and state governments have been accused for their partiality in these affairs. Muslim politicians do not want to recognise the constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria which states that Nigeria is a secular state and allows freedom of worship. This is evident in a number of government policies, for instance, government restrictions placed on Christian evangelism without, in the opinion of the Christian Association of Nigeria CAN , placing similar restrictions on Islam.
Our schools and colleges have been taken over by government and yet we see schools and colleges established under the umbrella of another religion [ that is, Islam ] being sponsored and entirely financed and administered by government; we have been denied access to the use of the [ sic ] electronic media in certain parts of the country and yet another religion has the monopoly of rendering a nearhour religious broadcast in the same areas; some states have deliberately refused to accept and recognize the growing population of Christians in the states, thus depriving the Christians not only of their rights but also questioning their claim to being indigenes of such states as claim to be religiously homogeneous.
To treat an indigene with disdain simply because of his or her religious affiliation is a breach of Nigerian constitution and a clear evidence of religious intolerance.
Just as Asadu has observed: 'The use of religion as identity and the outright intolerance of other religion by the extremists is the cause of disunity in Nigeria'. Interestingly, Islam which claims to be the religion of peace has no tolerance for non-Muslims. It makes deliberate efforts to deny Christianity fundamental right of freedom of worship. There is an evidence of inhuman treatment meted out to non-Muslims in the North.
For instance, Adefila , a permanent secretary in Kwara state, was compulsorily retired without due process for preaching the gospel at Kabba on 'Light and Darkness' at a 3-day revival in January Hence, Murray , a British think-tank director, wrote an article entitled, 'Who will protect Nigeria's Northern Christians?
Furthermore, on the inordinate polices of the government, it was observed by the CAN that:. These restrictions also include the bureaucratic difficulties Christians experience before they can get land to build churches in the North. The following account by the Anglican Bishop of Kaduna, T. Ogbonyomi, is typical of such experiences. On the 5th of March , he applied for land to erect a church for the Protestant community at the Government Girls Secondary School, Kawo, Kaduna, formerly owned by his Diocese.
By the 11th of April , he had not received even 'the courtesy of acknowledging the receipt of [ his application ], not to [ mention ] taking any worthy action on it', despite his sending a reminder on the 28 May The unreasonable restrictions are unabated even under current administration. For instance, in , the incumbent governor of Kaduna state, Mallam Nasir El Rufai, banned churches from holding outdoor programmes; they were only allowed to operate within the church premises.
To legalise his action, he sent an executive bill to the State House of Assembly for consideration and possible passage into law.
The bill was much more than for outdoor programmes, because had the bill sailed through it would have become:. Shiklam In fairness to the governor, one may say that his action was not specifically geared towards Christianity, but may only be an attempt to regulate the on-going religious abuse in the state. But by implication, it tends to mean that preachers of the gospel are to be determined by the governor, a non-Christian, who is ignorant of biblical hermeneutics and textual exegeses.
Besides, banning vigils, use of horn speakers by churches, disallowing Christian music in vehicles, parks, markets or shops, and opposition to invite preachers from outside the state without clearance from the government were a ploy to curtail the spread of church. After all, in the same state, Muslims hang their horn speakers on every nook and cranny with which they call for prayers five times daily. This is a depiction of religious intolerance masterminded by the Muslim political class.
Femi Ehinmidu was quoted to have reacted to the governor's action by insisting that 'the Bible commands Christians in the book of Mark 15 to go into the entire world and preach the gospel to every creature.
This is the foundation and life wire of the Christian religion … Taking away our rights to preach and evangelise is telling us not to practise our religion as we are commanded by the Lord Jesus Christ' Shiklam n. It is, therefore, not surprising that the government has been accused of being an accomplice in the recent crises in Kaduna.
Speaking on this matter at the floor of the Senate, senator Danjuma Lar, representing Southern Kaduna, blamed the crisis on the government of Kaduna state governor, who, he said, travels out of state without appointing someone to act on his behalf. He further accused El Rufai for allowing attacks on Christians in Southern Kaduna because they did not vote for him. Indeed, the extent of religious crisis in Nigeria is alarming.
In the past, Mason has lamented the situation, thus:. A major challenge that has confronted the country over the years is that of religious violence between Muslims and Christians. The relationship between the two has been one of mistrust and suspicion.
This has led to incessant religious crises. This is as a result of their different perceptions of the ideal society and the conflicting strategies of power and posturing which has made the ideological gap impossible. It is unfortunate that some Nigerians allowed religion to play its divisive role whose side effects are dangerous and fatal. Implication of religious pluralism for the Christian church.
The church had made impressive stride in improving the destinies of Nigerian citizens through the provisions of quality education, which, to a great extent, has transformed the Nigerian society; free gospel messages that have moulded the character of myriad of Nigerian citizens; and through the provision of reliable healthcare services that have saved many miserable indisposed people.
Unfortunately, rewards for Christians' lofty contributions have been ruthless tortures, senseless killings and wanton destruction of their properties by jihadists. As has been mentioned earlier, at several occasions the government had collaborated with jihadists to frustrate church's efforts. Government confiscated properties belonging to the church by way of forceful takeover of mission schools and lands and expelling of expatriate missionaries in Nigeria immediately after the civil war.
The worst is that successive federal governments since independence have not been fair to the church. Government has not sincerely protected Christians from these brutalities.
Obviously, in the words of Onyeidu :. Religion needs freedom to operate effectively, especially in a multi-religious nation like Nigeria. Normally, religious pluralism gives equal opportunities to different religions to function in a particular state. Thus, worshipers have the freedom to worship in their own liturgical way, without encroaching on the rights of other religion's worshipers of different faith.
Every religious being is at liberty to worship in its way is guaranteed. Therefore, no force should be used in making converts, rather religious institutions must operate flexibly so that religious adherents could decide for themselves to practice religion of their choice.
The fact that Nigeria is a pluralistic society is the cause to believe that religious pluralism if given its proper place in Nigeria could avert inordinate and incessant religious conflicts. This should, however, not to be taken as a simplistic solution, given the fact that there is propensity for constant violence in a society where religious autonomy and freedom are recognised.
In a pluralistic society, there would always be a potential for violence if religions claim the right to do mission work amongst others. This brings to the fore the imperativeness of Gandhi's assertion that education is incomplete without religion. It is through education and inter-faith dialogue that adherents would be made to understand that all religions have a common mission; hence, all religions are the same.
Christians and indeed adherents of other religions in Nigeria are advised to educate their members on the need to imbibe good virtues of religion and religious diversity whilst taking a series of expedient measures to improve their religion's fervour to serve humanity.
Negative implications of religious pluralism. The negative implication of religious pluralism is its flexibility, which has the tendency to encouraging syncretism. Certainly, in a pluralistic society, an individual could be trapped in two divergent religious views, which amounts to a pretentious practice of religious belief, which is averred by Christianity.
A scholar has attempted to establish this fact in the following manner:. Religious liberty guarantees that multiple religions can worship peaceably, and Christians appreciate such liberty, as it allows for open worship of God.
In contrast, religious pluralism teaches that multiple religions are true or equally valid, something the Bible clearly refutes. We encourage religious liberty, but at the same time we communicate the Bible's teaching of 'one God and one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus' 1 Tim Got Questions In view of these explanations, it therefore becomes clear that pluralism if not properly checked leads to religious ambivalence.
When that happens, it becomes a threat to Christian theology as it negates the teaching that 'there is salvation in no one else, for there is no other name under heaven given amongst men by which, we must be saved' Ac For example, in Europe and America where pluralism has been entrenched, significant numbers of people who profess Christianity have begun to jettison the claim that 'Jesus is the way' by which one can go to God Jn Thus, there has been agitation for rewriting of the Bible so that such a clause should be changed to read as 'Jesus is a way'.
This is one of the things Christianity would always contend with in a pluralistic society. If Christianity is overwhelmed by the pluralistic view, it becomes mere superficial and incapable of transforming humanity. This was further elucidated by Erdel :.
The ideology of religious pluralism has long been a fact in the West, even during the so-called age of faith when Christendom became the dominant socio-political force. The evils of Christendom are well known. Church membership became one's socio-cultural birthright, rather than a sign of genuine religious commitment, thereby leading to cheap race, unreflective faith, and nominal Christianity.
It is, therefore, not out of place to state that religious pluralism is like a two-edged sword. It could make or mar the Christian faith. An ardent believer in pluralism is betwixt and between; the best he can be is a nominal member.
There is a contradiction about pluralism. Pluralism creates opportunity for religions to coexist peacefully. If a religion such as Christianity claims that it has the only means to salvation and must convert all others through mission work, it changes the pluralist model, to which Christianity claims to subscribe, to exclusivism, which denies pluralism. Thus, although Christians and adherents of other religions purportedly subscribe to pluralism, they encourage exclusivism by way of their missionary works, and this raises the following fundamental question: How does a religion continue to do mission work exclusivism when it acknowledges the autonomy pluralism of all religions?
His basic pluralistic claim, rather, is that such differences are best seen as differing ways in which differing cultures have conceived of and experienced the one ultimate divine Reality. Some, though, see this sort of ethical standard for acceptable salvific perspectives to be as arbitrary as the standard for acceptable paths to salvation set forth by exclusivists or inclusivists Meeker , 5. Mark Heim, for instance, argues that pluralists such as Hick are really inclusivists in disguise in that they advocate only one path to salvation—the transformation from self-centeredness to Reality-centeredness—and thus in essence deny that diverse religions have real, fundamental salvific differences.
A better, more honest salvific pluralism, we are told, is to acknowledge that each religion has its own path to salvation that may be either similar to or different from that of other religions. That is, a more honest pluralistic perspective is to deny that the seemingly different salvific paths offered by various religious traditions are all just culturally distinct manifestations of the same fundamental path and maintain instead that salvific paths of various religions remain incompatible, but equally valid ways to achieve salvation.
It is acknowledged that this is not to say, of course, that all the details of all the salvific paths are actually true since some of the relevant claims are inconsistent.
But the appropriate response to this is not to claim there is one true path to salvation. It is rather to claim that many distinct paths, while remaining distinct, can lead to salvation Heim Critics, however, wonder whether part of this seeming disagreement is verbal in nature. Heim can appear to be bypassing the question of whether there is some sort of final, ultimate eschatological salvific state that the proponents of various religious perspectives will all experience, emphasizing rather that many distinct religious paths can liberate people produce salvation here and now Peterson et al.
Hick, on the other hand, seems most concerned with the nature of salvific reality—with what it means to experience salvation—while not denying that there exist in this world distinct ways that remain distinct to access this ultimate reality.
Some of these challenges are practical—e. The focus of this section, however, will be a pedagogical question of increasing interest in the philosophy of education: How ought the increasing religious diversity to which students are exposed affect public school curricula?
Most public school educators agree that increasing student understanding of diverse religious perspectives is important as this will have positive social outcomes.
Many educators, however, want to go further. It is also important, they maintain, for students to clarify their feelings about other religions and their followers. Specifically, they want to foster a more empathetic understanding of other religious perspectives, an understanding that encourages students to appreciate the other religions from the perspective of an adherent of that religion Kunzman While few challenge this as a valid goal, there is, though, continuing controversy over one common method by which educators attempt to engender this type of empathy in students.
As some see it, while having students think about diverse religions is an important step past the mere dissemination of factual information toward empathetic understanding, having students directly experience these religions in some way—for instance, having students visit a local mosque or having a representative from a Hindu Temple share with students in a class—is also necessary or at least very desirable.
Second, there is growing ethical concern that to experience a religion as an observer might in some cases trivialize or demean the religion in question. Is it justifiable for the public school educator to go even further than the dissemination of accurate information and the attempted engendering of empathetic understanding? It is clearly the case that almost all public school educators currently do attempt to bring it about that students hold certain beliefs related to pervasive human characteristics, such as race, gender, and disabling conditions.
So if the desire is simply to also encourage students to believe it wrong to treat those of other religions in intolerant or discriminatory ways and to believe it right to accept those of other religions as persons with equal inherent value, few will object. However, need teachers stop there? Might there not be other beliefs about religions and their adherents that public school educators can justifiably attempt to bring it about that all students accept?
We can extrapolate from some work on religious diversity by Robert Wuthnow to introduce two beliefs that some might propose fit into this category. It is important to note that Wuthnow does not explicitly claim or deny that encouraging students in a public school setting to become reflective pluralists would be appropriate. But not only does he highlight two increasingly popular pluralistic claims about religions— 1 that the beliefs of many religions are equally valid expressions of faith, expressions that adherents of these religions should be allowed or even encouraged to maintain and 2 that religious believers of all faiths should identify and focus on what these religions have in common—he highlights what such pluralists often note as the main benefits of widespread affirmation of these beliefs: a reduction in violent religious conflicts and an increase in socially beneficial inter-religious cooperation.
And these outcomes are clearly quite compatible with what we have seen to be a key reason why public school educators want to increase student understanding of other religions—namely, their desire to better prepare students to live in a peaceful, productive manner in social contexts that will increasingly be characterized by religious diversity. Accordingly, since it seems reasonable to believe that widespread acceptance of the validity of diverse religious perspectives and increased focus on the commonalities in diverse religions might well result in more peaceful, mutually beneficial interaction among followers of diverse religions, the question of whether public school teachers can justifiably attempt to bring it about that students affirm the beliefs in question appears worthy of exploration.
The problem is that various religions affirm conflicting doctrinal beliefs on significant issues. Orthodox Christians and Muslims are taught not only that the sacred scriptures of other religions contain false beliefs; they are often encouraged to try to convert those of other religions to their religious perspective.
And while many Muslims and Christians believe in a personal supernatural creator and personally immortality, some Buddhists deny both. This, however, means that an educator can justifiably attempt to convince students that all religions are equally valid expressions of faith only if she or he can justifiably attempt to convince conservative proponents of some of these religions that some of their core doctrinal beliefs need to be modified or rejected.
To attempt to do this in a public school setting will be seen by many as violating the prohibition against both restricting the free exercise of religion and promoting a given religion Basinger Might it not, though, at least be justifiable for a public school educator to encourage students to respect the right of adherents to other religions to retain their current religious beliefs?
If we interpret this as asking whether an educator can justifiably encourage students not to attempt to prohibit adherents to other religions from expressing and acting in accordance with their beliefs, a positive response is noncontroversial since this is only to say once again that educators should encourage students to be tolerant. However, to encourage respect for the religious beliefs of others often carries with it the explicit or implicit assumption that it is inappropriate, if not unethical, to attempt to convince adherents of one religion to convert to another.
And for a public school educator to attempt to convince all students that it is wrong to proselytize will again be seen by some as placing this educator in the legally and morally questionable position of attempting to convince some students to reject or modify what for them is a very fundamental, core religious belief.
Perhaps, however, there is a different, less controversial option for those educators who want to do more than simply encourage tolerance of expression and empathetic understanding. To do so, it has been argued, would not simply be of value within the classroom or community. Since religious convictions clearly influence social, political, and economic activity on a global scale, emphasizing the shared common values of religions has the potential to facilitate better global relationships.
And to encourage such relationships is surely an appropriate goal of public education Shingleton As we have seen, discussions of religious diversity lend themselves to no easy answers. The issues are many, the arguments complex, and the responses varied. It would be hard, though, to overstate the practical significance of this topic. While some many issues that philosophers discuss have practical implications for how we view ourselves and treat others, none is more relevant today than the question of religious diversity.
Religious convictions have not only motivated impassioned behavior in the past—behavior that has affected significantly the lives of many—such convictions clearly continue to do so today. So continuing philosophical discussions of religious diversity that clarify issues and assess arguments have the potential to be of great practical value.
The Pervasiveness of Religious Diversity 2. Possible Responses to Religious Diversity 3. Religious Diversity and Epistemic Obligation 4. Religious Diversity and Justified Belief 5. Religious Diversity and Apologetics 6. Religious Diversity and Religious Tolerance 7. Religious Diversity and the Eternal Destiny of Humankind 8. Religious Diversity in Public Education 9. The Pervasiveness of Religious Diversity Most religions are theistic in the sense that they posit the existence of a personal Supreme Being God or set of personal deities, although within some belief systems normally labeled religions—for example, Buddhism—there is no belief in such a being.
So both types of diversity will be given equal attention in our discussion 2. Possible Responses to Religious Diversity One obvious response to religious diversity of any form is to maintain that since there exists no divine reality—since the referent in all religious truth claims related to the divine is nonexistent—all such claims should be considered false.
Religious Diversity and Epistemic Obligation No philosopher denies that the awareness realization of seeming religious diversity sometimes does in fact have an impact on exclusivists—from causing minor uneasiness to significantly reducing their level of confidence in the truth of certain beliefs to precipitating belief abandonment.
James Kraft agrees, arguing that when individuals acknowledge that those with whom they disagree are equivalently informed and capable and have made no obvious mistakes in reasoning, their confidence in their perspective is rightly reduced Kraft The tentativeness this reduction in confidence produces, McKim tells us, does not entail never-ending inquiry.
Religious Diversity and Apologetics Let us assume that exclusivists are justified in retaining their exclusivistic belief in the face of religious diversity. Religious Diversity and Religious Tolerance Religious intolerance, defined as the practice of keeping others from acting in accordance with their religious beliefs, is not new. Religious Diversity and the Eternal Destiny of Humankind The discussion of religious diversity thus far has been framed in terms of truth claims in terms of justified belief because it is increasingly recognized by philosophers as the best way to access the most important questions that the reality of such diversity forces upon us.
To attempt to do this in a public school setting will be seen by many as violating the prohibition against both restricting the free exercise of religion and promoting a given religion Basinger Might it not, though, at least be justifiable for a public school educator to encourage students to respect the right of adherents to other religions to retain their current religious beliefs?
Conclusion As we have seen, discussions of religious diversity lend themselves to no easy answers. Bibliography Ahmad, S. Aijaz, I. Alston, W. Anderson, P. Meister, ed. Baker-Hytch, M. Basinger, D. Kraft and D. Basinger, eds. Benton and J. Kvanvig, eds. Byrne, P. Cheng, C. Christensen, D. Clark, K. Craig, W. Dastmalchian, A. De Cruz, H. Dormandy, K.
Feldman R. Hetherington ed. Gellman, J. Griffiths, P. Griffin, D. Schilbrack ed. Hasker, W. Heim, M. Hick, J. Himma, K. Kasprisin, L. Alston, ed. Kelly T. Szabo ed. Kim, J. Kraft, J. Kunzman, R.
Lackey, J. Haddock, A. Pritchard eds. Benton, J. Hawthorne, and D. Rabinowitz eds. Lamptey, J. Legenhausen, M. Mutahhari, M. Meeker, K. Martin and C. Buddha said there are 84, paths to enlightenment. All contribute to an understanding of how the universe operates. We have always seen the world as a pluralistic realm. Different people at different stages of spiritual development and understanding follow different paths.
We have always upheld views of tolerance and respect toward other faiths. People are at different spiritual and mental places and the various religions or worldviews are appropriate to them at each stage of becoming fully human. In the Kalama sutra, the Buddha encourages us to seek and question and experience our spiritual path ourselves.
Without pluralism, this would not be possible. Sharla S. With both of those meanings, we see opportunity. To those who support the phrase in this and its related meanings, we claim no problem, but we respectfully disagree — hopefully without being disagreeable.
President Gordon B. As a tribal spiritualist, I believe that religious pluralism is the progressive game-changer. Religious pluralism is not only timely and necessary, but the untethered voice of collective consciousness reaching far beyond religious and nonreligious demographic lines.
If we could all step back from our intimate platforms and utilize a pragmatic lens, we might realize our beautiful similarities and purpose.
If every faith and practice focused on love, brotherhood and solidarity, instead of the usual fear, individualism and separation, the world could be a different place. Imagine oneness. Judaism agrees that there are many paths to G-d.
The opportunity is to recognize others as intelligent and good, even if they hold differing opinions. Author Dennis Prager says that one of the most important days in the life of anyone who has a passionate religious or political view is when they meet someone who holds a different view and they recognize them as both intelligent and good.
Faith Forum is a weekly dialogue on religion produced by religious statesman Rajan Zed. Send questions or comments to rajanzed gmail. Facebook Twitter Email.
0コメント