The pluralism of Paul Tillich

Abstract

This study seeks to evaluate Paul Tillich's theological bases for affirming the validity and comparability of the many understandings of reality, especially as they bear on important issues in the theology of religions. The task here is specifically that of identifying Tillich's theology-ofreligions position. Is his approach to the religions open enough to be regarded pluralist, given Tillich's statments which seem to suggest an 'absolutist' stance and sometimes a 'universalist' one. We discuss relevant theological definitions of Tillich's and his observations of other religions and their important concepts to show that he does not claim superiority for Christianity a priori. Despite his observation of certain unique features of Christianity, he does not put forward criteria from Christianity and show that other religions do not satisfy them. His criteria, actually, are formal and derive from (1) his larger definition of religion as ultimate concern, (2) the type-determining elements of religion, and (3) the nature of religious symbols. Tillich's concept of religion indicates his pluralist stance by reason of its identification and treatment of "motives" present m the "prereligious and religious life" of humans, including secular movements which have a religious source. The type-determining elements, namely the sacramental, the mystical and the ethical, are seen as uniting differently to embody themselves in various forms in the concrete religions, thereby providing a religious typology that would facilitate understanding in intra-religious and inter-religious contexts. This typology therefore affirms the uniqueness of every religion, and the important role of historical and cultural determinants in the making of the special forms. So Tillich's apologetic intent, which drives him to show Christianity as having actualized the various typological elements, despite distortions which Christianity, like any other religion, cannot avoid, is that of demonstrating the nature and dynamics of religion from one example, namely Christianity, rather than that of claiming Christian superiority. We find that both Tillich's concept of religion and his religious typology point m the direction of the pluralist paradigm on account of its provision of the frame in which the unity or common basis and the plurality of religions can be appreciated.Through the significance he attaches to symbols in respect of religion and theology, Tillich is able on the one hand to point out that one symbol can express a number of rational meanings (the many articulations of a single symbol in its long or short history), and on the other to demonstrate that symbols manifest a concrete-universal character. The symbol is concrete in that it belongs to a specific religio-cultural tradition, and it is universal in that it refers to self-transcendence, which then is the basis of judging the limitations of each spiritual act. It is in this light that the concepts Tillich uses in elaborating his theology of religions, such as 'Christ the Criterion' and 'Protestant Principle', should be taken. Then they no longer suggest Christian superiority, but reflect the concrete-universal character ('Christ the Criterion') and especially the judging character ('Protestant Principle') of a religious symbol. Symbols therefore demand theological criticism and consequently theological reconstruction.Tillich's theological method is discussed to appreciate the dialectic character that Tillich sees in the religious substance itself and m the experience and analysis of the religious phenomenon. It is found that the correlation that Tillich maintains between the universal and the concrete in his theology of culture and his systematic theology is present in Tillich's analysis of the various expressions of other religions. In respect of the world religions, as a "mediating theologian" his attempt is to affirm and develop both sides of a correlation, the correlation between the Christianity and the religion(s) encountered. Hence his boundary situation between Christianity and the world religions and quasi-religions, a boundary that offers a new opportunity to save kerygma from narrowness and to revive religious symbols through an "interpenetration of systematic theology and the history of religions". It is suggested that his pluralism is a "dialectical pluralism", which engages in a dialectical analysis of the universal and concrete in Christianity and other religions.