Thanks so much for this post (and the illustrations provide a nice touch). I look forward to reading the book!
It's likely that you touch on this issue in the book, but I'm just curious what you think of the oft-contrasted approaches of Soloveitchik and Heschel vis-à-vis interfaith dialogue. Here's the bumper sticker version of Heschel's perspective (relying on his so-called "depth theology") as I understand it: while Jews and Christians cannot meaningfully meet on the cognitive level of contested doctrines (like the trinity or incarnation), they can meaningfully meet on the in some sense more fundamental level of the phenomenology of encountering the Ineffable. What I'm wondering specifically is why you think this approach wasn't congenial to Soloveitchik. It seems like a genuinely religious place of potential meeting (rather than just the "secular" sphere of meeting that he permitted), but doesn't seem to threaten assimilation or anything like that. Thanks!
Good question (and I should give this more attention). We do mention Heschel in the book in this context (alongside Feinstein, Wyschogrod, and others), though not your point specifically. My impressions of Soloveitchik is that he believes that the halakhic phenomenology is unique and any encounter with the Ineffable and its corresponding phenomenological experience is something that emerges alongside the rest of his phenomenology, straight from Halakhah. Christian experiences with the divine, however it emerges, will be different from Jewish experience as experience is mediated by worldview and the two emerge from very different worldviews. I assume he would think that it is impossible to compare the two experiences anyway, since it is impossible to communicate theologically at all. I think that deep down he was weary that he would have to hear Christians say things like "look, we are really the same, so why aren't you more like us?" I also get the impression that while he liked reading Heschel, he did not see him as a serious Jewish thinker because his Jewish thought was not rooted in Jewish Law. But, this deserves more thought.
Thanks so much for this post (and the illustrations provide a nice touch). I look forward to reading the book!
It's likely that you touch on this issue in the book, but I'm just curious what you think of the oft-contrasted approaches of Soloveitchik and Heschel vis-à-vis interfaith dialogue. Here's the bumper sticker version of Heschel's perspective (relying on his so-called "depth theology") as I understand it: while Jews and Christians cannot meaningfully meet on the cognitive level of contested doctrines (like the trinity or incarnation), they can meaningfully meet on the in some sense more fundamental level of the phenomenology of encountering the Ineffable. What I'm wondering specifically is why you think this approach wasn't congenial to Soloveitchik. It seems like a genuinely religious place of potential meeting (rather than just the "secular" sphere of meeting that he permitted), but doesn't seem to threaten assimilation or anything like that. Thanks!
Good question (and I should give this more attention). We do mention Heschel in the book in this context (alongside Feinstein, Wyschogrod, and others), though not your point specifically. My impressions of Soloveitchik is that he believes that the halakhic phenomenology is unique and any encounter with the Ineffable and its corresponding phenomenological experience is something that emerges alongside the rest of his phenomenology, straight from Halakhah. Christian experiences with the divine, however it emerges, will be different from Jewish experience as experience is mediated by worldview and the two emerge from very different worldviews. I assume he would think that it is impossible to compare the two experiences anyway, since it is impossible to communicate theologically at all. I think that deep down he was weary that he would have to hear Christians say things like "look, we are really the same, so why aren't you more like us?" I also get the impression that while he liked reading Heschel, he did not see him as a serious Jewish thinker because his Jewish thought was not rooted in Jewish Law. But, this deserves more thought.
Interesting spin on worldbuilding, I've add this as an example to my to-do pile
This book looks amazing! Its being added to my long term wish list - hopefully when I finish college I'll be able to afford it.