Functional Specialization and Religious Diversity: Bernard Lonergan's Methodology and the Philosophy of Religion Scott Halse Faculty of Religious Studies McGill University, Montreal October, 2008 A thesis submitted to the Faculty of Graduate Studies and Research of McGill University in partial fulfillment of the requirements of the degree of Doctor of Philosophy in philosophy of religion Scott Andrew Halse, 2008 11 Abstract Religious diversity has become a central topic in the philosophy of religion. This study proposes a methodological approach to the topic by exploring the division of tasks set out by Bernard Lonergan (1904-1984). Lonergan's methodological framework, which he called functional specialization, provides a generic differentiation of tasks, each of which is central to the overall project of understanding religious diversity. This thesis explores the relevance and utility of functional specialization as a methodological approach to religious diversity in the philosophy of religion. The first chapter is an analysis of the literature on religious diversity as a topic in the philosophy of religion. It unearths the dominant concerns in the field and some of the obstacles which continue to hinder the development of this enquiry. The second chapter provides the epistemological grounds of functional specialization. While the division of tasks outlined by Lonergan's methodology is useful simply insofar as it differentiates the tasks of academic enquiry, there are more theoretical grounds by which this division is justified. The third chapter provides an explanatory account of the operations and tasks involved in each of the eight functional specialties. It elucidates these specialties by drawing upon relevant analogies from outside the field of religious studies. The fourth chapter brings together the two main concerns of the study by suggesting ways in which functional specialization can make a methodological contribution to the enquiry into religious diversity. It organizes the distinct but related tasks which constitute the philosophical study of religious diversity, demonstrates the current trends regarding each of these tasks, and suggests ways in which they can be made more effective. Lonergan's notion of functional specialization makes an important contribution to the philosophical debate over religious diversity in significant ways. It provides an effective methodology which delineates both the fundamental tasks of scholarly enquiry and the operations involved in these tasks. It explains how current work in the philosophy of religious diversity could benefit from a clear delineation of the relevant tasks. It provides a framework which is open to collaboration among scholars of diverse philosophical and theological viewpoints. lll Resume La diversite religieuse est aujourd'hui une preoccupation centrale dans l'etude de la philosophic des religions. Cette etude propose une demarche methodologique en explorant la division des taches mise de l'avant par Bernard Lonergan (1904- 1984). La methodologie employee par celui-ci, qu'il nomma « specialisation fonctionnelle », permet d'etablir une separation generique des taches, chacune d'elles jouant un role important dans la comprehension globale de la diversite religieuse. Cette etude illustre la pertinence et 1'utilite de la specialisation fonctionnelle en tant qu'approche methodologique dans la philosophie des religions, et particulierement dans l'etude de la diversite religieuse. Le premier chapitre est un survol de la litterature en philosophic des religions qui a pour objet la diversite religieuse. Son but est de reveler les principales preoccupations exprimees dans ce champ d'etude ainsi que les obstacles qui continuent a limiter son developpement. Le deuxieme chapitre presente les fondements epistemologiques de la specialisation fonctionnelle. Certes, la division des taches proposee par Lonergan est utile pour differencier les taches academiques; il existe cependant une justification theorique plus large de son emploi. Le troisieme chapitre dresse un portrait des operations et des taches concernant chacune des huit specialites fonctionnelles. I1 met au clair ces specialites par le biais d'analogies tirees de champs d'etudes autres que la science des religions. Le quatrieme chapitre fait une synthese des deux principales preoccupations de cette etude en suggerant des manieres par lesquelles la specialisation fonctionnelle peut contribuer de fa9on methodique a la recherche sur la diversite religieuse. Ce chapitre elabore une structure pour evaluer les taches distinctes mais connexes qui constituent l'etude philosophique de la diversite religieuse, il demontre les tendances actuelles liees a chacune de ces taches, et il suggere des fa9ons par lesquelles elles pourraient devenir plus efficaces. La notion de specialisation fonctionnelle elaboree par Lonergan contribue de maintes fa9ons au debat philosophique sur Ia diversite religieuse. Elle foumit une methodologie efficace pour delimiter les taches fondamentales de Ia recherche ainsi que les operations requises pour effectuer ces taches. Elle aide a comprendre Ia maniere par laquelle Ia recherche en cours en philosophie de Ia diversite religieuse peut beneficier d'une demarcation plus claire des taches relatives a son exercice, et elle offre une approche structuree ouverte a Ia collaboration de specialistes representant des opinions philosophiques et religieuses differentes. lV Acknowledgements First, I would like to thank my supervisor, Maurice Boutin, for his generous and patient guidance during my doctoral program. Through sharing his theoretical insight and practical wisdom, Professor Boutin has been instrumental in the completion of this thesis. I am also indebted to Philip McShane, whose continual willingness to read and respond to my endless "ramblings" has resulted in the happy combination of a complete thesis and a good understanding of what remains to be understood. I would also like to thank the members of the Faculty of Religious Studies for their incalculable contribution to my education. Over the past three years, Professor Joseph McLelland, Professor Douglas Farrow and Dr. Jim Kanaris have made particularly significant contributions to my intellectual growth. I am indebted to my fellow graduate students at the Faculty of Religious Studies, with whom I have had the privilege to exchange ideas and insights that have considerably broadened my horizons. Conversations with Derek Bianchi Melchin were especially fruitful during my struggle up toward the mind of Bernard Lonergan. I would not have been able to complete this thesis in a timely manner were it not for the generous financial support of the Faculty of Religious Studies. I am also grateful to the FRS administrative staff for their encouragement and assistance. Without the love and support of my family, especially my parents, David and Linda Halse, this project would never have seen the light of day. To my wife, Anita, I cannot begin to express my gratitude. She has taught me more about life than I could ever hope to learn from a book amor magnus doctor est. v Contents Abstract ......................................................................................................... ii Resume.......................................................................................................... 111 Acknowledgements ..... .......... ... .................................... ..... ..... ....................... 1v Abbreviations .. ... .. .... ... ........... ... ......... .. .... .. .. .. ............ ..... .. ............. viii Introduction.................................................................................................. 1 1. Religious Diversity in the Philosophy of Religion: Current Approaches . ..... .. .. .. .. .... .. .. .. ... ... ... .. .. .. .. .. .. .. ... ... .. .. .. .. .... .. .. .. ... .. .. .. 6 1.1 The Ethical Approach .. .... .. .. .. .... ... .. ..... ... .. .... .. .. .. .. .. .. .. ... .. .. ... ...... 7 1.1.1 Himma' s Ethical Objections to the Justifiability of Exclusivism .. 8 1.1.2 Ethical Criteria for Adjudicating Among the Religions ................ 10 1.1.3 Religion, Liberation, and the Problem of Relativism-- Knitter . .... 13 1.1.4 Critical Remarks ......................................... ............... ............ ......... 15 1.2 The Historical Approach .. .... ... ..... .. .... .... ... .... .. .... .. .. .. .. ... .. .. .. .... .. .. .. .. .. 18 1.2.1 Troeltsch on the Absoluteness of Christianity ............................... 19 1.2.2 Toynbee on the History of Religions and Evaluative Criteria .. ..... 21 1.2.3 Wilfred Cantwell Smith on Faith and Comparative Religion ...... .. 23 1.2.4 Concluding Remarks...................................................................... 25 1.3 The Philosophical Approach ....... .......... ........................... ........... ........... 29 1. 3.1 Epistemic Justification . ....... .. .. ... .... .. .. ........ .. .. .. .. .... .. ... .. .. 29 1.3 .1.1 William Alston on Religious Experience .. .. .. .... .. .. .. .. .. .... .. .. 29 1.3.1.2 Alvin Plantinga on the Justification of Exclusivism ...................... 35 1.3.1.3 Concluding Remarks...................................................................... 39 1. 3.2 Criteria of Evaluation . .. .. .. .... .. .. .. .. ............. ... .. .. .. .... .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. ... 41 1.3.3 The Nature of Religious Truth....................................................... 47 1.3.4 Religious Objectives: One or