Respond Paper 2

Interreligious Dialogue

Alanuari (17/419925/PMU/09136)

Understanding at The Differences

The multi religious perspective is helpful as the first thought to come forward in the beginning of
understanding the other’s faith, obviously for the attempt to have interreligious dialogue. In terms of
dialogue, it is important to search the common wealth as the foundation of elaborating the knowledge
to see other religion from the texts and scriptures. Hence, the process of dialogue would share the
similarities among religions. This perspective is potential for strengthening religious pluralism by means
that how to gain common goal in living together through having the same perception about God, for
instance. Abrahamic religions (Islam, Christian, and Judaism) aim to have the only one God although
they have different ways to obtain the salvation. Maire Byrne’s point is helpful to understand how to
cope the difference among religions by looking at the common similarities. She supposed to apply the
perspective of comparative theology to have interconnection by looking the sacred text of other
religions.

I do agree the perspective of comparative theology is occupied as only the basic phase in interreligious
dialogue. In terms of academia, it may have useful approach to bring the dialogue for bridging the
differences of theological principle that obviously can have the similarities. But in broader dimension of
religion, how the perspective of comparative theology can occupied the principle differences? My
question here is that how this perspective define “religion” with the complexity of intra and
interreligious practices? I argue that the comparative religion perspective is influenced by the world
religion paradigm as far in how it defines what is so-called religion and non-religion.

My argument is that the perspective of comparative theology is not sufficient for interreligious
dialogue. There is a potential issue to reduce the uniqueness of each religion. How to understand the
other’s religion through learning the sacred text of other religion by such own perspective of a such
believer? While in fact, the practices of other religion itself is really diverse. Prothero (2010) stated that
there is a dangerous sentiment if the way we study religion is constructed by essentials of all religions
are the same. It is quite strongly argument that to study religion is to understand the text and also the
practice by its own perspective. With this approach of the study may help to have dept understanding
about the others. To have the living dialogue I think that it should not to catch the same in difference. As
far the dialogue conducts the aim of human being, the religion should be understood as what it is by
means that the dialogue applies the understanding from the differences among the religions.