The Routledge Handbook of Religious

Literacy Pluralism and Global

Engagement Routledge International
Handbooks 1st Edition Chris Seiple
Visit to download the full and correct content document:
https://ebookstep.com/product/the-routledge-handbook-of-religious-literacy-pluralism-
and-global-engagement-routledge-international-handbooks-1st-edition-chris-seiple/
More products digital (pdf, epub, mobi) instant
download maybe you interests ...

Religious Education and Religious Understanding An

Introduction to the Philosophy of Religious Education
Routledge Library Editions Philosophy of Education
Holley
https://ebookstep.com/product/religious-education-and-religious-
understanding-an-introduction-to-the-philosophy-of-religious-
education-routledge-library-editions-philosophy-of-education-
holley/

Routledge Handbook of Philosophy and Nursing 1st

Edition Martin Lipscomb

https://ebookstep.com/product/routledge-handbook-of-philosophy-
and-nursing-1st-edition-martin-lipscomb/

Religious Education Philosophical Perspectives

Routledge Library Editions Philosophy of Education
Sealey

https://ebookstep.com/product/religious-education-philosophical-
perspectives-routledge-library-editions-philosophy-of-education-
sealey/

Estudios del Discurso The Routledge Handbook of Spanish

Language Discourse Studies 1st Edition Carmen López
Ferrero

https://ebookstep.com/product/estudios-del-discurso-the-
routledge-handbook-of-spanish-language-discourse-studies-1st-
edition-carmen-lopez-ferrero/
Victorian Education and the Ideal of Womanhood
Routledge Library Editions Education 1800 1926 Burstyn

https://ebookstep.com/product/victorian-education-and-the-ideal-
of-womanhood-routledge-library-editions-
education-1800-1926-burstyn/

The Teacher Routledge Library Editions Philosophy of

Education Pearson

https://ebookstep.com/product/the-teacher-routledge-library-
editions-philosophy-of-education-pearson/

The Uses of Schooling Routledge Library Editions

Philosophy of Education Broudy

https://ebookstep.com/product/the-uses-of-schooling-routledge-
library-editions-philosophy-of-education-broudy/

Education and Knowledge Routledge Library Editions

Philosophy of Education Harris

https://ebookstep.com/product/education-and-knowledge-routledge-
library-editions-philosophy-of-education-harris/

The Origins of Civic Universities Manchester Leeds and

Liverpool Routledge Library Editions Education 1800
1926 Jones

https://ebookstep.com/product/the-origins-of-civic-universities-
manchester-leeds-and-liverpool-routledge-library-editions-
education-1800-1926-jones/
 THE ROUTLEDGE HANDBOOK OF
RELIGIOUS LITERACY, PLURALISM, AND
GLOBAL ENGAGEMENT

This pioneering handbook proposes an approach to pluralism that is relational, principled, and
non-relativistic, going beyond banal calls for mere “tolerance.”
The growing religious diversity within societies around the world presents both challenges
and opportunities. A degree of competition between deeply held religious/worldview
perspectives is natural and inevitable, yet at the same time the world urgently needs engagement
and partnership across lines of difference. None of the world’s most pressing problems can be
solved by any single actor, and as such it is not a question of if but when you partner with an
individual or institution that does not think, act, or believe as you do. The authors argue that
religious literacy—defined as a dynamic combination of competencies and skills, continuously
refined through real-world cross-cultural engagement—is vital to building societies and states
of neighborly solidarity and civic fairness.
Through examination, reflection, and case studies across multiple faith traditions and
professional fields, this handbook equips scholars and students, as well as policymakers and
practitioners, to assess, analyze, and act collaboratively in a world of deep diversity.

Chris Seiple, Ph.D., The Fletcher School of Law & Diplomacy, is President Emeritus of the
Institute for Global Engagement, USA, and Principal Advisor to the Templeton Religion
Trust’s Covenantal Pluralism Initiative. A former U.S. Marine infantry officer, he has served as
a Senior Fellow for Comparative Religion at the University of Washington’s Jackson School
of International Studies, as Senior Advisor to the U.S. Agency for International Development’s
Evidence-Based Summit on Strategic Religious Engagement (2020), and as co-chair of the U.S.
Secretary of State’s “Religion and Foreign Policy Working Group” (2011–2013).

Dennis R. Hoover, D.Phil., Oxford University, is editor of The Review of Faith & International
Affairs; Research Advisor to the Templeton Religion Trust’s Covenantal Pluralism Initiative; and
Senior Fellow at the Institute for Global Engagement, USA. He is co-editor with Mariano
Barbato and Robert Joustra of Modern Papal Diplomacy and Social Teaching in World Affairs (2019);
editor of Religion and American Exceptionalism (2014); and co-editor with Chris Seiple and
Pauletta Otis of The Routledge Handbook of Religion and Security (2013).
 THE ROUTLEDGE
HANDBOOK OF RELIGIOUS
LITERACY, PLURALISM, AND
GLOBAL ENGAGEMENT

Edited by
Chris Seiple and Dennis R. Hoover
 Open Access made available with the support of the Fetzer Institute.

Cover image:“Imam Mohamed Magid and Sister, Uzbekistan”,

photograph by Richard Devon, used by permission of the Institute
for Global Engagement (IGE)

First published 2022

by Routledge
2 Park Square, Milton Park,Abingdon, Oxon OX14 4RN
and by Routledge
605 Third Avenue, New York, NY 10158
Routledge is an imprint of the Taylor & Francis Group, an informa business
© 2022 selection and editorial matter, Chris Seiple and
Dennis R. Hoover; individual chapters, the contributors
The right of Chris Seiple and Dennis R. Hoover to be identified as the
authors of the editorial material, and of the authors for their individual
chapters, has been asserted in accordance with sections 77 and 78 of the
Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988.
The Open Access version of this book, available at www.taylorfrancis.com,
has been made available under a Creative Commons Attribution-Non
Commercial-No Derivatives 4.0 license.
Trademark notice: Product or corporate names may be trademarks or
registered trademarks, and are used only for identification and explanation
without intent to infringe.
British Library Cataloguing-in-Publication Data
A catalogue record for this book is available from the British Library
Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data
Names: Seiple, Chris, editor. | Hoover, Dennis, editor.
Title:The Routledge handbook of religious literacy, pluralism and global
engagement/edited by Chris Seiple and Dennis R. Hoover.
Description:Abingdon, Oxon; New York, NY: Routledge, 2022. |
Includes bibliographical references and index.
Identifiers: LCCN 2021031382 (print) | LCCN 2021031383 (ebook) |
ISBN 9780367478025 (hardback) | ISBN 9780367692452 (paperback) |
ISBN 9781003036555 (ebook)
Subjects: LCSH: Religion. | Theology. | Religious pluralism. |
Religions–Relations.
Classification: LCC BL85 .R68 2022 (print) | LCC BL85 (ebook) |
DDC 201/.5–dc23
LC record available at https://lccn.loc.gov/2021031382
LC ebook record available at https://lccn.loc.gov/2021031383
ISBN: 978-0-367-47802-5 (hbk)
ISBN: 978-0-367-69245-2 (pbk)
ISBN: 978-1-003-03655-5 (ebk)
DOI: 10.4324/9781003036555
Typeset in Bembo
by Deanta Global Publishing Services Chennai, India
We dedicate this book to anyone who wants to thoughtfully
and practically engage the world’s greatest challenges, and who
embraces the opportunities of working with others who do not
think, believe, or act as they do.
 CONTENTS

Acknowledgments xi

Introduction 1

1 Rethinking religious literacy and pluralism: Crossing cultures, making

covenants, and engaging globally 3
Chris Seiple and Dennis R. Hoover

PART I
What is religious literacy for? Philosophical and religious perspectives
on covenantal pluralism 19

2 Covenantal pluralism: Toward a world of peaceable neighborhoods 21

W. Christopher Stewart, Chris Seiple, and Dennis R. Hoover

3 Covenantal pluralism: Perspectives from Jewish history and thought 38

David Saperstein

4 Fratelli Tutti, lessons learned from interreligious action, and

the Catholic Church 53
Maryann Cusimano Love

5 Are Calvinists for pluralism?: The politics and practice of

a Protestant possibility 66
Robert J. Joustra and Jessica R. Joustra

6 Deed over idea:Toward a shared Caliphate 80

Mahan Mirza

vii
 Contents

7 Hinduism, insular pluralism, and religious literacy 96

Shylashri Shankar

8 The elephant in the room: Buddhist religious exclusivism and

prospects for covenantal pluralism 107
Paul Fuller

9 Isomorphism, syncretism, and poly-ontological dynamics:The

implications of Chinese religion for covenantal pluralism 120
David A. Palmer

10 On neutrality and the nones: Secular humanism, covenantal

pluralism, and “religious” literacy 136
Roy Speckhardt

PART II
Who needs religious literacy? Perspectives on professional fields 149

11 Religious literacy and K-12 education 151

Benjamin Pietro Marcus

12 Religious literacy and higher education 165

James Walters

13 International studies, religion, and cross-cultural religious literacy 177

James K.Wellman, Jr.

14 Religious literacy in development and humanitarian relief 186

Katherine Marshall

15 Religious literacy and diplomacy 200

Nicole Bibbins Sedaca

16 Religious literacy, chaplaincy, and spiritual care 215

Wendy Cadge, Carolina P. Seigler, and Trace Haythorn

17 Corporate religious diversity, equity, and inclusion as covenantal pluralism 228

Brian J. Grim and Kent Johnson

18 Religious literacy and social services 241

Chelsea Langston Bombino and Stanley Carlson-Thies

19 Religious literacy and American journalism:A charge to public service 254

Josh Good

viii
 Contents

PART III
Where can religious literacy and covenantal pluralism make a difference?
Case studies and practitioner perspectives 269

20 Engagement and embrace—from apartheid to democracy:A reflection

on rupture and a toolkit for transition 271
Ebrahim Rasool

21 The secularism paradox: Living with deep difference in the Middle East 284
Shadi Hamid

22 Two steps forward, one step back: Prospects for covenantal pluralism in
Laos and Vietnam 295
Stephen Bailey and Hien Vu

23 Cross-cultural religious literacy, competencies, and skills:

An Indonesian experience 309
Matius Ho

24 “Salad bowl” secularism: India’s covenant to preserve pluralism 321

Tehmina Arora

25 Religious literacy and Pakistan’s pluralist potential 335

Minhas Majeed Khan

26 Geo-religious literacy, orthodoxy, and plurality in Russia: Prospects for

covenantal pluralism 348
Katya Drozdova

27 Transition and transformation in Western Europe: Possibilities for

covenantal pluralism 359
Sughra Ahmed

28 Religious literacy, racial literacy, and Latin America’s overdue reckoning

with deep diversity 371
Raimundo C. Barreto

29 Cross-cultural religious literacy and pluralist leadership in the United States 385
Stephanie Summers

30 Understanding—and bridging—religious liberty tribalism:A case study

in talking about Muslims’ rights with Christian conservatives in America 394
Asma T. Uddin

ix
 Contents

31 Seeking a virtuous feedback loop: Robust pluralism and civic

engagement in the United States 407
Zeenat Rahman

32 Fairness as a path forward on LGBTQ rights and religious liberty 416

Shirley Hoogstra and Robin Fretwell Wilson

33 From the pulpit to pluralism:A personal reflection 426

Bob Roberts, Jr.

Notes on contributors 437

Index 442

x
 ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

We are grateful to the Issachar Fund, and its team—especially Kurt Berends, Mike Hamilton,
and Sara Merrilees—for helping to envision this project in March of 2019, and for supporting
and walking with us as it developed.We are also thankful to the Templeton Religion Trust, espe-
cially its chief grants officer W. Christopher Stewart (who is also our co-author on Chapter 2
of this book), for support and keen insight. Our editors at Routledge, Emily Ross and Hannah
Rich, have been equally fantastic in their support and flexibility through every stage of the
process.We are especially grateful for our international team of wise and winsome authors, who
gave so generously of their time and expertise to make this unique volume a reality.We also owe
a debt of gratitude to the incredible staff and partners of the Institute for Global Engagement
and The Review of Faith & International Affairs, from whom we have learned so much over the last
two decades.And a special word of thanks is due to everyone at the University of Washington’s
Jackson School of International Studies—students, faculty, and administrators, but especially
Jim Wellman, Randy Thompson, and Megan Bowman; in conversation and in the classroom,
they helped Chris test and hone the concepts of cross-cultural religious literacy. Finally, we are
most of all thankful to our families, whose steadfast love, support, and patience have made this
journey possible.

xi
Introduction
 1
RETHINKING RELIGIOUS
LITERACY AND PLURALISM
Crossing cultures, making covenants,
and engaging globally

Chris Seiple and Dennis R. Hoover

It was never our intention to go to Pakistan. But one day, in the fall of 2003, the Institute for
Global Engagement (IGE), where we both worked and are still affiliated, received a guest who
asked:“I don’t know what you do—I think you build bridges—but how would you like to travel
to Peshawar, Pakistan, and engage the newly elected Chief Minister of the Northwest Frontier
Province?”1 It would have been easy to say no. IGE was only three years old. As a think-and-
do-tank, IGE was busy building new educational programs while also building relationships
that would eventually yield forums across Asia on religion and the rule of law, security, and
citizenship.And we had just founded The Review of Faith & International Affairs, a first-of-its-kind
journal published quarterly by Routledge.
Chris sought some advice. Early in 2004, Chris had lunch with Akbar Ahmed, the longtime
Ibn Khaldun Chair of Islamic Studies and Professor of International Relations at American
University. When asked how to think about this opportunity to expand IGE’s work to Pakistan,
particularly the area along the Afghanistan border between Peshawar and Bannu where he had
served as a Pakistani civil servant, Akbar replied:“I’ve been a Pashtun for 3,000 years, a Muslim
for 1,400, and a Pakistani for 57.”
Akbar’s point was succinct and profound. Akbar knew who he was. He was fluent in his
culture, his faith, and his country—across time and space. Were we literate in who we were,
much less the peoples of the Northwest Frontier, and their faith traditions? Could we under-
stand ourselves, and could we muster the will and skills to truly understand the Pashtun-Muslim
people of Pakistan?
Akbar was saying that to engage the Pashtun-Muslim culture in Northwest Pakistan
successfully—that is, to develop and implement sustainable projects, together—we would need
much more than good intentions, much more than surface level familiarity with the country.As
with any engagement, we would have to review motivations and interests, ours, and theirs.We
had to think through what we thought about ourselves, and what we believed about engaging a
people and culture so different than our own.We also had to think about those people and their

3 DOI: 10.4324/9781003036555-2
 Chris Seiple and Dennis R. Hoover

culture, and how they understood themselves, and, how they understood engaging a people and
culture so different than their own.And then, as a result, we had to think through what goals we
might develop and implement with them.
We had the will to develop a deepening competency about ourselves, the Pashtuns, and what
we might do together, but, frankly, we did not have the skills. In his first meeting with the Chief
Minister of the Northwest Frontier Province, Chris found himself asking: “Why do you do
what you do?”The Chief Minister responded:“I believe that the Creator will hold me account-
able for the way I govern my people.” Chris did not expect that answer, let alone concurring
that he believed the same thing too (even though he also knew that he had serious theological
and political differences with the Chief Minister). But there Chris was: Totally unprepared to
evaluate, negotiate, and/or communicate the moment, because he did not have the skills to be
competent in himself, the other, and what might be done together.
And so began a learning process that continues to this day. Chris eventually made several trips
to Pakistan, making many friends, with whom IGE subsequently worked on various innovative
projects (e.g., a fellows program at the University of Science and Technology in Bannu). This
process of partnership took place faster because both parties sought to know their own faith
and culture at their richest and deepest best, and enough about the other’s faith and culture to
demonstrate genuine respect (not merely “tolerance”) for the essence of the other’s identity.This
respect was for each other’s inherent dignity, and genuinely held beliefs (while not implying any
blanket endorsement of the other’s beliefs).Across different ethnic and political cultures, as well
as irreconcilable theological differences, they learned how to agree to disagree, agreeably, and
therefore how to work together, practically.
This model and mindset, encouraged by similar experiences in other countries, set the organ-
izing pattern for IGE’s work in its early years, and continues to guide its work in challenging
contexts around the world—China,Vietnam, Laos, Myanmar, Uzbekistan, Northern Iraq, and
parts of Northern and Eastern Africa—as well as its Center for Women, Faith and Leadership,
which ensures that gender is an integral dimension of IGE’s engagement in each place. In each
of these situations, the key has always been the same: Seeking first to understand the essence
of one’s own, as well as the other’s, identity before engaging to create a relationship capable of
discovering common values, and common interests, pursuant a common project.
IGE did not use phrases like “cross-cultural religious literacy” and “covenantal pluralism” to
describe what it was doing and why, but, in reflection, these concepts capture the core of IGE’s
ethos and methodology.As we have come to define it, cross-cultural religious literacy is a set of
skills (evaluation, negotiation, and communication) rooted in a set of competencies (in under-
standing oneself, understanding the religious “other,” and understanding the context of potential
collaboration).These competencies and skills contribute to, and are refined by, practical experi-
ences of mutual engagement, embodied and lived in specific contexts. Cross-cultural religious
literacy is a means toward the ends of “covenantal pluralism.” The philosophy of covenantal
pluralism calls both for a constitutional order of equal rights and responsibilities and for cultural
norms of engaging, respecting, and protecting the other (albeit without necessarily conceding
moral equivalence to all the beliefs and behaviors of others).
As our writings and conferences suggest, across IGE’s first 20 years, we constantly assessed
and analyzed ourselves, as well as our potential partners and their context, and continue to do
so, before applying ideas developed together.2 We have also sought to equip others worldwide,
of any religion or no religion, to similarly consider and include religion—in their academic
disciplines and professional sectors—understanding that religion can potentially be, depending
on the context, a tremendous force for good, or ill.

4
 Rethinking religious literacy, pluralism

Global context and the need for religious literacy

Scholarly specialists in religious studies have of course long argued for the value of education
about comparative religion. But it wasn’t until after the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001,
that a broader sense of urgency about religious literacy began to take root. Moreover, the pro-
cesses of globalization—and reactions to those processes—over the ensuing two decades have
only further heightened the need for cross-cultural religious literacy across virtually every sector
of society and governance, domestically and transnationally.
Globalization is many things, but it seems to have two primary, sometimes countervailing,
effects. First, and most practically, globalization creates or exacerbates problems that can only be
solved through broad-based partnership. Today’s interrelated global challenges—from trade to
terrorism, climate change to counterproliferation, development to deterrence, and health(care)
to human rights—demand different perspectives, as well as different partnerships among indi-
viduals and institutions that will not share the same faith background or worldview orientation.
We believe that in a world where no global challenge can be solved by a single state or non-state
actor, it is not a question of if but when you partner with an individual or institution that does
not think, act, or believe as you do.
In other words, no matter our different spiritual epistemologies and/or ethical frameworks, it
is in our collective self-interest to find a way to work together.Which is also to say—consciously
or sub-consciously—each of us will possess a different point of moral departure that de facto
exercises a philosophy of the other in building practical partnerships. Our global engagement
pursuant to our self-interest cannot help but reflect what we believe about someone else, a
needed partner, who doesn’t believe as we do.
Globalization’s second effect is its constant impact on identity. The continuous transfer of
information and increase in mobility accelerated by globalization inevitably challenge how we
understand and conceive of ourselves, the other, and the world. In the best of circumstances,
encounter and principled engagement with different religious and philosophical frameworks
strengthen our identity as we consider teachings and thinking that, despite differences, can
anchor our spiritual/moral identity in the other (i.e., the Golden Rule).
But we also know that information can be manipulated to play upon and/or create real
and alleged threats to our identity. Much too often, sadly, people cannot live out their iden-
tity because their beliefs are construed as a threat. Annually since 2007 the Pew Research
Center has been measuring government restrictions on religion around the world. In 2018,
religious restrictions reached an all-time high (Pew Research Center 2020).The total number
of countries with “high” or “very high” levels of government restrictions also increased, ris-
ing from 52 in 2017 to 56 in 2018. Pew also reports an index of social hostilities involving
religion. In 2018 this index was down slightly—but only after having reached an all-time
high in 2017.
Given such repression and hostility it is perhaps not surprising that our world is now expe-
riencing the most displaced people since World War II. According to the United Nations, over
80 million people have been displaced from their home (UNHCR 2020). Too often, peo-
ple are fleeing conflict where religion has seemingly been used to validate the power of one
group (often the ethno-religious majority) against another (usually ethno-religious minorities)
(Theodorou 2014; see also Falk 2019 and Seiple 2016).
These two combined and countervailing effects of globalization—a need for partnership
when we are unwilling (no will) and/or unable (no skills) to partner because of (perceived)
threats to our respective identities—yield a world of conceptual, geographic, and spiritual dis-

5
 Chris Seiple and Dennis R. Hoover

ruption and dislocation. It is hard to work together when our identity is defined against, and/or
as under threat from, the other. Inevitably, people suffer, ask why, and yearn for meaning.
Globally, religion remains a pervasive force, one that can be used for good and bad.As such, the
stakes for cross-cultural religious literacy, and illiteracy, are high.As Stephen Prothero, a leader in
the field of religious literacy, has written:“religious illiteracy is more dangerous because religion
is the most volatile constituent of culture, because religion has been, in addition to one of the
greatest forces for good in world history, one of the greatest forces for evil” (Prothero 2007, 17).

The emerging field of religious literacy

In the American context, the field of religious literacy crossed a threshold of public awareness
in 2007, with the publication of several key books.The most widely cited is the New York Times
bestselling Religious Literacy: What Every American Needs to Know About Religion—But Doesn’t,
by Prothero. Prothero wrote Religious Literacy “to produce citizens who know enough about
Christianity and the world’s religions to participate meaningfully—on both the left and the
right—in religiously inflected public debates.” His was not a favoritism of Christianity but sim-
ply a naming of a fact:Various understandings of Christianity played an instrumental role in the
founding and evolution of the United States. One cannot, Prothero argued, be a fully engaged
citizen of the US unless one is functionally literate about its history, a history which Biblical
diction and theological doctrine played a vital part in shaping (and still do). Prothero defined
religious literacy as “the ability to understand and use in one’s day-to-day life the basic building
blocks of religious traditions—key terms, symbols, doctrines, practices, sayings characters, meta-
phors, and narratives” (Prothero 2007, 12).
Diane Moore—another leader in the emergent field of religious literacy—agrees that facts
about religion are important, and that they should be taught in America’s public schools (also for
the sake of citizenship). But she felt it imperative to stress that facts about religion do not exist
in isolation. They should be situated and understood in context. For example, an understand-
ing of suffering is instrumental to the Christian faith; but that understanding, and how it shapes
eventual application, will likely differ according to the socio-cultural and historical contexts of
whether the group of believers is part of the ethnic majority or minority (e.g., white and black
churches in America). Moreover, these contexts also had to be taught, and how they were taught
must be given conscious and ongoing reflection.
In her 2007 book, Overcoming Religious Illiteracy: A Cultural Studies Approach to the Study of
Religion in Secondary Education, Moore made a threefold case for the multi-disciplinary approach
of cultural studies and its effort to name the relevant lenses, situated facts, and inherent biases.
This holistic approach (Moore 2007, 5) assumes that:

·· “[W]ithout a basic understanding of the beliefs, symbols, literature, and practices related to
the world’s religious traditions, much of history and culture is rendered incomprehensible.
Religion has always been and continues to be woven into the fabric of cultures and civi-
lizations in ways that are inextricable. The failure to recognize this fact impoverishes our
understanding of human experience and sends the false message that religion is primarily
an individual as opposed to a social phenomenon.”
·· “[R]eligious worldviews provide alternative frameworks from which to critique normative
cultural assumptions. … [T]he study of religion can serve to enhance rather than thwart
critical thinking and cultural imagination regarding human agency and capacity.”
·· “[K]nowledge of the basic tenets and structures of the world’s religions is essential to a
functioning democracy in our increasingly pluralistic age.”

6
 Rethinking religious literacy, pluralism

Moore (2007, 56) went on to define religious literacy as

the ability to discern and analyze the fundamental intersections of religion and social/
political/cultural life through multiple lenses. Specifically, a religiously literate person
will possess 1) a basic understanding of the history, central texts, beliefs, practices, and
contemporary manifestations of several of the world’s religious traditions as they arose
out of and continue to be shaped by particular social, historical, and cultural contexts;
and 2) the ability to discern and explore the religious dimensions of political, social,
and cultural expressions across time and place … This understanding of religious lit-
eracy emphasizes a method of inquiry more than specific content knowledge, though
familiarity with historical manifestations is an important foundation for understanding
the intersections of religion with other dimensions of human social life.

These influential writings set the pattern for what followed in the emerging field of religious
literacy: An American K-12 emphasis on understanding the other, but not necessarily the (role
of) self during engagement of the other. For example, also in 2007, the First Amendment Center
published Finding Common Ground:A First Amendment Guide to Religion and Public Schools (Haynes
and Thomas 2007).They argued that general education is woefully incomplete without impart-
ing at least basic knowledge of religion, and they challenged the widespread misunderstanding
of the Constitutional separation of church and state as somehow barring teaching about religion
(from a nonsectarian point of view).
In 2010 the American Academy of Religion (AAR) issued its Guidelines for Teaching about
Religion in K-12 Public Schools in the United States. Produced by an AAR task force chaired by
Diane Moore, the Guidelines articulated the rationale for religious literacy education as follows:
“Illiteracy regarding religion 1) is widespread, 2) fuels prejudice and antagonism, and 3) can be
diminished by teaching about religion in public schools using a non-devotional, academic per-
spective, called religious studies” (AAR Religion in the Schools Task Force 2010). Building on
this achievement, in 2011 Moore began laying the groundwork for a Religious Literacy Project
based at Harvard Divinity School.
In 2015, Adam Dinham and Matthew Francis published their edited book, Religious Literacy
in Policy and Practice, in which they argued (Dinham and Francis 2015, 257, 266, 270) that reli-
gious literacy “is a stretchy, fluid concept that is variously configured and applied in terms of the
context in which it happens … [R]eligious literacy is necessarily a non-didactic idea that must
be adapted as appropriate to the specific environment.”They further concluded that

religious literacy lies in having the knowledge about at least some religious traditions,
and an awareness of and ability to find out about others. Its purpose is to avoid stereo-
types, engage, respect, and learn from others, and build good relations across difference.
In this it is a civic endeavor rather than a religious one, and seeks to support a strong multifaith
society, that is inclusive of people from all faith traditions and none, within a context that is
largely suspicious and anxious about religion and belief.
[emphasis added]

Accordingly, religious literacy “is best understood as a framework to be worked out in context.
In this sense, it is better to talk of religious literacies in the plural than literacy in the singular.”
Also in 2015, Moore founded the Religious Literacy Project at Harvard Divinity School,
which among other things has sought to apply religious literacy in various professional fields,
running symposia on topic areas such as media and entertainment, journalism, immigration ser-

7
 Chris Seiple and Dennis R. Hoover

vices, and humanitarian action. For example, a 2017 study with Oxfam looked at the religious
literacy of faith-based relief and development NGOs (Gingerich et al. 2017). Moore also added
the consideration of “power and powerlessness” to her method for exploring religious literacy,
suggesting that questions had to be asked about “which perspectives are politically and socially
prominent,” and why (Moore 2015).
In 2017, the US National Council for Social Studies, through the support of the AAR and
the Religious Freedom Center, added religious studies to its “C3 Framework for Social Studies
State Standards” (National Council for Social Studies 2017). Reflecting on this Framework,
Religious Freedom Center Director (at the time) Charles Haynes remarked:

Religious literacy is critical for sustaining the American experiment in religious lib-
erty and diversity. Only by educating students about religions and beliefs in ways that
are constitutionally and academically sound can the United States continue to build
one nation out of many cultures and faiths.
(National Council for Social Studies n.d.)

In 2018 the emerging field of religious literacy began to consider global application, as well as
the role of the one seeking religious literacy about the other.The Religious Freedom Center’s
Benjamin Marcus, for example, warned against a linguistic mirror-imaging of the religious other
while engaging him/her. Marcus (2018) noted that “Americans read the world fluently using
their own religious language, but many are incapable of understanding the language of the reli-
gious other in public life.”To truly understand and respect the other “requires the ability to parse
religious language and to analyze how individuals and communities value each component with
their religious identities.”
Religious literacy education has also begun to expand beyond K-12 to address higher edu-
cation. Douglas Jacobsen and Rhonda Hustedt Jacobsen pointed the way in their important
2012 book, No Longer Invisible: Religion in University Education. One example of the growing
interest in religious literacy at the university level came in January of 2018, when Chris taught
“Cross-Cultural Religious Literacy & Leadership in an Age of Partnership” for the first time at
the University of Washington’s Jackson School of International Studies.This class resulted from
Chris’ experiences at IGE as well as a “Bridging the Gap” grant from the Carnegie Endowment
meant to help the academy become more relevant to policymakers.Through this class, and his
work with the Templeton Religion Trust, Chris began to apply his global experiences through
building a broader framework of religious literacy: i.e., beginning with the self, then the other,
while focusing on the skills necessary to do something together (See Seiple 2018a, 2018b). In
March 2019, the University of Washington Board of Regents unanimously approved “Cross-
Cultural Religious Literacy” as a graduate certificate.3
The recognition of religious literacy as a priority in higher education took another step
forward in November 2019, when the AAR published its “Religious Literacy Guidelines:What
U.S. College Graduates Need to Know about Religion.” Echoing the catalytic work of Diane
Moore, who co-chaired the report, the AAR (2019) states:

Religious literacy helps us understand ourselves, one another, and the world in which
we live. It includes the abilities to:

·· Discern accurate and credible knowledge about diverse religious traditions and
expressions;
·· Recognize the internal diversity within religious traditions;

8
 Rethinking religious literacy, pluralism

·· Understand how religions have shaped—and are shaped by—the experiences and
histories of individuals, communities, nations, and regions;
·· Interpret how religious expressions make use of cultural symbols and artistic rep-
resentations of their times and contexts;
·· Distinguish confessional or prescriptive statements made by religions from
descriptive or analytical statements.

Later, in Appendix B of the guidelines, the AAR, taking more notice of the person seeking to
engage the religious other, defined religious literacy as

the ability to discern and analyze the role of religion in personal, social, political,
professional, and cultural life. Religious literacy fosters the skills and knowledge that
enable graduates to participate—in informed ways—in civic and community life; to
work effectively and collaboratively in diverse contexts; to think reflectively about
commitments to themselves and others; and to cultivate self-awareness.

In October 2020, Moore also launched the Master of Religion and Public Life degree program
at Harvard Divinity School to “advance the public understanding of religion in service of a just
world at peace.”4

Implications
By way of summary thus far, there are several dimensions to “religious literacy” in its full-
est sense. The first is recognition of the implicit difference between diversity and pluralism.
Diversity is the presence of difference. It is side-by-side tolerance. Diana Eck, director of the
Harvard Pluralism Project, writes:

Pluralism is not diversity alone, but the energetic engagement with diversity. Diversity
can and has meant the creation of religious ghettoes with little traffic between or
among them.Today, religious diversity is a given, but pluralism is not a given; it is an
achievement.
(Eck n.d.)

The second key element, accordingly, is engagement. If we want to move beyond tolerance, we
will need the will and skills to engage. Engagement requires an understanding of the other’s
motivations and interests, and some self-awareness of one’s own. Engaging a religious actor is
no different than engaging a secular one—the process still requires an understanding of what
you and the other party seek, and why.“Religious literacy” at the least is a tool for understand-
ing the religious other. Certainly, Prothero, Moore, and Marcus, among others, would begin
there.
But, it is also true that most writers would agree that context is at the heart of “religious
literacy” as a means to understanding, if not application. Judgment and flexibility are therefore
vital characteristics, as individuals, situations, and contexts vary. (Flexibility is also important
because, as the above survey indicates, religious literacy itself is an evolving concept.) And if reli-
gious literacy is context-dependent, then it is inevitably also about relationships. Such extrapola-
tive logic suggests that the religious literacy necessary to engage the other requires multi-level
and multi-directional understanding—including understanding of the situation and place, and,
understanding of oneself, as one comes into relationship with the other and the place.

9
 Chris Seiple and Dennis R. Hoover

Religious literacy, therefore, is relational even as it implicitly, given the many unknowns,
demands a humble approach in its desire to cross from mere tolerance of diversity to proactive
and nonrelativistic pluralism, through mutual engagement. In fact, it is a civic responsibility. In
his discussion of “deep pluralism,”William Connolly (2005, 64–65) writes:

In the ideal case each faith thereby embeds the religious virtue of hospitality and the
civic virtue of presumptive generosity into its relational practices. It inserts relational
modesty into its ritual practices to amplify one side of its own faith—the injunction
to practice hospitality toward other faiths coexisting with it—and to curtail pressures
within it to repress or marginalize other faiths.To participate in the public realm does
not now require you to leave your faith at home in the interests of secular reason (or
one of its surrogates); it involves mixing into the relational practice of faith itself a pre-
liminary readiness to negotiate with presumptive generosity and forbearance in those
numerous situations where recourse to the porous rules of commonality across faiths,
public procedure, reason, or deliberation are insufficient to the issue at hand.
Negotiation of such an ethos of pluralism, first, honors the embedded character of
faith; second, gives expression to a fugitive element of care, hospitality, or love for dif-
ferences simmering in most faiths; third, secures specific faiths against persecution; and,
fourth, offers the best opportunity for diverse faiths to coexist without violence while
supporting the civic conditions of common governance. It does not issue in a simple
universalism in which one image of transcendence sets the standard everywhere or in
a cultural relativism in which one faith prevails here and another there. It is neither
universalism nor relativism in the simple mode of each. It is deep pluralism.

Such an interconnected web of relationships between and among religious (and non-religious)
people requires, as Connolly emphasizes, the skill of negotiation. Negotiation, however, begins
with the skill of evaluation (i.e., the capacity to assess and analyze the various dynamics at play);
and commences and ends with the skill of communication (how something is said, or not said,
is often more important than what is said).This web of relationships also requires, as Connolly
suggests, the best of one’s values, as well as a keen understanding of the power dynamics at play
(which can result in violence, if not managed properly).
Certainly, this has been our experience in our work with IGE over the years. We always
found good people everywhere, engaging according to the best of their faith and conscience,
and as a civic responsibility, living out the values of charity, hospitality, and respect toward the
(religious) other. But it is also true that we always found contentious issues that invariably
pointed back to the local power dynamic between the ethnic and/or religious majority and
the ethnic and/or religious minorities. For example, access to education, worship, and good
development were often part and parcel of the majority-minority power relationship.A holistic
approach to religious literacy requires situated knowledge—a knowledge that is not only aca-
demic but also contextual and relational.
Of course, such dynamics are part of the human condition. James C. Scott’s important schol-
arship on the history of the people of upland Southeast Asia provides vivid examples of such
majority-minority power relations. In The Art of Not Being Governed, Scott (2009, 13, 19, 20, 27,
155, 158, 337) writes:

The attempt to bring the periphery into line is read by representatives of the spon-
soring state as providing civilization and progress—where progress is, in turn, read as
the intrusive propagation of the linguistic, agricultural, and religious practices of the

10
 Rethinking religious literacy, pluralism

dominant ethnic group: the Han, the Kinh, the Burman, the Thai. … In the preco-
lonial period, the resistance can be seen in a cultural refusal of lowland patterns and
in the flight of lowlanders seeking refuge in the hills. … The hills, however, are not
simply a space of political resistance but also a zone of cultural refusal. … Treatment
of lowland cultures and societies as self-contained entities (for example, “Thai civi-
lization,” “Chinese culture”) replicates the unreflective structure of scholarship and,
in doing so, adopts the hermetic view of culture that lowland elites themselves wish
to project.The fact is that hill and valley societies have to be read against each other
to make any sense. … The religious “frontier” beyond which orthodoxy could not easily be
imposed was therefore not so much a place or defined border as it was a relation to power—that
varying margin at which state power faded appreciably … Religious identity in this case is a
self-selected boundary-making device designed to emphasize political and social difference …
The valley imagination has its history wrong. Hill peoples are not pre-anything. In
fact, they are better understood as post-irrigated rice, postsedentary, postsubject, and
perhaps even postliterate.They represent, in the longue durée, a reactive and purpose-
ful statelessness of peoples who have adapted to a world of states while remaining
outside their firm grasp.
[emphasis added]

Nuanced understandings of power dynamics (including racial dynamics), and how they impact
local self-understanding, are essential to meaningful mutual engagement. Put differently, Scott’s
description of lowland and highland Southeast Asia suggests the kind of questions that a holistic
approach to religious literacy must ask of the context, and the potential partners involved, ever
appreciating the situated knowledge, as well as one’s own self-understanding, and the interaction
between them. In short: It’s complicated, fluid, and evolving.

From academic to cross-cultural religious literacy: competencies and skills

Cross-cultural religious literacy demands that one be reflective about one’s philosophy/theology
of the other, toward practical and positive engagement in a multi-faith, globalizing world that
will require multi-faith partners to serve the common good. Put simply, we must first under-
stand ourselves (a personal competency), then understand others as they understand themselves
(a comparative competency), and then understand the nature and requirements of leadership
in crossing cultural and religious barriers for the sake of practical collaboration, which tends to
yield civic solidarity (a collaborative competency).
Moreover, it is important to recognize that these competencies are not linear and, in fact,
feed from and help form each other. Indeed, one often only begins to discover self through
the engagement of the other. In our experience, the other is not necessarily met initially out
of altruistic desire, but often out of the practical self-interest of a common challenge. It is the
human condition that the heart follows the hands of hard work, before the head finally agrees.
Stereotypes are sometimes only overcome through the humanizing of work together.

Personal Competency
To have “personal competency” is to understand one’s own moral, epistemological, and spiritual
framework—to include one’s own (holy) texts (and/or oral traditions) and what they say about
engaging the other. It also includes understanding how and why one’s own character develops,
and deepens.As noted above, traditional religious literacy literature often under-emphasizes the

11
 Chris Seiple and Dennis R. Hoover

self as a starting point, if it is included at all. As Lenn Goodman (2014, 1, 3) astutely observes,
self-knowledge is essential to authentic engagement and dialogue.

[Fruitful dialogue demands] knowing something about who we are ourselves, what we
believe and care about, and how what is other actually is other.Without the discipline
of self-knowledge to complement our curiosity, interest collapses into mere projection
and conjecture … The self-knowledge that pluralism demands is hard won. It means
coming to peace with oneself, reconciling one’s heritage with one’s personal outlook
and existential insights, and integrating oneself in a community even as one differenti-
ates oneself from it … Tolerance is the minimum demand of pluralism in any healthy
society. Religious tolerance does not mean homogenizing. Pluralism preserves differ-
ences.What it asks for is respect.

Comparative Competency
To have “comparative competency” is to understand the moral, epistemological, and spiritual
framework of one’s neighbor as s/he does, and what that framework says about engaging the
other.This dimension of religious literacy includes the range of topics that would typically be
covered in a religious studies course in comparative religion. However, we would also stress the
crucial importance of developing an understanding of the lived religion of the religious other,
in a particular place. Put another way, what are the thresholds in the moral framework of the
other that allow one to belong to a particular group and/or place? In asking this question, we are
especially mindful that the things that are genuinely meaningful in one’s walk of faith do not
necessarily comport precisely with that religion’s official doctrines.

Collaborative Competency
By “collaborative competency” we mean holistic knowledge of the particular place where mul-
tiple actors (individuals or organizations, state and non-state) with different moral frameworks,
usually informed by different religions, meet in order to consider working together to accom-
plish a specific task. Collaborative competency is understanding the spiritual, ethnic, and/or
organizational cultures relevant to the process of partnership, i.e., developing and implementing
a project or program together.A collaborative competency takes place when different individu-
als/institutions move from side-by-side tolerance (diversity), to self- and other-awareness, to
mutual engagement (the heart of a healthy kind of pluralism). Crossing into the context of the
other always respects the lived reality of a particular place, situating the partnership and resulting
projects within the spiritual, secular, ethnic, and organizational cultures of the partners involved,
while also recognizing the power dynamics that are present.
The prepared movement toward another is the moment of application.And that moment of
crossing toward the other is not only engagement, but also leadership, as both parties will have to
fashion shared goals and methods that can accomplish the task at hand, and speak to the various
government and civil society stakeholders (some, even many, of whom will not be religious).

*****
However, in addition to the above competencies, engagement and leadership also require spe-
cific skills—skills informed by historical experience and precedents of multi-faith endeavors. If
there is a will to learn how to think conceptually about this process, then there must also be
skills that train about what to do in specific contexts.These skills not only help build personal,

12
 Rethinking religious literacy, pluralism

comparative, and collaborative competencies, they are transferrable to any vocation, or loca-
tion.They are critical to the process of assessing and analyzing within the three competencies,
to include their combined application. Based on our global engagement experience, there are
three basic skill sets that are particularly helpful in any situation: Evaluation, negotiation, and
communication.

Evaluation
The evaluation process takes specific account of self, as well as the other, according to the con-
text in which the relevant parties are seeking to implement their shared goals. Evaluation under-
stands that the role of religion takes place simultaneously—internally, and externally—along
the same continuum: As one analytic factor among many, to a force that can have tremendous
impact for good or ill. Internally, evaluation considers one’s own character and beliefs, especially
one’s concept of the other, as well as unknown biases. Externally, evaluation seeks to accurately
name and understand the role of religion in a given, multi-layered context, pursuant pro-social
effect.

Negotiation
As one evaluates self, other, and the context of application, one prepares to engage cross-cultur-
ally, i.e., to build and lead the necessary partnerships. At every step of this process, negotiation
takes place, internally, and externally. Internally, one cannot help but (re)consider one’s own
identity through the encounter of different beliefs, cultures, and peoples. Meanwhile, externally,
there is a job to do. How well that gets done, at some point, is a reflection of the internal pro-
cess, as well as one’s capacity to engage respectfully. Negotiation involves mutual listening and
understanding, which, in turn, lead to sustainable action. Communication is the key.

Communication
Communication is verbal and non-verbal, as well as written and/or visual. These communi-
cations take place across social-cultural-religious and geo-political identities. Communication
becomes that much more important in places where things like shame, respect, and family
often have a serious and long-standing role. Imperatively, communication begins with listening:
Within one’s own organization, within one’s own country, and within the local social-cultural-
religious context (from the capital to the province).An elicitive and empathetic ear is crucial to
an ethic of engagement that results in trust, trust that leads to tangible results, together.

Cross-cultural religious literacy as a means to covenantal pluralism

Cross-cultural religious literacy is developed through a process of mutual engagement between
actors (state or non-state) of different religious and non-religious worldviews. It is a multi-
dimensional and practical concept of “literacy” rooted in an understanding of self, the other’s
self-understanding, and the objectives at hand in a specific cultural context. But cross-cultural
religious literacy is not an end unto itself. Rather it is part of a broader theory of positive social
change. In contrast to a religious “literacy” that is only a general knowledge of “facts” about the
religions of others, cross-cultural religious literacy is a set of competencies and skills oriented
to a normative framework for robust pluralism. A merely technical and utilitarian knowledge
of religion will not somehow automatically support greater social flourishing and pluralistic

13
 Chris Seiple and Dennis R. Hoover

peace. Indeed it is quite possible to combine factual knowledge of religion with illiberal, anti-
pluralist sentiment. Familiarity can, unfortunately, breed contempt rather than solidarity. Ours
is an era of “democratic recession” (Lovelace 2020) fueled in large part by a religious nation-
alism that defines the ethno-religious majority against ethno-religious minorities (usually as
scapegoats).
As such it is important to place the task of improving religious literacy within a broader
vision for a form of pluralism that is up to the challenge of our times. We need to be able to
answer a basic teleological question:What is cross-cultural religious literacy for?
The answer we propose is this: Covenantal pluralism. Cross-cultural religious literacy is a vital
means of making progress toward the ideal end-state of covenantal pluralism.
“Covenantal pluralism” is an original phrase, first developed by Chris in his work with
the Templeton Religion Trust in 2017. However, the ideas are not entirely new. In fact, there
are many historical precedents. (One 17th-century example is Roger Williams, who founded
Rhode Island on a “covenant of peaceable neighborhood” that cherished freedom of con-
science; see Seiple 2012.)
The phrase “covenantal pluralism” is designed to catalyze new and needed conversations
about the world we live in. Covenantal pluralism embodies the humility, patience, empathy,
and responsibility to engage, respect, and protect the other—albeit without necessarily lending
moral equivalency to the beliefs and behaviors of others (see Chapter 2 of this Handbook; see also
Stewart, Seiple, and Hoover 2020; Joustra 2020; Joustra 2021).A pluralism that is “covenantal” is
richer and more resilient because it is relational—that is, it is not merely a transactional contract
(although relationships often do begin with, and strategies are rooted in, contracts). Covenants,
Rabbi Jonathan Sacks (2002, 150–151) tells us, are

a bond, not of interest or advantage, but of belonging … [A covenant is] where we

develop the grammar and syntax of reciprocity, where we help others and they help
us without calculations of relative advantage—where trust is born … Covenants are
beginnings, acts of moral engagement.They are couched in broad terms whose precise
meaning is the subject of ongoing debate but which stand as touchstones, ideas, refer-
ence points against which policies and practices are judged.What we need now is not a
contract bringing into being a global political structure, but rather a covenant framing
our shared vision for the future of humanity.

Accordingly, the concept of covenantal pluralism assumes a holistic top-down and bottom-up
approach: It seeks a constitutional framework of equal rights and responsibilities for all citizens
under the rule of law (the top-down), as well as a supportive cultural context (the bottom-up),
of which religion is often a significant factor.
Cross-cultural religious literacy, then, is not merely a kind of technical expertise, nor merely
an attribute of a good general education. Rather it is a set of competencies and skills situated
within, and oriented to, a normative vision for robust pluralism. Defined in this way, religious
literacy is relevant to much more than just polite “interfaith dialogues” among clergy and theo-
logians.The practice of cross-cultural religious literacy, guided by covenantal pluralism, increases
the likelihood that people of profoundly different points of moral and religious departure will
nevertheless engage across differences and contribute in practical ways to the common good.
As we will discuss in the next chapter (which we co-authored with W. Christopher Stewart),
covenantal pluralism moves beyond mere side-by-side “tolerance” and instead calls for a mutual
engagement that builds mutual respect and mutual reliance, yielding resiliency. It is a secular

14
 Rethinking religious literacy, pluralism

covenant of global neighborliness, one with a balanced emphasis on both the rules and relation-
ships necessary to live peacefully and productively in a world of deep differences.

Conclusion
We believe the time is ripe for this Routledge Handbook of Religious Literacy, Pluralism, and
Global Engagement.The field of religious literacy has expanded and matured; yet is still young
enough such that there is ongoing constructive debate and refinement of concepts, diction,
approaches, and priorities. In this Handbook we highlight a broad range of leading thinkers
and practitioners in the realm of religious literacy. And in the process, we trust that greater
clarity will result regarding the purpose and mutually reinforcing dimensions of cross-cultural
religious literacy.
Regarding the purpose of cross-cultural religious literacy, this Handbook includes in-depth
consideration of the assumptions that shape the contexts within which religious literacy is
potentially relevant. Much of the extant literature and discourse assumes that religious literacy
will have straightforwardly pro-social purposes and effects—enhancing freedom of conscience
and bolstering citizenship and the rule of law, such that peace and democracy deepen and
expand. But this Handbook aims to add clarity regarding the realities of deep diversity (the pres-
ence of difference) and covenantal pluralism (the mutually respectful engagement of difference)
to which the theory and praxis of religious literacy should be oriented.
Second, the Handbook includes in-depth consideration of the means of engagement, through
which each and all can work toward the ends of covenantal pluralism. Specifically, the Handbook
contributors reflect on the skills necessary—evaluation, negotiation, and communication—to
become competent in self, the other, and the particular context of joint implementation.These
chapters present research findings and case studies from around the world, as well as practical
lessons learned and personal reflections from practitioners.
We have organized the Handbook into three major sections, corresponding to three foun-
dational questions:

(1) What is religious literacy for?

(2) Who needs it?
(3) Where can it make a meaningful difference?

Section 1 addresses the normative contexts within which “religious literacy” is situated.
Contributors to this section seek and explore the contributions of multiple religious/philo-
sophical traditions to covenantal pluralist norms, aspirations, and practices.This section features
reflections from a range of world religions as well as a secular humanist contribution. Due
to space constraints, the section is of course far from a comprehensive collection of perspec-
tives from all the world’s myriad forms of spiritual and communal expression and practice.
However, the section demonstrates the potential for people coming from starkly different points
of moral and epistemological departure to nevertheless arrive at a basic consensus on the plural-
ist purposes of cross-cultural religious literacy.These purposes are ultimately civic in nature, not
religious; it’s about living well with (irreconcilable) difference, not ethereal aspirations toward
religious convergence.
Section 2 then turns to the question of who can, and should, develop cross-cultural religious
literacy pursuant to the cultivation of covenantal pluralism.The section features chapters exam-
ining the practical application of cross-cultural religious literacy to a wide range of disciplines
and professional sectors.Taken together, the chapters in this section demonstrate that religious

15
 Chris Seiple and Dennis R. Hoover

literacy is relevant to every vocation and location.This section also makes clear that in an ever
more globalized economy, cross-cultural religious literacy is not only the right thing to do, but
also something that is in everyone’s enlightened self-interest.
Finally, Section 3 examines the practical problem-solving (or at least problem-mitigating)
potential of cross-cultural religious literacy. It offers a diverse selection of case studies of con-
temporary conflicts and controversies from around the world, as well as personal reflections from
leading practitioners of multi-faith engagement. Section 3 demonstrates the real-time relevance
of cross-cultural religious literacy and covenantal pluralism even in highly fraught contexts.The
authors in most of these chapters share from their own direct personal experiences, bringing
their lessons learned about the will and skill to competently and covenantally engage diversity,
that is, to build pluralism rooted in relationships, respect, and rules.
As such, this Handbook is a combination of scholarship and story, theory and tangibility, that
presents its chapters in full awareness that we and our authors do not have all the answers. But
our hope is that our readers will join us in wrestling with these issues as we seek new diction
and new deeds for a world struggling to live, peacefully and constructively, with its deepest dif-
ferences.

Notes
1 The Northwest Frontier Province was renamed as the Khyber Pakhtunkhwa province in 2010.
2 For example, publications by IGE staff over its first 20 years include Seiple 2004; Seiple and Hoover
2004; White 2008; Thames, Seiple, and Rowe 2009; Daugherty 2011; Hoover and Johnston 2012;
Seiple, Hoover, and Otis 2013; Hoover 2014; and many other policy briefings. For more, please see:
https://globalengage.org/publications.
3 See https://jsis.washington.edu/religion/international-policy-institute/.
4 See https://hds.harvard.edu/academics/degree-programs/mrpl-program.

References
AAR Religion in the Schools Task Force. 2010. Guideline for Teaching About Religion in K-12 Public Schools
in the United States. Atlanta: American Academy of Religion. https://www.aarweb.org/common/
Uploaded%20files/Publications%20and%20News/Guides%20and%20Best%20Practices/AARK-12C
urriculumGuidelinesPDF.pdf.
American Academy of Religion. 2019. Religious Literacy Guidelines: What U.S. College Graduates Need to
Know About Religion. Atlanta: American Academy of Religion. https://www.aarweb.org/AARMBR/
Publications-and-News-/Guides-and-Best-Practices-/Teaching-and-Learning-/AAR-Religious-
Literacy-Guidelines.aspx?WebsiteKey=61d76dfc-e7fe-4820-a0ca-1f792d24c06e.
Connolly,William E. 2005. Pluralism. Durham, NC: Duke University Press.
Daugherty, Jared, ed. 2011. Muslims and a Harmonious Society.Arlington,VA: Institute for Global Engagement.
Dinham,Adam and Matthew Francis, eds. 2015. Religious Literacy in Policy and Practice. Bristol: Policy Press.
Eck, Diana. n.d. “What is Pluralism?” Pluralism Project Website. Harvard University. https://pluralism.org/
about. Accessed April 20, 2020.
Falk, Pamela. 2019. “Record 71 Million People Displaced as ‘Major Powers’ Fail to Halt Crises, UN
Refugee Agency Says.” CBSnews.com, June 2019. https://www.cbsnews.com/news/un-refugee-
agency-71-million-displaced-war-violence-major-powers-failure-syria-venezuela/.
Gingerich,Tara R., Diane L. Moore, Robert Brodrick, and Carleigh Beriont. 2017. “Local Humanitarian
Leadership: Engaging with Religion, Faith & Faith Actors.” Oxfam and Harvard Divinity School Religious
Literacy Project. https://oi-files-d8-prod.s3.eu-west-2.amazonaws.com/s3fs-public/file_attachments/rr-
local-humanitarian-leadership-religious-literacy-310317-en.pdf.
Goodman, Lenn. 2014. Religious Pluralism and Values in the Public Sphere. Cambridge: Cambridge University
Press.

16
 Rethinking religious literacy, pluralism

Haynes, Charles and Oliver Thomas, eds. 2007. Finding Common Ground:A First Amendment Guide to Religion
and Public Schools.Washington, DC: First Amendment Center.
Hoover, Dennis R., ed. 2014. Religion and American Exceptionalism. Oxford: Routledge.
Hoover, Dennis R. and Douglas Johnston, eds. 2012. Religion and Foreign Affairs: Essential Readings. Waco,
TX: Baylor University Press.
Jacobsen, Douglas and Rhonda Hustedt Jacobsen. 2012. No Longer Invisible: Religion in University Education.
Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Joustra, Robert J. 2021. “Have We Reached Peak Pluralism?” Religion & Global Society. London School of
Economics. https://blogs.lse.ac.uk/religionglobalsociety/.
Joustra, Robert J. 2020. “The Coordinates of Covenantal Pluralism: Mapping Pluralist Theory in the 21st
Century.” The Review of Faith & International Affairs 18(4): 18–34.
Lovelace, Ryan. 2020. “‘Global Recession in democracy’: US ‘Freedom’ Score Falls 8 Points.” The
Washington Times, March 4. https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2020/mar/4/freedom-house-
freedom-world-2020-report-shows-decl/.
Marcus, Benjamin. 2018.“Religious Literacy in American Education.” In The Oxford Handbook of Religion
and American Education, edited by Michael D.Waggoner and Nathan Walker. Oxford: Oxford University
Press. https://www.oxfordhandbooks.com/view/10.1093/oxfordhb/9780199386819.001.0001/
oxfordhb-9780199386819-e-38.
Moore, Diane L. 2007. Overcoming Religious Illiteracy: A Cultural Studies Approach to the Study of Religion in
Secondary Education. New York: Palgrave MacMillan.
Moore, Diane L. 2015. Religious Literacy Project: Our Method. Cambridge, MA: Harvard Divinity School
Religious Literacy Project. https://rlp.hds.harvard.edu/files/hds-rlp/files/rlp_method_2015.pdf.
National Council for Social Studies. 2017. C3 Framework for Social Studies State Standards. Silver Spring,
MD: National Council for Social Studies. https://www.socialstudies.org/sites/default/files/2017/Jun/
c3-framework-for-social-studies-rev0617.pdf.
National Council for Social Studies. n.d. Academic Study of Religion Added to Social Studies Guidelines. Silver
Spring, MD: National Council for Social Studies. https://www.socialstudies.org/about/academic-
study-religion-added-social-studies-guidelines.
Pew Research Center. 2020. In 2018, Government Restrictions on Religion Reach Highest Level Globally in
More Than a Decade. Washington, DC: Pew Research Center, November 10. https://www.pewforum.
org/2020/11/10/in-2018-government-restrictions-on-religion-reach-highest-level-globally-in-mo
re-than-a-decade/.
Prothero, Stephen. 2007. Religious Literacy:What Every American Needs to Know—And Doesn't. San Francisco,
CA: HarperOne.
Scott, James C. 2009. The Art of Not Being Governed: An Anarchist History of Upland Southeast Asia. New
Haven:Yale University Press.
Sacks, Jonathan. 2002. The Dignity of Difference. London: Continuum.
Seiple, Chris. 2012.“The Essence of Exceptionalism: Roger Williams and the Birth of Religious Freedom
in America.” The Review of Faith & International Affairs 10(2): 13–19.
Seiple, Chris. 2016.“The Humanitarian System is not Working—So How Can We Fix It?” World Economic
Forum Blog, May 19. https://www.weforum.org/agenda/2016/05/the-humanitarian-system-is-not-
working-so-how-can-we-fix-it/.
Seiple, Chris. 2018a.“Faith Can Overcome Religious Nationalism: Here’s How.” World Economic Forum Blog,
April 18. https://www.weforum.org/agenda/2018/04/faith-can-overcome-religious-nationalism-
heres-how/.
Seiple, Chris. 2018b. “The Call of Covenantal Pluralism.” Templeton Lecture on Religion and World Affairs.
Foreign Policy Research Institute, November 13. https://www.fpri.org/article/2018/11/the-call-of-
covenantal-pluralism-defeating-religious-nationalism-with-faithful-patriotism/.
Seiple, Chris, Dennis R. Hoover, and Pauletta Otis, eds. 2013. The Routledge Handbook of Religion and
Security. Oxford: Routledge.
Seiple, Robert. 2004. Ambassadors of Hope. Downers Grove, IN: Intervarsity Press.
Seiple, Robert and Dennis R. Hoover, eds. 2004. Religion and Security: The New Nexus in International
Relations. Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield.
Stewart, W. Christopher, Chris Seiple, and Dennis R. Hoover. 2020. “To Advance International Human
Rights, First Promote Covenantal Pluralism.” Religion & Global Society. London School of Economics,
December 16.https://blogs.lse.ac.uk/religionglobalsociety/2020/12/to-advance-international-human-
rights-first-promote-covenantal-pluralism/.

17
 Chris Seiple and Dennis R. Hoover

Thames, Knox, Chris Seiple, and Amy Rowe. 2009. International Religious Freedom Advocacy: A Guide to
Organizations, Law, and NGOs.Waco,TX: Baylor University Press.
Theodorou, Angelina. 2014. Key Findings About Growing Religious Hostilities Around the World. Washington,
DC: Pew Research Center, January 17. https://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2014/01/17/key-
findings-about-growing-religious-hostilities-around-the-world/.
UNHCR. 2020. Forced Displacement Passes 80 Million by Mid-2020 as COVID-19 Tests Refugee Protection
Globally. UNHCR, December 9. https://www.unhcr.org/news/press/2020/12/5fcf94a04/forced-dis-
placement-passes-80-million-mid-2020-covid-19-tests-refugee-protection.html.
White, Joshua. 2008. Pakistan’s Islamist Frontier.Washington, DC: Institute for Global Engagement.

Acknowledgments
An abridged version of this chapter was previously published as: Chris Seiple and Dennis R.
Hoover,“A Case for Cross-Cultural Religious Literacy,” The Review of Faith & International Affairs
19(1): 1–13. Used here by permission of The Review of Faith & International Affairs, Institute for
Global Engagement.

18
 PART I

What is religious literacy for?

Philosophical and religious perspectives
on covenantal pluralism
Another random document with
no related content on Scribd:
back
back
back
back
back
back
back
back
back
back
back
back
back
back
back
back
back
back