Religious pluralism is broadly admitted to be one of the crucial challenges in this present age. Hence, the need to explore the theology of religions is widening. In view of the above, we need to understand the concept of theology of religions, before zooming to a discussion of it. Generally, theology of religions may mean the ways of human living. Importantly, this recognition has the effect of driving one’s attention to a theology of religions, given that the challenging issues related to salvation cannot be taken lightly. Matthew (2013) understands theology of religion as the branch of Christian theology that attempts to theologically and biblically evaluate the phenomena of religions. In other words, it is an area of theological reflection on inter-religious relations that raises fundamental questions for all people of faith
57
in a pluralist, postmodern world. Its aim is to give some definition and shape to Christian reflection on the theological implementation of living in a pluralistic world (Karkkainen, 2003:20). According to Hedges (2010:16), theology of religions is a constructive interpretation of how Christianity relates to other religions, the nature of other religions, and what may happen to the followers of other religions. Perhaps, Knitter’s (2003:21) summary is more helpful; he says theology of religions involves meaning, values and relationships. For this reason, the study applies the praxis cycle of Kritzinger (2008:764ff) within the conceptual framework of prophetic dialogue in PROCMURA in Chapters 4 and 5 to provide a space for the possibilities of religious dialogue that might lead to reconciliation and peaceful coexistence.
To achieve this, the researcher recognises that the relationship between identity and encounter among Christians and Muslims in Northern Nigeria appears to stress a monolithic notion of identity, and there are no adequate tools to approach other religions. In fact, this is what Eyeruroma and Chidimma (2013:209-210, citing Tajfel &Turner, 1979) call intergroup discrimination –between the in-group in comparison with the out-group – and the consequences of this is categorisation. Eyeruroma and Chidimma (2013:220) also state that the direct consequences of this unhealthy comparison are discrimination and prejudicial attitudes. These elements are sufficient to trigger conflicts, be they political, social, religious or otherwise, especially in a pluralistic society like Nigeria. Conceivably, this is why Aihiokhai (2012:11) note that, with the reality of globalisation and the close proximity of multiple cultures and religions interacting within community borders, no religion can survive by itself. Similarly, this social categorisation makes sense when Bodenhousen (2010:12, citing Turner et al., 1994) says;
Once, one accepts the fact that people are inherently multifaceted, and that the extent to which any given social category is spontaneously seen as relevant can vary across contexts, it becomes clear that the level of diversity within group depends on which respects for diversity one considers...conversely, experiencing diverse group environments provides individuals with opportunities to develop greater creativity...
In short, diversity in the person and diversity in the group can potentially complement one another, resulting in better functioning at both levels. The argument here is that identity and encounter are related. In Christian theology of religions it has become commonplace among theologians to distinguish three approaches, exclusivism, inclusivism and pluralism. Other divisions have been proposed, but this threefold approach continues to be dominant. The researcher was motivated to concentrate on inclusivism firstly, because of the understanding of the importance of collaboration and peace and the implication of destroying one another as Christians and Muslims in Northern Nigeria. Secondly, the motivations to
58
concentrate on inclusivism outshine other reasons because of the importance of cooperation on matters of mutual interest and concern, and for the dissemination of information on both Islam and Christianity through dialogue. Thirdly, in agreement with Knitter (2002:27-28), the researcher decided to move towards inclusivism, because Jesus is the medium for salvation; in other words, God’s offer of truth and saving grace through Jesus Christ, and no other one.
In fact, inclusivism is the most common concept today, particularly among mainstream religious believers of established religions. It acknowledges the universal presence of divine truth and its accessibility outside of one’s own tradition, whenever and wherever people honestly seek the truth. It is only being criticised for limiting the opportunity for interreligious dialogue. According to Knitter (2002:103), in Jesus Christ alone has God done something very special, something that has not been done and will not be done elsewhere? This means that, in Jesus Christ alone the inclusivists have God’s full, final and fulfilling words, therefore there cannot be real dialogue because it has no room. Hedges (2010:20ff) sums it up when he describes exclusivism as “either one religion is true, pluralism he describes as more than one religion is true, but inclusivism he describes as “one religion is true and others partially true”.
Knitter (1995:28) argues that all religions want to include other religions in their own understanding of truth; this is what gives dialogue its substance, excitement and values. Similarly, Hedges (2010:30) suggests that each of the typologies is marked by a different motif, thus exclusivist approaches characterise discontinuity, inclusivist approaches exemplify fulfilment, whereas pluralist approaches epitomise openness. In view of these identities, the encounter, according to Hedges (2010:13), is important, as is discussion of the theology of religions. Hence, in his (Hedges, 2010:56) opinion,
if we are to move beyond the impasse we cannot simply opt for one position or another, but must develop a contemporary theology … instead of placing ourselves in camps with fixed answers, or extolling a ‘true Christianity’, we should extol a humble Christianity that says: ‘I’m not sure I can tell the truth...I can only tell what I know’.