The Honorary Christian

[SedesDomi]

Catholic theologians and missionaries have developed different understandings of the other religions. In the preconciliar days * most Catholics judged the other religions to be false, that is, futile attempts to reach God. In the conciliar period , there was a shift in theology: [members of] the other religions were called ‘anonymous Christians’: "For since Christ died for everyone* and since all are in fact called to the one and same destiny, which is divine, we must hold that the holy Spirit offers to all [Christians and non-Christians alike] the possibility of being made partners, in a way known to God, in the paschal mystery" Gaudium et spes 22]. In the postconciliar period [after Vatican 2] there was a Copernican shift in missiology: some Catholics have come to regard the world religions as autonomous bodies, as valid ways to God, and as sources of new religious awareness.

Pope John Paul [did] not favor the postconciliar view. In the Catholic church, then, this discussion between the magisterium and the theologians, mystics, and missionaries will continue. For now, the suggestion of Ralph Mecklenburger, a rabbi from Michigan, deserves serious consideration: perhaps the best attitude Christians can have toward the other religions is to call them ‘honorary Christians’: “Think of a foreign visitor being declared an ‘honorary citizen’ of a city; the term connotes appreciation, fondness, respect”.

Certainly, this world would be a much more peaceful place if every Jew, Muslim, Buddhist, and Hindu were considered an honorary Christian and every Christian considered an honorary Jew, honorary Muslim, honorary Buddhist, and honorary Hindu.

Timothy G. McCarthy. The Catholic Tradition: The Church in the Twentieth Century. Revised and Expanded 2nd Edition. Chicago: Loyola Press, 1998. 165-166; 147

 

[Claire_from_DE]

**In the conciliar period , there was a shift in theology: [members of] the other religions were called ‘anonymous Christians’: "For since Christ died for everyone and since all are in fact called to the one and same destiny, which is divine, we must hold that the holy Spirit offers to all [Christians and non-Christians alike] the possibility of being made partners, in a way known to God, in the paschal mystery" Gaudium et spes 22].

I’ve never heard the term ‘anonymous Christian’ but, as described above, it isn’t the same as ‘honorary Christian’. To hold out the possibility of all people to share in the paschal mystery is not the same as saying they are Christians. We must, however, treat all people with the respect due them as God’s unique creations.**

 

[SedesDomi]

In the conciliar period , there was a shift in theology: [members of] the other religions were called ‘anonymous Christians’: "For since Christ died for everyone and since all are in fact called to the one and same destiny, which is divine, we must hold that the holy Spirit offers to all [Christians and non-Christians alike] the possibility of being made partners, in a way known to God, in the paschal mystery" Gaudium et spes 22].

I’ve never heard the term ‘anonymous Christian’ but, as described above, it isn’t the same as ‘honorary Christian’. To hold out the possibility of all people to share in the paschal mystery is not the same as saying they are Christians. We must, however, treat all people with the respect due them as God’s unique creations.

“Anonymous Christian” comes from Catholic theologian Karl Rahner. Rahner’s idea formed part of Vatican 2’s description of non-Christian religions, even though Rahner’s specific term “anonymous Christian” was not itself mentioned in the Vatican 2 documents.

Rahner’s idea was that, since God’s grace is available to non-Christians, and since at least some non-Christians were honestly seeking goodness and truth, then at least some non-Christians were recipients of God’s grace, even if they were not ‘officially’ Christian.

I think the good Rabbi meant ‘honorary Christian’ to be synonymous with Rahner’s ‘anonymous Christian’.