New Models of Religious Diversity: Modern Judaism beyond the Scylla of “Political” and the Charybdis of “Religious”
This essay is a response to Julie Cooper’s piece in this volume. In her essay, Cooper insightfully analyzes ways in which the rise of the modern state has imposed “religious” forms of identification on Jews, and she engages a series of early twentieth-century Zionist thinkers who resisted and challe...
| Publié dans: | Political theology |
|---|---|
| Auteur principal: | |
| Type de support: | Électronique Article |
| Langue: | Anglais |
| Vérifier la disponibilité: | HBZ Gateway |
| Journals Online & Print: | En cours de chargement...
|
| Fernleihe: | Fernleihe für die Fachinformationsdienste |
| Publié: |
Routledge, Taylor and Francis Group
[2020]
|
| Dans: |
Political theology
|
| Sujets / Chaînes de mots-clés standardisés: | B
Judaïsme
/ Religion
/ Politique
|
| RelBib Classification: | AD Sociologie des religions BH Judaïsme ZC Politique en général |
| Sujets non-standardisés: | B
Sovereignty
B Translation B Rabbinic Judaism B Jewish politics B Liberalism |
| Accès en ligne: |
Volltext (Resolving-System) |
| Résumé: | This essay is a response to Julie Cooper’s piece in this volume. In her essay, Cooper insightfully analyzes ways in which the rise of the modern state has imposed “religious” forms of identification on Jews, and she engages a series of early twentieth-century Zionist thinkers who resisted and challenged that problematic imposition. I build on Cooper’s analysis, highlighting ways in which even these thinkers may still be caught up in the very paradigm that they sought to challenge. Yet despite their limitations, I suggest that it is precisely by engaging more deeply with such thinkers that theorists today can extend and continue the critique that they initiated. By gaining greater awareness of the ways in which useful critiques of “religionization” can still succumb to problematic “politicization,” and vice versa, theorists can better position themselves to draw on past texts and thought in order to challenge the hegemony of dominant “political” and “religious” options. |
|---|---|
| ISSN: | 1743-1719 |
| Contient: | Enthalten in: Political theology
|
| Persistent identifiers: | DOI: 10.1080/1462317X.2020.1773681 |