I. Course Introduction

1

• I. Course Introduction
• A. Why study religion and politics?
• Relevance in Political History (Western
  Civilization)
• Relevance in American History
• Relevance in Political Philosophy
• Relevance in Political Debate
• Relevance in Political Outcomes (parties, policy,
  voting, elections, groups, etc.)
• Applies to us all? The political question, then,
  is not, How does religion relate to non-religious
  politics? but rather, What kind of politicswhat
  stances, arguments, policies, and principlesflow
  from different religions or ways of understanding
  the world and life, whether they are older
  (traditional) or newer religions? We will not
  understand the political dynamics of the
  contemporary world until we recognize the
  religiousness of all peoples and cultures and the
  differences among their basic assumptions about
  human flourishing and their diverse impacts on
  political and economic developments.
• Someone may argue that religion ought not be
  relevant, but it would be mistaken or naïve to
  say that it is not relevant.

2

• The place of politics and religion in America
  (comparatively speaking). Neither Iran, England,
  France, or Sweden. No homework on Wednesday
  nights government offices closed on Sundays out
  on Easter and Christmas. Peter Berge If India
  is the most religious country on our planet, and
  Sweden is the least religious, America is a land
  of Indians ruled by Swedes. Instead, we have a
  sort of permissive establishment of religion
  here, where the major religion is accommodated in
  public life (not oppressive, not prescriptive,
  not entirely secular).
• C. How will we study RP? Where do we limit the
  study? Course will focus mostly on most
  dominant religious groups, movements, events,
  trends, in American political history and
  behavior.

3

• II. But What about the Secularization thesis?
• A. Definition Religious belief and practice is
  (and ought to be) decreasing in relevance
  acceptance as human progress is advanced through
  modernization and globalization.
• B. Evidence Religion is safe and irrelevant
• Decline of religiosity (in Europe, at least)
• Rise of dualism (division of sacred/secular
  airtight categories) and the privatization/secular
  ization of Christianity (America) paradigm
  shift Christian and religious categories, once
  taken for granted, no longer welcome as lenses
  through which we must interpret the world from
  1950-today America moved from dualism towards
  postmodernism. (Example Bible-theft).
• How pervasive? Can you imagine a research
  program or department whos whole mission was to
  examine the phenomenon of secularism?
• Responses to naturalism by Christians, a new
  protestantism growth in subjective faith, growth
  in experiential faith growth in relative faith
  growth in spiritualism decline of traditionalism
  and growth in secular marketing strategies (p. 15
  Wald).

4

• C. Causes of Secularization
• Dualism in Theology (Aquinas division of Nature
  and Grace)
• Dualism in Philosophy - Especially articulated in
  the thought of Immanuel Kant, we divide
  knowledge, truth, and all activity into
  revelation vs reason, science vs faith, fact vs
  value, etc. This, we say, is the nature of
  knowledge and we add that matters of faith,
  values, and revelation (religion) are of private
  use only while matters of fact, science, and
  reason are of public use.
• Great Awakenings identification of Christian
  life with individual experience, not testable
  truth claims and corporate confessions of faith.
• Surrender of the fundamentalists (1900-1970)
• 5. Rise of the secular left (1850-1950) - This
  group eventually gained control of the
  public/social institutions and successfully
  argued that anyone who wants to play with them
  must use their ball (secular or naturalistic
  assumptions about the world). Successfully
  changed basic understandings of science,
  education at all levels, public philosophy,
  church-state doctrine, model of personhood (from
  the soul to the psychologized self), and
  journalism. Notice interest was not a neutral
  public space, but a new moral order (and toppling
  of the old Protestant one). Next generation gave
  us the 1960s revolutions and postmodernism.

5

• 6. Growth of Modern Government Government was
  once limited to commerce and civil order and
  the church focused on charity and inculcation of
  goodness and truth. But when govt expanded its
  role (welfare-regulatory state), it pushed
  religion to those areas not important enough to
  have received the help/control of government
  (margins of public life).
• 7. Public Education For secular elites, the
  goal was to create universal centers of
  intellectual reconstruction, where successive
  generations are trained exclusively in secular
  methods and eventually secular perspectives on.
  For protestants, it was to help the poor and (and
  in some cases, undermine catholic education).
  Result secular thinking and secular viewpoints
  training over 90 of the last few generations.
  The 1960s was not accident. (Read p. 133 of
  Baker)

6

• D. Challenges to secularization (in addition to
  the U.S. itself) (1) birth, marriage,
  immigration patterns in U.S. and especially
  Europe (2) stable beliefs and practice of
  evangelicals despite economic incline regular
  church attendance in U.S. well over 50 (3)
  growth of Islam and Christianity worldwide (4)
  return of theology in American evangelicalism
  (SBC 30 ministers Reformed) (5) Argument that
  secularization is not non-religious Some
  religions are traditional, some are new, and
  among the new religions are those guided by a
  secular faith, a belief system held by
  communities whose gods--which they do not
  acknowledge as godsare the idols of human
  autonomy, scientific rationality, technological
  progress, the nation, economic growth, a
  communist future, or sheer power in itself (6)
  argument that religion persists because it, and
  not science, satisfies a basic human need, the
  desire to explain existence/life (7) resurgence
  of religion in public life in the name of
  government neutrality

7

• III. Worldview and Presuppositions
• A. What is religion? A lot the confusion about
  the role of religion in politics comes from our
  assumptions about religion, or how to define it.
  If religion means traditional rituals or
  practices of organized faith communities, then
  not all are religious (popular view in the West).
  If religion means adherence (wittingly or
  otherwise) to a philosophical system, basic
  beliefs about what is ultimately real, true,
  right, valuable, and meaningful, then everyone is
  religious.
• B. 7 Worldview Questions from James Sire
• What is prime reality?
• What is the nature of external reality?
• What is a human being?
• What happens at death?
• Why/how is it possible to know anything at all?
• How do know right from wrong?
• What is the meaning of human history?

8

• C. If the worldview concept is correct
  (everyones got one), then one could never
  divorce religion from politics. Worldviews do
  not cloud our judgment, they determine our
  judgment. There is no free-thinker, cant
  judge religion except on the basis of another
  religion GK Chesterton and the universal reality
  of dogmatism. AND. If politics is about the
  authoritative allocation of values (choosing
  which values to legislate), then politics
  necessarily is informed by worldview convictions
  about what values are best for society.

9

• IV. Religious Arguments in Public Discourse (Draw
  2 Circles Religion/Politics
• NO! KEEP RELIGION IN CHURCH!
• 1. Simple argument
• Different beliefs about God
• Differences may lead to violence
• With no certainty about religion, avoid religion
  in public space
• John Rawls and the doctrine of Public Reason
• Problem How can people committed to different
  worldviews live/work 2gether as equals in a fair
  peaceful society? Answer Limit reasons to only
  those premises held in common by all
  (overlapping) and assume all citizens
  participate from behind a veil of ignorance,
  where no one knows what status they will hold in
  life. Result? Just society and possibility of
  ongoing conversation in public.

10

• 3. Natural Law - In politics, we use science and
  reason (accessible to all by Gods natural
  revelation). In religion, we use special
  revelation (word of God). Robert George agrees
  that religious reasons must not be used as
  political reasons. He only argues that Rawls
  must not limit political reasons to only those
  reasons held in common by all people. As a
  natural law philosopher, he insists that some
  truths can be ascertained by all through unaided
  natural reason and are therefore acceptable in
  the public square, even if not all citizens
  recognize them or even if these naturally
  discerned truths are rejected by many. If Rawls
  requires overlapping reasons, George requires
  natural reasons, but both ultimately reject
  revealed or religious reasons.

11

• B. YES! PERMIT THE DIFFERENT VOICES! (some
  public subject matter, say justice, overlaps and
  is relevant in ones religious concerns
  concentric circles)
• 1. Critiques of Rawls Not consistent with
  liberal democracy, free speech, or pluralism
  discredits men like MLK and movements like the
  abolition movement inconsistent with government
  neutrality since secularism/naturalism differ
  with Christianity, for instance, only in content
  not form conceived towards a desired result, the
  case of abortion and slavery (original position
  vs public reason) self-defeating since Rawls
  assertion that only reasons held in common are
  permissible is itself a principle not held in
  common by all, so it too should be excluded?
• 2. Nicholas Wolterstorffs critique of Richard
  Rorty (FROM THE READING)

12

• Key concepts in Political Theology
• A. Key questions
• 1. What is breadth and depth of
  Creation-Fall-Redemption?
• 2. What is the nature of the kingdom of
  God/Christ?
• 3. When and how is that kingdom realized?
  (Millennium)
• 4. Is natural revelation an adequate basis for
  civil government?
• Is the state supposed to enforce the moral law of
  God? Christ and Culture
• B. Christ against Culture (opposition Holy
  Huddle the culture is lost and evil and
  Christians should separate themselves entirely)
  Quaker, third-race sectarians Anabaptists
  traditions
• Christ of Culture (agreement whatever is
  good/enjoyable/helpful in culture is coextensive
  with Christianity no conflict at all) 19th
  20th century liberal protestantism (Jefferson)
• Christ above culture (grace perfects nature
  synthesis where culture is finished off by
  church culture can lead you to God but church
  must take you the rest of the way) Aquinas and
  Roman Catholic tradition
• Christ and culture in paradox (tension dualist)
  Lutheran
• Christ transforms culture (reformational
  creation is being misdirected and is in need of
  recreational work of Christ through Christians)
  Calvinistic and social gospel movement

13

• Political Theologies (Historic)
• Strong Church-State Affinity Roman Catholic,
  Anglican, National Confessionalist and Christian
  America (Puritans and the Christian commonwealth)
• Interactive Lutheran and Principled-Pluralism
  of Dutch Reformed (we are citizens of two
  non-overlapping kingdoms)
• Strong Separation Models Baptist (historic) and
  Anabaptist traditions (Gods rule ended at the
  cross)