Political Order 2: Religion
- Jia Han
- Mar 3, 2024
- 5 min read
3-3-2024
From time immemorial religion and polity have been symbiotically related. Eminent historian Bernard Lewis wrote “The older religions of mankind were all related to — were in a sense a part of — authority, whether of the tribe, the city, or the king. The cult provided a visible symbol of group identity and loyalty; the faith provided sanction for the ruler and his laws.”[1]
Many Chinese might have questions about this statement. What about China? Did ancient China have a state religion? It depends on the definition of religion. In academic literature, religion is defined broadly. Almost all world academic literature regards Confucianism as ancient China’s state religion. (There were some short intervals of exceptions. Furthermore, …) [2,3] are textbooks on world religions. If you want a detailed study, one might consider [4].
We know that the US, and most modern nation-states, is secular in the sense that it has no official religion. Modern secularism began 200+ years ago when America introduced the First Amendment of the US Constitution. Why would (and could) America become secular? How did the US become a (liberal) democracy? These involve long stories that require many articles, to say the least. A concise but excellent overview of Western political thoughts since the Reformation is Mark Lilla’s book, The Stillborn God [5]. First, the book’s title may induce some readers to think that the book rejects God. It is not. The stillborn God represents an unsatisfactory political order born from liberalism. (You may have many further questions but I ask you to read the book.) The title of Chapter 1 is The Crisis. Its epigraph consists of two quotes from Jesus. Luke 17:20-21 “... because the kingdom of God is in your midst.” and John 18:36 Jesus said, “My kingdom is not of this world. …” These seemingly contradictory statements contain the real meaning of the kingdom of God. I hope that I have already convinced you that the kingdom of God is no ordinary polity. (I do not want to go into the details because it will require many articles to say the minimum.)
Now it is time for you to have a quick read of the NT (New Testament). It might surprise many that it contains no teaching on governance whatsoever. It does have a few passages on how to obey the authorities (e.g.Romans 13:1-7). Recall the symbiotic relationships between religion and political authority said earlier. Any Christian ruler (or rulers), whether emperor, king, or prince will encounter the same problem: how to govern? A natural solution is to adapt inherited political and legal institutions so that they do not contradict the Bible. This was what happened in the late Roman Empire. (I have done some research on this subject. If you want, I can give you references to start with.)
More than one thousand years passed since Christianity became the official religion of the Roman Empire. As many of you know, the Roman Empire dissolved gradually starting from the early 5th century. However, the (Catholic) Church survived. The empire became many European polities, together known as Christendom. In all these centuries (from the end of the Roman Empire until the Reformation in 1517), European polities had two pillars: the local prince (temporal political authority) and the Catholic Church (religious authority). (I think the best overview about this is a textbook on International Relations [6]. But Fukuyama’s textbook on political order [7] is OK if you pay attention to the details.)
So the relationship between the NT and polities was not resolved from the late Roman Empire onward. The Stillborn God is a reflection of political thoughts and practices of the last four hundred years in the West (roughly one hundred years after the start of the Reformation). The beginning of the book introduces a general framework about religion and politics: the immutable divine nexus of man, God, and the world (p.21). It is a framework for all human societies, allowing detailed variations. In the one hundred years after the Reformation, Europe had widespread political conflicts, turmoils, and wars. The turning point in Western political thought was when Thomas Hobbes separated political philosophy from political theology. This is known as the Great Separation in The Stillborn God (p.58). Hobbes’s innovative work was not well received initially. However, many thinkers modified Hobbes’ works. Among them, John Locke was perhaps the most well-known. As Steven Smith described in his book, Political Philosophy, the US Constitution inherited extensively from Locke’s political philosophy.
Have the problems of religions and polities been solved? Far from it. If this is so, Mark Lilla need not write The Stillborn God, which reviews and reflects Western political thoughts and debates with focus on the Great Separation. If you are interested, you should study this well-written book. I wish to call your attention to the rift. (p.113) “It is no exaggeration to say that, together, Rousseau and Kant, caused the major rift between Anglo-American and continental European approaches to modern political thought, and therefore to thinking about the theological-political problems that had beset Western Christendom for a millennium and a half. We still live with the consequences of that rift today.” This has profound practical consequences to be discussed later. Liu advocated that China’s democratization should follow the British-American path [8] and Os Guinness made similar comments [9]. They are largely correct, but not complete.
The Stillborn God concludes: (p.308) “… Time and again we must remind ourselves that we are living an experiment, that we are the exceptions. We have little reason to expect other civilizations to follow our unusual path, which was opened up by a unique theological-political crisis within Christendom. This does not mean that other civilizations necessarily lack the resources for creating a workable political order; it does mean that they will have to find the theological resources within their traditions to make that happen. Our challenge is different. We have made a choice that is at once simpler and harder: …” Let me paraphrase the concluding remark. The Great Separation is a Western experiment that has made substantial achievements in practice. However, it is only an experiment that works well most times but might encounter serious problems. Furthermore, it might not work for other civilizations.
References:
1) Bernard Lewis, "What Went Wrong?: The Clash Between Islam and Modernity in the Middle East," Harper Perennial, 2003, p.96.
2) Christopher Partridge (Editor) “Introduction to World Religions,” 3 ed. Fortress Press, 2018.
3) Ninian Smart, "The World's Religions", 2nd Ed. Cambridge University Press, 1998.
4) Jeananne Fowler, Merv Fowler, “Chinese Religions: Beliefs & Practices,” Sussex Academic Press, 2008.
5) Mark Lilla, 2008, The Stillborn God: Religion, Politics, and the Modern West, Vintage, 2008
6) Robert Jackson, Georg Sørensen, "Introduction to International Relations: Theories and Approaches," Oxford University Press, 5 edition, 2013.
7) Francis Fukuyama, "The Origins of Political Order: From Prehuman Times to the French Revolution,"Farrar, Straus and Giroux, 2011. (A nation-state may be considered modern if strong, rule of law, and accountable (国家建设、法治、负责制——政治发展三大组件)
9) Freedom, Faith & Forgiveness | Os Guinness (12-23-2022)
10) 韩家亮：与丁学良商榷政教分离可能性 http://hx.cnd.org/?p=147449
Comments