Covenantal Pluralism and a Revised Account of Religious Literacy

This presentation is prepared for the workshop and draws on the white paper on covenantal pluralism submitted to the Templeton Religion Trust (TRT). It has two main goals. First, it introduces the audience to ‘covenantal pluralism,’ a new concept and research initiative supported by TRT. Second, it argues for a revised understanding of religious literacy.

Religious pluralism is an undeniable reality of 21st century life, shaped by various factors. Globalization, immigration, and the rise of social and traditional media have made interactions among diverse religious groups commonplace. Certain global events have underscored the importance of cross-cultural literacy (see Seiple and Hoover (2021); Halafoff (2013)). Democratic societies often uphold religious pluralism as a core value. A consequence of living in a religiously pluralistic society is that differences will most certainly exist at both the intracommunal and intercommunal levels. 

Informed by the works of Seiple and Hoover (2021), Seiple and Hoover (2022), and Stewart et al. (2020), I take covenantal pluralism to be a pattern of interaction across religious boundaries that overall is increasingly peaceful, productive, characterized by engagement, and respectful of difference and the integrity of each party. This kind of engagement is demanding and difficult to achieve. Although covenantal pluralism prepares communities to engage with others during times of conflict, it also aims to be preventive by fostering a society in which controversies are averted. Achieving this vision requires a re-evaluation of key terms and virtues essential to enabling covenantal pluralism. This includes revising our account of religious literacy. 

There is a growing literature on religious literacy (see Cheetham et al. 2013; Dinham and Francis 2016; Gustafson 2023; Ellis 2023). A significant portion of this work focuses on promoting religious literacy in K-12 education (see Marcus et al. 2019; Soules and Del Nido forthcoming), with some attention also given to higher education (see Jones and Meyer 2022; Gilliat-Ray 2000; Jacobsen and Jacobsen 2008). There is also recent work addressing religious diversity (see Schilbrack 2020) and religious disagreement (see Dormandy 2020; Jensen 2024).  This, too, is  relevant to conceptualizing religious literacy. 

To motivate my preferred account of religious literacy, I examine prominent accounts—namely, the knowledge-based, analytic-based, and skills-based—revealing their limitations. In response, I propose an alternative: an attentiveness-based approach to religious literacy which is defined as follows: Religious literacy is an attentiveness to one’s religion and others’ religion that enables conversations and practical interactions that cross religious boundaries. This attentiveness is characterized by (a) hermeneutical understanding both of oneself and others, (b) respect for the integrity of both parties and (c) an ongoing process of overcoming misunderstanding. During the workshop, I elaborate on each part of my definition. I argue that this approach more effectively addresses the challenges of pluralism faced by 21st century societies. The specific challenges discussed include exclusivist groups and conversion, multiple religious belonging, and the underlying motivation. I argue these challenges can be addressed through an attentiveness-based approach to religious literacy.

Religious literacy framed as mere tolerance is inadequate for achieving the kind of pluralism we aim for in the 21st century. Similarly, focusing solely on understanding is also insufficient. Tolerance falls short because it does not require active engagement that crosses a religious boundary. Likewise, understanding alone is not enough, as one could gain knowledge of another's religion and misuse it to harm or undermine them. The pluralism we need today demands productive engagement in times of conflict or uncomfortable spaces. Ultimately, we need to move beyond the notion that we have succeeded simply because different religious groups have engaged in peaceful dialogue, collaborated on a social issue, or interacted without causing offense to one another. Producing tangible resolutions to our present-day conflicts requires something more demanding than previous accounts of religious literacy advocated for. 

My account of religious literacy is hermeneutical. Our understanding of who we are is shaped by self-serving categories, which need to be critically examined in order for us to understand how they were constructed. Engaging with others broadens our perspective and acts as a mirror, helping us reflect on ourselves, including our inherent biases and limitations. This self-reflection focuses on the concepts we use to divide the world and shape our identities. Interreligious engagement brings these self-constructions to light by exposing us to the often radically different ways others construct their own identities. My account of religious literacy has a moral dimension. Suppressing one’s moral commitments for the sake of interreligious engagement ought to be avoided. Respecting the integrity of differences requires drawing out these moral commitments and bringing them to the surface and engaging with them directly. This is the kind of engagement that has the potential to enable a pattern of interaction that crosses religious boundaries that overall is increasingly peaceful, productive, characterized by engagement, and respectful of difference and the integrity of each party. This process is highly demanding and requires more than just religious literacy— I believe that it is enabled by other essential virtues, particularly intellectual humility and courage.