Stanley J.

Samartha (1920-2001)

Life:
- He bagan his career as pastor and lecturer at the Karnataka Theological College,
Mangalore.
- He did his higher studies at Union Theological Seminary, New York.
- His main passion was to write on inter-religious dialogue.
- He was the Director of the subunit on “Dialogue with People of living faiths and
Ideologies” in Geneva.
- Later he was back in India teaching at U.T.C, Bangalore and Consultant to
CISRS.
- His main books are: Courage for Dialogue, Towards World Community, and One
Christ – Many Religions.

1. The Context of Religious Pluralism

Religious pluralism is based on the fact that different religions respond to the Mystery or
Ultimate Reality. Religious pluralism has several values in the contemporary world. 1.
First, it provides spiritual and cultural resources for the survival of different people in
their search for freedom, self-respect, and human dignity. 2. Affirming the plurality of
religions, cultures, and ideologies can help to overcome fascism. 3. Pluralism introduces
an element of choice by providing an alternative vision of reality and ways of life.
Plurality points to the fact that God cannot be exhausted by any one religion.

2. Christian Response to the Plural Context

There are three fears in acknowledging and accepting the fact of pluralism.
- The fear of syncretism
- The fear of compromising the “uniqueness” of Christ.
- The fear of losing the “urgency” of mission.
There are four barriers that prevent Christians from responding positively to the fact of
pluralism.
 - Christians hold a negative view of other religions.
- The need to insist the Christ is the only way, and affirming the superiority of
Christianity.
- The need to affirm the Great commission to make converts and baptise them.
- The need to make the whole world Christian so that every tongue may confess
that Jesus Christ is “Lord.”

3. Theological Reasons – Why dialogue should be a Christian concern.

a) - God in Jesus Christ has entered into relationships with persons of other faiths.
- The incarnation is God’s God’s dialogue with humanity.
- To be in dialogue means to be part of God’s continuing work among fellow
human beings.
- Jesus was open to have fellowship with people of other faiths. (Roman Centurion,
Samaritan Woman, Samartian Leper)
- Jesus said that “the Holy Spirit will lead you into all truth.” (John 16: 12, 13)
b) - The church should have a concern to establish “true Community.”
- The church should be a sign and a symbol of forgiveness, reconciliation and new
creation.
- The church as a true community should be concerned about dialogue.
- In this journey to build a true community, strangers become fellow pilgrims.
- Building a true community is important in the context of the impact of
secularization.
- Building a true community is also meaningful in the face of the resurgence of
Areligious fundamentalism.
c) - We should know that dialogue does not lead to syncretism and relativism.
- Relativism tends to make people withdraw from the spiritual struggle.
- To accept that all religions are relative is like being without a theological
backbone and living without true spirituality.
- There need not be any fear of syncretism, because a universal religion cannot be
fabricated; creation of a world faith is not an alternative to religious conflict; and
 any prophetic religion will defend its spiritual integrity against using it for human
purposes.

4. Christology in a pluralistic context:

Samartha argues that “to make exclusive claims for our particular Christian tradition is
not the best way to love our neighbors as ourselves. Christians should be willing to move
beyond not only exclusiveness, but also inclusiveness. Samartha claims that “Elevating
Jesus to the status of God or limiting Christ to Jesus of Nazareth are both temptations to
be avoided.” Samartha suggests that a theocentric Christology avoids the dangers of
exclusivism and will be helpful in establishing new relationships with neighbors of other
faiths. Jesus himself was theocentic. Therefore, a theocentric christology provides more
theological space for Christians to live together with neighbours of other faiths. He
affirms that this theocentric christology does not minimize the centrality of Jesus Christ,
but provides a basis for retaining the Mystery of God. Theocentric christology provides a
vision to participate with all human beings in God’s continuing mission in the world.

5. Mission as Dialogue

1. The first attitude called for is to accept the coexistence of different faiths and not to do
so grudgingly. 2. Second, true dialogue presupposes commitment. It does not imply
sacrificing our position. Without commitment to the Gospel, dialogue becomes
meaningless. 3. Third, Dialogue is possible only if we preceed from the belief that we are
not moving into a meaningless mission, but that through dialogue we accept to meet God
in the procees. We can witness to our deepest convictions, while listening to those of our
neighbors. 4. Fourth, it is true that Christianity has emphasized dialogue. However, it is
done not at the cost of doing mission. Today all Christian bodies and denominations
affirm this innate missionary nature of Christianity. It is the duty of the church to
proclaim without fail that Christ is the way, the truth and the life (John 14:6).

Samartha
Stanley Jedidiah Samartha was born on 7 October 1920 in South Kanara District of
Karnataka. His family belonged to Basel Mission. He was raised in a deep Christian
Spirit. He began his theological studies from United Theological College (UTC),
Bangalore and later earned his Ph.D. from USA in 1958. Later he joined UTC as
Professor of History and the Philosophy of Religions. He worked closely with CISRS
and was the Principal of Serampore College, Calcutta, before he was appointed as the
first Director of the sub-unit on Dialogue with World Council of Churches in its head-
office at Geneva. He published number of books and articles in many Indian and
International journals. In 1981 he returned to India and wrote extensively on Inter-
religious Dialogue and was very much involved in this.
Samartha’s Concept of Mission
Before we dig into Samartha’srevised christology, it is necessary that we have a clear
view of Samartha’s perspective of mission, because his revised christology is an
outcome of his perspective of mission. Samartha holds to pluralist view of religions
and in his view mission is not the extension of Christianity and the extermination of
other religions. Samartha says that “mission is God's continuing activity through the
Spirit to mend the brokenness of creation, to overcome the fragmentation of
humanity, and to heal the rift between humanity, nature and God”.
His understanding of mission is also closely tied to his understanding of the Holy
Spirit. In explaining his understanding of Mission, Samartha said, “God’s mission
cannot be limited by temporal factors, and while the mysterious action of the Holy
Spirit cannot be bound by visible communal walls.” Samartha calls for substituting
the word “mission” with “witness”. He believes that using this word would help
Christians to proclaim the Lordship of Jesus Christ in their ministry and at the same
time help them to convey the message of hope to people who struggle with diverse
issues and situations. On this issue he emphasized that in a world which is religiously
plural the mission of the Church is not to convert people to Christianity but to call
them to enter the Kingdom of God.
In Samartha’s own words, the purpose of his work “is to examine the new perceptions
of religious pluralism in the world today and, in the context of its implications for
people in the global community, to indicate the contours of a revised christology.”
In the preliminary segment of the book, the author gives a vivid sketch of an
oppressed people kept in bondage by the colonial powers- a people whose desire is
for a life of freedom, self-respect and human dignity, a people who were enforced to
accept other values as greater than their own. The author then introduces Christianity
which is, according to him, closely associated with colonialism. He affirms that
Christianity is also tyrannical because it rejects to accept that people of other faiths
that live by their own esteemed beliefs. He emphasizes that this rejection is a severe
form of injustice. Nevertheless, the author is pleased to notice that in recent times a
revival is taking place. With the destruction of colonialism and the meeting of
Vatican II, new phases and concepts of communication in relation to religious
pluralism have opened up. Introducing world religions in Christian theology and the
launching of a study by the World Council of Churches, 'My Neighbour's Faith and
Mine- Theological Discoveries through Inter-Faith Dialogue', are vital signs of the
new trends in the awareness of Religious Pluralism.
While affirming the validity of other faiths he asks, “How can so great a Mystery be
experienced in only one way and expressed only one set of symbols?” He then goes
on to say that exclusive claims that attempt to repress plurality and are reluctant to
risk the enactment of faith in a pluralistic society cause an obstacle against future
possibilities. Such claims are insensible to the feelings and emotions that come from
within the heart. They overlook the mood of awe and reverence and silence before the
Mystery of God and shut the door of hope for reciprocal criticism and mutual
enhancement.
He then brings out new perceptions which are taking place in the world. He says that
salvation history is being questioned in these days in the light of religious pluralism
by both Western and non-Western theologians. Instead, histories of their own are
given importance. He then affirms that there are many kinds of christologies in the
New Testament. He argues that there is “one Jesus but many Christologies which
means that any exclusive or normative claim on behalf of one particular Christology
does not seem to have the support of New Testament”. He concludes his first chapter
by saying that “in the new global context the Church has to redefine its identity and
role in history in relation to, rather than over against other communities”.
Second chapter surveys Jewish, Muslim and Buddhist responses to the Christian
initiatives of inter-faith dialogues. After surveying Samartha poses to ask a question
that what have we learnt from these dialogues. He further emphasizes that
Christianity now needs to learn and to receive from other faiths; Christians now need
to be learning rather than teaching. He concludes this chapter by saying that “a
sensitive understanding of the neighbour’s responses to Christian-initiated dialogues
should therefore be of help not just to Christians but to other communities of faith as
well, as humanity moves towards the twenty-first century.”
In chapter three he touches the subject of justice. He emphasizes that when there is
economic injustice between North and South or as we say between West and East,
there is also an obvious theological injustice. The Judean-Christian Western tradition
is generally connected to the rich and other traditions to the poor. He then poses for a
moment and asks “is there any inter connection between these two forms of
injustice?” And then again he asks “is there then a connection between poverty and
religiosity?” He then pleads for a need of new relationships which would be possible
only through dialogue. At the end of the chapter he extends the boundaries of justice
and peace to the nature also and calls for partnership with the nature too.
The fourth chapter pays attention on religious identities in the secular state and the
decisive role that religions play in the life of the larger community.He urges that in
this secular society, religions need to join their hands together for the cause of
bringing people to God. The task of a religious people is to draw attention to the
mystery of transcendence, a centre of values beyond the individual religion. The
Ultimate Reality should not be confined to one particular expression of faith, for an
exclusive claim limits God's outreach to all humanity. While concluding this chapter,
he urges that “in an age dominated by science and secularism one of the tasks of the
genuinely religious people is to draw attention to the Mystery of transcendence, a
center of values, a source of meaning, an object of loyalty beyond the smaller
loyalties to one’s particular caste, or language or religion. Whatever be the manner in
which faith responds to this Mystery, and express it in different cultural way, this
sense of the Beyond in our midst, of the Mystery that touches life at all points but is
not confined to it, helps people to come together for common human purposes in
society not just for a pragmatic reasons, but deeper reasons of faith and commitment”.
The fifth chapter deals with Scripture and scriptures. By Scripture he means the
Christian Scripture and by scriptures, the scripture of other religions. Samartha says
that this topic is insufficiently discussed and is “usually avoided in inter religious
meetings”. In this chapter Samartha points out the plurality of Scriptures and
hermeneutical revolutionfor knowledge of God in a multi-scriptural context.
Therefore, he advocates that the methods adapted to gain this knowledge, whether
through writings or individuals, should be culture oriented. For each culture and
religion has a particular way of expressing and thinking about Truth, and these
individual expressions should be considered as valid and respected, like the Christian
scriptures.In this chapter he urges that “the scriptures of other religions should not be
subordinated to the Christians, but regarded as valid and authoritative to those who
accept them because they are based on their own particular ‘faith-experience’”.
From chapter six on Samartha starts his formulation of a revised christology. In this
chapter he argues that christology should be based on theocentric theology, in other
words he advocates a theocentric christology. He says that “a theocentric christology
provides more theological space for Christians to live together with neighbours of
other faiths. ‘Christomonism’ does not do full justice to the total evidence of the New
Testament, nor does it give sufficient emphasis to the trinitarian dimension of the
Christian faith”. Samartha feels that the theocentric christology would help Christians
to relate with the people of other faiths in mutual cooperation and growth.
Chapter seven of this book talks about the Revised Christology of Samartha. At the
very outset of this chapter he argues that even though Christ is same forever,
christologies has to go through change and reconsideration if they have to
communicate to the Church and the world. He says that most of the chirstologies that
we find today are imported from the Western countries to rest of the countries and
thing which is missing in them is that they are not adequate to respond to the existent
powerful major religions. He goes on to say that these christologies “are not only
irrelevant to the life of the people but often obstruct the life and witness of the church
in Asia.” So he asserts that, "in a religiously plural world, a Christology that is
biblically sound, spiritually satisfying, theologically credible, and pastorally helpful is
both necessary and possible-without making exclusive claims for Christianity, or
passing negative judgments on the faiths of our neighbours". He then goes on to list
the negative results of exculsive claims by any faith- dichotomy and division of
peoples into 'we' and 'they'; cooperation among different religious communities
becomes difficult; they may lead to tensions and conflicts in society; and finally they
may raise serious theological questions. He explains his revised christology saying,
“The way towards a revised christology is through acknowledging the Mystery of
God, rediscovering of the meaning of the God-human encounter in Jesus Christ and
by becoming more sensitive to the working of the Holy Spirit today leading hearts
and minds to new avenues or truth”.
In Chapter eight Samartha talks about making of his revised Christology. In this
chapter he differentiates between Helicopter Christology i.e. Christology from above
and Bullock-cart Christology i.e. Christology from below. He then lists number of
reasons that why a Christology from above cannot meet the needs of the people, 1) it
compromises the very basis of all monotheistic faiths; 2) it does not do justice to the
humanity of Jesus of Nazareth as attested to by the synoptic gospels; 3) it under-
estimates the significance of historical consciousness; 4) it makes it possible for
Christians to relate themselves, their faith in God through Jesus Christ and the
liberated and liberating life in the Kingdom of God to neighbors of other faiths.
He explains these two christologies in following way “A helicopter Christology, in its
attempts to land on the religiously plural terrain of Asia, makes such a lot of
missiological noise and kicks up so much dust that people around it are prevented
from hearing the voice and seeing the vision of the descending divinity. A bullock-
cart Christology, on the other hand, always has its wheels touching the unpaved roads
of Asia, for without continual friction with the ground, the cart cannot move forward
at all. Moreover, a bullock-cart Christology has the advantage of having its bullocks
move on with a steady pace, even when the driver sometimes falls asleep”.
Samartha seems to say that this type of Christological shift rejects the 'helicopter
Christology', and leads to a 'bullock-cart Christology'. In other words, 'bullock-cart
Christology' is a culture-centered Christology which does not make a great deal of
missiological noise that people cannot hear or even understand the Divine, but it
makes the sounds of the people- sounds they can understand and relate to. It is a
Christology anchored in the heart of the peoples, because it touches them at their
point of need and through this they are able to meet the Divine. A Christology that is
helicopter, mission oriented or foreign, cannot minister to neighbors of other faiths. It
only proves to be a stumbling block. In other words, to believe that God is best
defined by Christ is not to believe that God is confined to Christ.
In chapter nine, he deals with the substance of his revised christology by combining
faith and history, or historical Jesus and Christ. Then he goes on to discuss what he
says the marks of revised christology- the Kingdom of God, the freedom Christ brings
and the Cross-Resurrection event. In this chapter he puts Jesus in the same category
of Budhha and Mahatma Gandhi, saying that they all had the quality of non-
attachment, aparigraha.
The book ends with chapter ten where he goes on to discuss the task of mission in a
religiously plural world. In this chapter the author illustrates the change in the content
and practice of mission in a religiously plural world and advocates the methodology
of confessing Christ’s Lordship and saviourhood in a way that it becomes free from
the exclusive claims of Christian parochialism and is understood in the midst of the
variety of ways in which God’s love and concern for all humanity are revealed.