In his book The Dignity of Difference the late former Chief Rabbi Jonathan Sacks challenges positions which seek to ignore or push aside difference in favour of sameness, or which see difference as problematic and something to be overcome in order to achieve unity. Rather, he argues, ‘difference does not diminish; it enlarges the sphere of human possibilities’ (2002: 209). In a challenge to liberal societies, Linda Woodhead has argued that questions about whether religion has a place or what place it has are the wrong points of departure. Rather, we should be asking how liberal societies can deal with pluralism, including conflict, and create a society in which ‘both religious and non-religious people and institutions are able to choose, contribute, belong, express their opinions, debate and contest’ (2013: 213). This concern, of the dignity but also the possibility of difference has been central to this book.

Core to this has been a view of a deeper pluralism that encompasses ethical, institutional and legal dimensions, and includes questions about what it means to be human and live in and construct social worlds in secular but religiously diverse societies. Pluralism, on this account, is more demanding than simple diversity. Tolerance may be a minimum requirement, but more is also necessary. As Goodman argues: ‘… it does not mean homogenizing. Pluralism preserves differences. What it asks for is respect’ (2014: 3). For Diana Eck, director of the Harvard Pluralism Project, pluralism is ‘the energetic engagement with diversity’, ‘the active seeking of understanding across lines of difference’, ‘the encounter of commitments’ and ‘based on dialogue’.