Abraham Joshua Heschel (1907–1972) was among the most prominent Jewish thinkers engaged in interreligious dialogue, particularly when he played a key role in shaping Nostra Aetate, while simultaneously being a leading advocate for civil rights and a vocal opponent of the Vietnam War.
His 1965 lecture No Religion is an Island, delivered at Union Theological Seminary, articulates foundational principles of his interreligious philosophy. Revisiting this text in the context of the weaponization of religious freedom reveals its contemporary relevance in countering the manipulation of religious liberty as a justification for discrimination and exclusion.
This presentation will explore Heschel’s interreligious thought and the alternative it offers to the premises that facilitate the weaponization of religious freedom. One such premise is the assumption that the mere existence of a “religion” grants it an inherent right to self-expression, often at the expense of individual liberties. Interfaith advocates struggle with this dilemma, as this assumption appears to be the very foundation that enables a non-hierarchical interreligious discourse. This raises a critical question: Can interreligious pluralism be sustained without legitimizing religions that exploit this very pluralism for oppressive purposes?
Heschel’s response to this dilemma is an interreligious pluralism that is not based on the formal category of "religion" but on God’s concern for humanity, which calls all religions into solidarity. This approach rests on two key principles:
- Distinguishing between God and religion, recognizing all religions as relative before the divine concern.
- Viewing religious life as a response to God’s concern, framing interreligious engagement as an ethical imperative for solidarity rather than a doctrinal entitlement.
This "dialogical freedom", as opposed to both negative freedom (freedom from coercion) and positive freedom (freedom for self-determination), calls religious traditions into mutual responsibility. It frames interreligious engagement not as an affirmation of religious autonomy but as a shared moral response to divine concern – an exaltation of response to God which involves human solidarity.
Building on this framework, Heschel challenges the undifferentiated category of "religion" and instead distinguishes between "Faith in One God" – which inherently fosters solidarity and moral responsibility – and "idolatry", which promotes hierarchical exclusion. By phenomenological analyzing, Heschel argues that an idolatrous religious experience is one that sanctifies identity and exclusion, while a biblical experience generates solidarity with all who bear the divine image.
This distinction leads to a bold conclusion: Religious freedom should not be extended to "idolatrous" religions that promote oppression, as doing so does not compromise interreligious pluralism. Rather, true interreligious pluralism embraces diverse traditions that acknowledge their ethical responsibilities but cannot accommodate supremacist or exclusionary ideologies disguised as "religion".
Abraham Joshua Heschel (1907–1972) was a key figure in interreligious dialogue, instrumental in shaping Nostra Aetate, while also advocating for civil rights and opposing the Vietnam War. His 1965 lecture No Religion is an Island articulates a vision of interreligious engagement that challenges the misuse of religious freedom as a justification for discrimination.
This presentation explores Heschel’s alternative framework: a pluralism rooted not in religious autonomy, but in divine concern, which calls all faiths into solidarity. Heschel distinguishes between “Faith in One God,” which fosters moral responsibility, and “idolatry,” which sanctifies exclusion and oppression. His concept of "dialogical freedom" reframes interreligious engagement as a moral response rather than an entitlement. This perspective provides a critical lens for resisting the weaponization of religious freedom while sustaining authentic interreligious pluralism.