Religious Pluralism, De Facto and De Iure: An Indian Appraisal of Vatican II

Abstract

Pluralism, pluriformity and synodality have become often-mentioned jargons in the post-modern religious context. The narrow, exclusive, yet necessitated axiom, namely, extra ecclesiam nulla salus of Origin of Alexandria, Cyprian of Carthage, which although intended for schismatics and heretics originally, was understood rigidly from the fifth to the fifteenth century in the documents of popes and councils. The Council of Florence declared that all outside the Catholic Church, be it pagans, heretics, Jews, or schismatics, will not have a share in eternity. On the contrary, they will go to the “everlasting fire which was prepared for the devil and his angels,” if not joined the church before death. Such a notion was defended by Pope Pius IX in Singulari Quadam (1854), stating clearly that everyone outside the Catholic Church will have no salvation. The Second Vatican Council, a metamorphosis wherein the Church did not define any new doctrine but exemplified a dialogical pilgrimage, called for a renewed vision of other religions in our time (Nostra Aetate). Periti from both theology and history backgrounds consider the Vatican II standpoint as a breakthrough and a conclusion for the recurring search for Vera Religione. This paper will evaluate religious pluralism from a Catholic point of view in line with Vatican II and post-Vatican II teachings and would affirm that it is de facto and de iure in the contemporary global context. Although ‘dialogue’ and ‘dialogical’ became the new paradigm in which the church should pilgrimage with the new conciliar vision, on account of both misinterpretation and reinterpretation, the new enthusiasm has been skillfully downplayed in the post-Vatican II period. Thus, this paper will unfold the fact that the ‘envisioned dialogue’ has remained in the conciliar documents alone, at least in the Indian context, wherein religious pluralism is de facto and de iure.