To the Editor:

I found David Danzig’s “Christianity in a ‘Post-Western’ Era” [January] enlightening. His resumé of the Christian literature is a contribution to those who cannot keep a whole eye on all the current thought in concerned Christendom.

Regrettably, when Danzig digs into his own knowledge of Judaism, he shows his incompetence. Thus in his summation he writes: “It goes without saying that no monotheistic religion has ever justified religious pluralism on the basis of its own system of beliefs,” revealing his utter ignorance of: Yesh Tsaddikim b’vmot ha’olam she’yesh lohem chelek b’olam ha’ba—“the righteous of all peoples have a position in the world to come.” . . . Maimonides, of course, makes much of this in his Mishneh Torah and in his Guide for the Perplexed. Indeed, this fundamental is the primary restraint on Jewish missionary activity. . . .

(Rabbi) Ely E. Pilchick
Congregation B’nai Jeshurun
Newark, N. J.

_____________

To the Editor:

David Danzig’s essay does describe one of Christianity’s needs in the present world situation. However, I believe he goes too far when he assumes that “no monotheistic religion has ever justified religious pluralism on the basis of its own systematic beliefs.” Mr. Danzig did concede that Judaism and Islam recognized the limits on their universal appeal. . . . Yet with regard to creeds and observances that do not violate its basic ethic and the prohibition against idolatry, Judaism is exceedingly tolerant. Neither ethnic nor religious diversity is frowned upon. Even in the Messianic era, there will be Jews and non-Jews, and the Messiah will only judge among the nations.

(Rabbi) Emanuel Rackman
Congregation Shaaray Tefila
Far Rockaway, N. Y.

_____________

To the Editor:

. . . It is true that Jewish thought envisages the embracing of Judaism by all nations. Isaiah 2:1—4 is perhaps the finest expression of this idea. Yet, this universal aspiration does not exclude a working relationship of religious pluralism, such as Christian thought must now confront along the lines that Mr. Danzig points out. . . .

(Rabbi) Morris Lieberman
Baltimore Hebrew Congregation
Baltimore, Maryland

_____________

To the Editor:

Central to Mr. Danzig’s argument is his contention that Christianity was geographically stabilized from the year 500 until the expansion of the West started about 1500. . . . This is the closest one can come to rewriting the history of Europe in one sentence. . . . In the year 500 only a fourth of Europe was ruled by Christianity, and the researches of Harnack indicate that the bulk of the rural population was probably untouched by it. By 1500 Europe was almost solidly Christian. . . .

Victor Fox
New York City

_____________

To the Editor:

. . . . David Danzig speaks mainly of those Christians whose faith is so immature as to lead them to visualize an all-embracing, worldwide, institutionalized Christianity which gathers into its bosom not only Westerners but millions of Africans and Asians, thereby promoting itself to the rank of spiritual club number one. Mr. Danzig rightly points to the more than dubious possibility of fulfilling such an expectation. . . .

Nevertheless, the claim to universality in Christ’s message still holds good. It resides in the message’s inherent ability to awaken any human being to spiritual life, and to make him accede to the discovery of his own self and to liberation. . . . The traditional teaching of the Catholic Church is that God has his own way of saving those who, through no fault of their own, remain outside the visible Church. “Fault” (or “invincible ignorance”) should not be understood in a derogatory sense. It means simply that anyone who, believing in the Church, wilfully stays out of it, is guilty of insincerity; ipso facto, he is not saved. On the other hand, a sincere Buddhist, Jew, Moslem, or even an atheist, can, through living a consecrated life, be nearer to God than a nominal Christian, and can thus be saved. That fact in itself justifies the existence of other religions and therefore pluralism.

This message has not been adequately presented to the non-Western world, except by the few Christians who understand that the need to which they should first attend is their own—the need for humility and for a deepening of their faith. . . . Such men as Father Ricci in 12th-century Japan, Charles de Foucauld in Africa at the end of the last century, and Father Monchanin in India in recent years, recognized the spiritual values of other religions and tried to identify themselves with those values without ceasing to be Christians. This attitude was inaugurated some two thousand years ago by a Jew, the Pharisee Paul, who, in his own words, became “all to all men.”. . .

The goal is not in Christianity’s becoming mankind’s majority religion. Christopher Dawson’s theological pronouncement (which Mr. Danzig quotes) should not be interpreted geographically or numerically; nor does it exclude Arnold Toynbee’s prophetic view. In this post-Constantine, “post-Western” era, the issue is whether or not we of the West will remove within ourselves the road blocks which stand in the way of the Christian principle of universality. (The work of Mircea Eliade and Father Teilhard de Chardin begins to point the way.) Mr. Danzig’s thoughtful article is a healthy reminder that it is not the universality of Christ’s message which is lacking but our own understanding of it.

Claire Huchet Bishop
New York City

_____________