The Politics of God

By MARK LILLA
The New York Times
August 19, 2007

I. "The Will of God Will Prevail"

The twilight of the idols has been postponed. For more than two
centuries, from the American and French Revolutions to the collapse
of Soviet Communism, world politics revolved around eminently
political problems. War and revolution, class and social justice,
race and national identity - these were the questions that divided
us. Today, we have progressed to the point where our problems again
resemble those of the 16th century, as we find ourselves entangled in
conflicts over competing revelations, dogmatic purity and divine
duty. We in the West are disturbed and confused. Though we have our
own fundamentalists, we find it incomprehensible that theological
ideas still stir up messianic passions, leaving societies in ruin. We
had assumed this was no longer possible, that human beings had
learned to separate religious questions from political ones, that
fanaticism was dead. We were wrong.

An example: In May of last year, President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad of
Iran sent an open letter to President George W. Bush that was
translated and published in newspapers around the world. Its theme
was contemporary politics and its language that of divine revelation.
After rehearsing a litany of grievances against American foreign
policies, real and imagined, Ahmadinejad wrote, "If Prophet Abraham,
Isaac, Jacob, Ishmael, Joseph or Jesus Christ (peace be upon him)
were with us today, how would they have judged such behavior?" This
was not a rhetorical question. "I have been told that Your Excellency
follows the teachings of Jesus (peace be upon him) and believes in
the divine promise of the rule of the righteous on Earth,"
Ahmadinejad continued, reminding his fellow believer that "according
to divine verses, we have all been called upon to worship one God and
follow the teachings of divine Prophets." There follows a kind of
altar call, in which the American president is invited to bring his
actions into line with these verses. And then comes a threatening
prophecy: "Liberalism and Western-style democracy have not been able
to help realize the ideals of humanity. Today, these two concepts
have failed. Those with insight can already hear the sounds of the
shattering and fall of the ideology and thoughts of the liberal
democratic systems. . . . Whether we like it or not, the world is
gravitating towards faith in the Almighty and justice and the will of
God will prevail over all things."

This is the language of political theology, and for millennia it was
the only tongue human beings had for expressing their thoughts about
political life. It is primordial, but also contemporary: countless
millions still pursue the age-old quest to bring the whole of human
life under God's authority, and they have their reasons. To
understand them we need only interpret the language of political
theology - yet that is what we find hardest to do. Reading a letter
like Ahmadinejad's, we fall mute, like explorers coming upon an
ancient inscription written in hieroglyphics.

The problem is ours, not his. A little more than two centuries ago we
began to believe that the West was on a one-way track toward modern
secular democracy and that other societies, once placed on that
track, would inevitably follow. Though this has not happened, we
still maintain our implicit faith in a modernizing process and blame
delays on extenuating circumstances like poverty or colonialism. This
assumption shapes the way we see political theology, especially in
its Islamic form - as an atavism requiring psychological or
sociological analysis but not serious intellectual engagement.
Islamists, even if they are learned professionals, appear to us
primarily as frustrated, irrational representatives of frustrated,
irrational societies, nothing more. We live, so to speak, on the
other shore. When we observe those on the opposite bank, we are
puzzled, since we have only a distant memory of what it was like to
think as they do. We all face the same questions of political
existence, yet their way of answering them has become alien to us. On
one shore, political institutions are conceived in terms of divine
authority and spiritual redemption; on the other they are not. And
that, as Robert Frost might have put it, makes all the difference.

Understanding this difference is the most urgent intellectual and
political task of the present time. But where to begin? The case of
contemporary Islam is on everyone's mind, yet is so suffused with
anger and ignorance as to be paralyzing. All we hear are alien
sounds, motivating unspeakable acts. If we ever hope to crack the
grammar and syntax of political theology, it seems we will have to
begin with ourselves. The history of political theology in the West
is an instructive story, and it did not end with the birth of modern
science, or the Enlightenment, or the American and French
Revolutions, or any other definitive historical moment. Political
theology was a presence in Western intellectual life well into the
20th century, by which time it had shed the mind-set of the Middle
Ages and found modern reasons for seeking political inspiration in
the Bible. At first, this modern political theology expressed a
seemingly enlightened outlook and was welcomed by those who wished
liberal democracy well. But in the aftermath of the First World War
it took an apocalyptic turn, and "new men" eager to embrace the
future began generating theological justifications for the most
repugnant - and godless - ideologies of the age, Nazism and Communism.

It is an unnerving tale, one that raises profound questions about the
fragility of our modern outlook. Even the most stable and successful
democracies, with the most high-minded and civilized believers, have
proved vulnerable to political messianism and its theological
justification. If we can understand how that was possible in the
advanced West, if we can hear political theology speaking in a more
recognizable tongue, represented by people in familiar dress with
familiar names, perhaps then we can remind ourselves how the world
looks from its perspective. This would be a small step toward
measuring the challenge we face and deciding how to respond.

...

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/08/19/magazine/19Religion-t.html?ex=1345176000&en=341d1b3853a2d364&ei=5090


Reply via email to