Formulation of the Claim

Religious orthodoxies acknowledge prophetic mediation and the mediation of clerics, but they keep it at the level of faith and imagination.

Explanation

In Arkoun’s thought, orthodoxy does not deny the existence of mediation; rather, it affirms it as part of the very structure of belief. However, this affirmation does not open it to historical or critical examination, because mediation remains confined within the horizon of belief.

Thus, the relationship to prophecy and to clerics remains one of acceptance and transmission, not one of epistemic questioning. What matters here is not so much the origin of mediation as its status: it is acknowledged, but it is not transferred into the realm of historical analysis that distinguishes Arkoun’s project.

Its Place in the Book’s Argument

This atom appears within Arkoun’s critique of religious structures that preserve the sanctity of the mediator and prevent subjecting him to study. It is connected to his broader thesis about the need to move religious phenomena from the level of faithful assent to the level of historical understanding, without merely describing them as closed truths within orthodoxy.

Limits of the Claim

This atom does not mean that Arkoun denies mediation itself, nor that it is a sweeping judgment on all religious positions in every context. What is meant is a description of the way orthodoxy operates when it keeps mediation inside the circle of faith and does not allow it to be transformed into an object of critical knowledge.

Brief Evidence

It is true that the question of mediation is acknowledged, but it has never been properly thought through by religious orthodoxies, all religious orthodoxies without exception, whether Jewish, Christian, or Islamic. We mean the religious orthodoxies generated by the major ideologies that transformed history or changed the face of history. The entire tradition of monotheistic thought in its three versions acknowledges the mediation of the prophets and then the mediation of the “authorized” clerics, in order to actualize and embody God’s revealed word in human history, but this acknowledgment remains at the level of a conceptual characterization that serves faith, or, better put, serves the religious imaginary inseparable from the social imaginary. For this reason, we say: contemporary researchers …