Rethinking the Role of Religion in the Public Sphere: Local and Global Perspectives

Rosalind I. J. Hackett1
PREAMBLE This essay represents my efforts as a scholar of comparative religion to situate the impetus for expanding shariah law in Nigeria in a broader, more global, perspective. That broader perspective is what I will call the resurgence of religion in the public sphere.2 By this I understand the drive to claim recognition for, and the possibilities for implementation of, religious ideas, values, practices, and institutions in the governance of nation-states and the lives of their citizens. As has been well demonstrated for the Muslim world by Dale Eickelman and Jon Andersen,3 the rise of modern media has been strategic in this connectionserving to transform the public realm into a marketplace of ideas, identities, values, and discourses. Coupled with the processes of democratisation, it means that religious authority and interpretation are now in many hands. The new discursive, performative, and participative public space is not confined to formal institutions recognized by state authorities. In order to illustrate and problematise these trends, I provide several current examples from various parts of the world. I pay particular attention to the American scene, since this is where I am based, and this is where the significance of religion has assumed considerable prominence in public discourse in the post-September 11 context. My choice of topic was in part informed by recent visits to and/or participation in conferences on the changing role of religion in various national or regional contexts (India, Latin America, Europe). I am particularly interested in the way these public debates, often highly
My thanks go to Bob Dowd, Predrag Klasnja, Rashied Omar and Charles Reynolds for their helpful comments and suggestions on this essay. 2 By public sphere I understand a space open to all, rather than any Habermasian notion of it (Habermas, 1991). In fact, Birgit Meyer, one of the organizers of a conference in Amsterdam in December 2002 on Religion, Media and the Public Sphere, summarizes the views of several participants that Jrgen Habermas rather normative and rationally inclined understanding of the public sphere is of little help in grasping the phenomenon of public religion . . . . Meyer, 2003, 126. 3 Eickelman and Andersen, 1999.
1

63

64

ROSALIND I.J. HACKETT

contentious, raise questions about religious and cultural difference, and the treatment of minorities in increasingly multi-religious and multi-cultural national contexts. While these are clearly local questions, they are increasingly framed in global terms by both actors and analysts. As already suggested, the modern media are instrumental in this regard, as we shall discuss below, so too are diasporic communities and international nongovernmental organizations. As several of the presenters demonstrated at the conference, these questions need to be treated from constitutional and international human rights perspectives. However, my focus is expressly less specific in that I want to show that the impetus for more public religion is a live issue in media, academic, political, religious, and social sectors across the globe. Debates and publications regarding the appropriate role of religion in both emergent and longstanding democracies increasingly shape political will and public policy. Consider, for example, the contentious debates in Europe at the present time over whether there should be any reference to God or to Europes Christian heritage in the new European constitution. The Western paradigm of the secular state and privatised, individualised religion is now being openly challenged in post-colonial states, as well as on home turf by migrant populations and religious revivalism.4 As a concerned and hopefully conscientious academic, I believe that I have an essential role to play not just in providing knowledge, but also in analysing the interests and stakes at play in any given situation. The academic space allows me, in fact compels me, to ask critical reflective questionsin the present context on moves to accord religion more influence in public lifein a relatively unbiased way. (This resembles in part the work of the investigative journalist, but the latter may be more beholden to institutional control and market conventions.) Based upon my extensive experience in education and the media, I conclude by highlighting those areas which are instrumental in promoting harmonious coexistence between religious traditions in modern, pluralistic nation-states. INTRODUCTION Up until the early 1990s there was a clear disparity between the growing significance of religion on the world stage and the literature one could read on this score in either scholarly or popular publications. Historian Scott Appleby states candidly that Western myopia on the subject of religious power has been astounding.5 For a long time scholars predicted that as religions were assumed to be carriers of tradition they would enter into
4 5

See, e.g., Demerath, 2001. Appleby, 2003, 231.

THE ROLE OF RELIGION IN THE PUBLIC SPHERE

65

decline because of secularisation and privatisation. Because of these blinkers or blinders, scholars and observers missed the religious roots of the civil rights movement in the United States and misread the surge of the Iranian revolution.6 Then in 1993, Harvard professor of international relations Samuel Huntington published an article in the journal Foreign Affairs entitled The Clash of Civilizations?7 This controversial article opened the floodgates for public debate on the significance of religion in international affairs. In it Huntington declared that [t]he fault lines between civilizations will be the battle lines of the future. He argued that the world would be shaped in large measure by the interactions among seven or eight major civilizations, namely Western, Confucian, Japanese, Islamic, Hindu, Slavic-Orthodox, Latin American and possibly African. It was not just Huntingtons oversimplified mapping of the contemporary world which provoked criticism, but the suggestion that the most important differentiating feature was religion, and that post-Cold War optimism would be shattered by dangerous and deep-rooted cultural conflict.8 He also argued that democracy was only realizable within the context of church-state separation (or in more appropriate terminologyreligion-state separation). Prescient or not, Huntingtons work stimulated a flood of long-overdue studies of the role of religion in international affairs. It sent diehard secular political scientists and social critics into a tailspinif the flurry of publications in the last decade is any indication.9 A landmark study was Religion, The Missing Dimension of Statecraft.10 Religion plays a crucial role in many international conflicts, yet for the most part, diplomacy either ignores or misunderstands its role. The authors set out to restore this missing dimension to its rightful place in the conduct of international diplomacy. The book also offers the first systematic account of modern cases in which religious or spiritual factors have played a helpful role in preventing or resolving conflict and achieving non-violent change. Another publication around the same time which helped focus attention on the growing importance of religion on the international scene was Jose Casanovas influential study, Public Religions in the Modern World.11 This book reconsiders the relationship between religion and modernity, and argues that
Levine, 2000, 122. Huntington, 1993; see also Huntingtons book on this subject, Huntington, 1996. 8 See Kaplan, 2001. 9 See Philpott, 2002 for a discussion of this, with comprehensive references. Of particular note is the special issue of Millennium: Journal of International Studies (29/3: 2000) on Religion and International Relations. 10 Johnston and Sampson, 1994. 11 Casanova, 1994.
6 7

66

ROSALIND I.J. HACKETT

many religious traditions have been making their way, sometimes forcefully, out of the private sphere and into public life. This is occurring at an increasingly transnational level.12 These processes are well captured by Hent de Vries: the functions ascribed to modern subjectivity, to the political, the economy, the nation, the state, the public sphere, privacy, and so on have been radically transformed.13 The mass mediated dimension of these developments has been well articulated by sociologist Manuel Castells who argues that we have passed from Giddens era of late modernity into the age of the network society.14 This new form of society has been induced by the information technology revolution and the restructuring of capitalism. This has led, in his opinion, to a disjunction between the local and the global, and power and experience, for most individuals and social groups.15 Consequently, he states, [t]he search for meaning takes place then in the reconstruction of defensive identities around communal principles.16 These new forms of communal resistance or cultural communes are at the base of the new primacy of identity politics in todays network society. He sees the resurgence of religious fundamentalisms as reflecting the contestations of the new global order.17 These movements constitute a social barometer, given their reactive nature, aiming to construct social and personal identity on the basis of images of the past and projecting them into a utopian future, to overcome unbearable present times.18 For some it was more the turn of the millennium that occasioned rethinking about religion.19 As noted by a prominent commentator on contemporary religious affairs, Philip Jenkins, the twenty-first century will almost certainly be regarded by future historians as a century in which religion replaced ideology as the prime animating and destructive force in human affairs, guiding
12 Key works in this area are Robertson, 1992, Beyer, 1998, and Rudolph and Piscatori, 1997. 13 De Vries, 2002, 19. 14 Castells, 1997, ii, 10-11. 15 Ibid., 11. 16 Ibid. 17 Peter van der Veer prefers to designate these movements as religious nationalisms since many of them articulate discourse on the religious community with discourse on the nation. See van der Veer, 1997, 195. 18 Ibid., 25. Odinkalu, 2003, 15, traces the pathologies of suffering, conflict and systematic violations that Africa has suffered back to colonial patterns of exclusion and ethnicization. See also van der Veer, 1997. 19 See Gifford et al., 2003.

THE ROLE OF RELIGION IN THE PUBLIC SPHERE

67

attitudes to political liberty and obligation, concepts of nationhood, and of course, conflicts and wars.20 Jenkins is alluding in part to the tragic events of September 11 and their aftermath. As a scholar of comparative religion, I can certainly confirm that the production of texts on Islam and on religion and violence more generally, as well as on peace and tolerance, has escalated exponentially. But I would also add that what September 11 brought home to many (I know this at least from talking to my own students and following the local and international news on a regular basis), is not only a stronger sense of the ambivalence of the sacred, as brought home to us by Scott Appleby in his book so entitled,21 but also our global connectedness. Human rights scholar and advocate Abdullahi An-Naim calls this our shared vulnerability.22 FAITH-BASED DIPLOMACY As an extension of the greater recognition of the role of religion on the international stage, one can note a number of new initiatives to extend the scope of faith-based organizations to the diplomatic realm. A number of recently published works realistically address the religious dimension of conflict transformation and peace-building.23 A new book edited by Douglas Johnston, Faith-Based Diplomacy: Trumping Realpolitik,24 gives shape to this emergent field. It reveals the change in thinking that is occurring among those who are international relations specialists: In some non-Western cultures, religion is a primary motivation for political action. Historically dismissed by Western policymakers as a divisive influence, religion in fact has significant potential for overcoming the obstacles that lead to paralysis and stalemate. The concept of incorporating religion as part of the solution to such problems is as simple as it is profound. It is long overdue.25 For instance, there is a chapter in Johnstons book by a Muslim scholar entitled Conflict Resolution as a Normative Value in Islamic Law: Handling Disputes with Non-Muslims.26 There is also a new journal, Faith and International Affairs, published by the Council on Faith and International
Jenkins, 2002. Appleby, 2000. 22 An-Naim, 1998. 23 Docherty, 2001; Appleby, 2000; Gopin, 2000; Sampson and Lederach, 2000. Juergensmeyer, 2003 and Esposito, 2003 also address this dimension in their conclusions. 24 Johnston, 2003. 25 Ibid., jacket cover. 26 El-Fadl, 2003.
20 21

68

ROSALIND I.J. HACKETT

Affairs located at the Institute for Global Engagement near Philadelphia. It not only encourages inter-faith dialogue and provides resources for those at the nexus of faith and international affairs, but also encourages what it calls holistic engagement in global issues. In a recent article in this journal, one can read about the rituals of prayer and fasting that led to a breakthrough in difficult peace negotiations in the Kashmir region.27 There is also the International Center for Religion and Democracy in Washington, DC that declares its mission to be: To facilitate increased understanding and collaboration between policymakers and diplomats on the one hand and religious leadersboth clergy and laityon the other in resolving identitybased conflicts that exceed the reach of traditional diplomacy. The Centers mission statement goes on: Regardless of ones spiritual persuasion, there are two compelling reasons why the Center's work is important: (1) the need for more effective preventive measures to minimize the occasions in which we have to send our sons and daughters in harms way and (2) the need for a stable global environment to support continued economic growth that can benefit an expanding percentage of the world's population. By linking religious reconciliation with official diplomacy, the ICRD is creating a new synergy for peacemaking that serves both of these needs. It also provides a more fruitful approach for dealing with ethnic conflict, tribal warfare, and religious hostilities28 The Program in Religion in Conflict and Peacebuilding at the Joan B. Kroc Institute for International Peace Studies also seeks to strengthen the potential for peacebuilding within religious traditions, in addition to exploring the complex roles of religion in contemporary conflicts.29 Organizations with a specific focus on peace-building include the Tanenbaum Center for Interreligious Understandings Program on Religion and Conflict Resolution and PeaceMakers International.30

Cox and Philpott, 2003. http://www.icrd.org/ (accessed December 11, 2003). 29 http://kroc.nd.edu/research/religion.html (accessed March 6, 2004). 30 http://www.tanenbaum.org/ (accessed March 6, 2004); http://www.peacemakers.net/ (accessed March 6, 2004).
27 28

THE ROLE OF RELIGION IN THE PUBLIC SPHERE

69

BEST-SELLING RELIGION Interestingly, while journalists and academic analysts have rushed to catch up with global religious resurgences, books promoting religion, more religion, or better religion are bestsellers in many parts of the world. The fact that these books now displace more academic works on the shelves of major US and UK bookstores is somewhat problematic from my vantage point as a scholar of religion. Books on religion or spirituality now feature regularly on the New York Times bestseller list. These can range from religious reflections and spiritual guides to modern interpretations of ancient sacred wisdom. One can also find histories and contemporary accounts of religious traditions, concepts, and holy places written for the general reader, such as those by popular British author Karen Armstrong, whose bestknown works are A History of God and The Battle for God.31 Once President Bill Clinton started singing the praises of Yale law professor Stephen Carters works, such as The Culture of Disbelief: How American Law and Politics Trivialize Religious Devotion,32 sales went up exponentially. Explaining how preserving a special role for religious communities can strengthen democracy, Carter criticizes the trivializing of religious faith in contemporary American law and politics. In his more recent book, Gods Name in Vain: The Wrongs and Rights of Religion in Politics,33 Carter expresses his concerns about the risks and limitations of political involvement for religious people and communities. In his words: We must never become a nation that propounds an official religion or suggests that some religions are more American than others. At the same time, one of the official religions we must never propound is the religion of secularism, the suggestion that there is something un-American about trying to live life in a way that puts God first. Quite the contrary: Preserving the ability of the faithful to put God first is precisely the purpose for which freedom of religion must exist.34 Carter worries about religious voices losing their prophetic edge by being co-opted by political forces, and about the anti-religious politics of the political elite. Without the independent religious conscience, he suggests, there might never have been the abolitionist movement, rights for industrial
Armstrong, 1994 and 2000. Carter, 1994. 33 Carter, 2000. 34 Ibid., 4.
31 32

70

ROSALIND I.J. HACKETT

workers, or the civil rights movement.35 In the book, he lays out what he considers to be the basis of principled and prophetic religious activism.36 Incidentally, Carter has been criticized for propagating a version of religion which is self-evidently personalistic, moralistic, and experiential, and most definitely of the monotheistic variety, which sustains the misleading dichotomy of church-state and prevents people from seeing how values may be cultivated in the secular realm. 37 Another critic describes Carters book as a product of the very culture it purports to criticize, saying that it advances a view of religion as legitimate only when in service to democracy.38 Legal scholar John Witte sees the shift to more public religion in the US context as both inevitable and necessary. He notes that over the last fifteen years the US Supreme Court has abandoned much of its earlier separationism.39 The metaphorical wall of separation between church and state envisaged by Jefferson no longer looms large in the Courts opinions, and privatisation of religion is no longer the bargain that must be struck in order to attain religious freedom. According to Witte, there are two teachings which emanate from the recent cases. First, public religion must be as free as private religion, for religious groups, in his words, provide leaven and leverage for the polity to improve. Second, the freedom of public religion sometimes requires the support of the state. This is because it is impossible for religious bodies to avoid contact with todays modern welfare state and all its ramifications in the educational, welfare, legal, social, and healthcare sectors. Such developments in part explain the rise of what Dennis Hoover calls an activist center in American public life.40 This has manifested itself in two principal ways: first, a call by certain politicians and writers for religion to assume a more prominent role in public life, and second, advocacy of the charitable choice provision of the welfare reform law, whereby government support is provided for faith-based organizations to address social problems.41 President George W. Bush has openly talked about the influence of his religious faith, particularly in the aftermath of September 11. This has occasioned numerous articles in leading news magazines and newspapers regarding the Presidents personal religious beliefs and
35 Ibid. In a similar vein, Gifford, 1995 examines critically the contribution of the African churches in several countries to the processes of democratisation. 36 Carter, 2000, 7. 37 McCutcheon, 2001, 131. 38 Craycraft, 1999, 156-157. 39 Witte, n.d. 40 Hoover, 2000. 41 See Silk, 1999.

THE ROLE OF RELIGION IN THE PUBLIC SPHERE

71

practices.42 While statistics show that the majority of Americans like their leader to be God-fearing, they are not so keen about public professions of faith. Some journalists have jumped on statements by politicians that there could be no morality without religion.43 Religions influence in American politics is obvious in recent debates about school prayer, abortion, and homosexuality, as well as in the success of grassroots religious organizations in mobilizing voters. Many liberal secularists decry this trend, rejecting any interaction between politics and religion. But in Why I Am Not a Secularist,44 distinguished political theorist William E. Connolly argues that secularism, although admirable in its pursuit of freedom and diversity, too often undercuts these goals through its narrow and intolerant understandings of public reason. He believes that in dealing with controversial issues such as the death penalty, the right to die, and the war on drugs, secularism has failed to recognize the complexity of public views because it has excluded religious and theistic viewpoints. In doing so, he claims that it has ignored an opportunity to create public consensus. He argues further that the narrowness of the secularist vision has helped to increase support for the death penalty, which he himself opposes. As against the secularist vision, Connolly crafts a bold new model of public life that he believes more accurately reflects the diversity of voices and the needs of contemporary politics. He calls for a refashioning of secularism that would allow it to incorporate a wider variety of ethical views, and honour the desire of believers and nonbelievers alike to represent their faiths openly in the civic forum.45 For political philosopher Paul Weithman, any questions regarding the role religion may play in citizens decision-making are essentially moral questions. This is because a societys commitment to liberal democracy entails certain moral and normative commitments for its citizens. Weithman has produced two well-argued books on this subject, Religion and the Obligations of Citizenship and an earlier, edited volume, Religion and Contemporary Liberalism.46. He identifies two main sets of questions that arise
See, e.g., Lampman, 2003. See, for example, the Roundtable on Religion in Politics Tikkun November 2000 http://www.tikkun.org/magazine/index.cfm/action/tikkun/issue/tik0011/article/0011 11a.html (accessed April 22, 2004). 44 Connolly, 1999. 45 It is worth noting that at the recent American Academy of Religion annual meeting in Atlanta (November 21-25, 2003), a panel on philosopher and ethicist Jeffrey Stouts new book, Democracy and Tradition, where leading public intellectuals debated a number of issues including the appropriate place for religion in a multicultural democratic context, drew a crowd of over 2000. 46 Weithman, 2002 and 1997, respectively.
42 43

72

ROSALIND I.J. HACKETT

with regard to the proper role of religion in democratic politics. The first set asks how religion may affect political outcomes and how those outcomes square with the commitments of liberal democracy. For example, can state support for a religion, all religions, or for religion as suchas in the endorsement of religious codes of conduct be consistent with liberal democracy? Weithman demonstrates how attention to political outcomes can illustrate and illuminate what he calls puzzles about liberal democracy.47 For example, in the much debated case of whether prayer should be permitted in public schools, he shows how, if it is permitted because the majority favours it, then the liberty of the minority can be compromised in the name of a democratic commitment to majoritarianism. But if prayer is not permitted, he explains, it seems that the liberal commitment to freedom of religion (and the protection of minorities) can thwart measures the majority would like to enact. Weithman also explores the question of whether some citizens should be allowed to make ritual use of drugs which are generally proscribed. If so, then the commitment to the equal treatment of all before the law can, under some circumstances, cede to religious liberty. If not, he states, then it is rather that religious liberty can be restricted in the name of treating all as equals before a law which the state has an interest in enforcing.48 The second set of questions highlighted by Weithman pertains to religious political inputs. This concerns the use of religious arguments in the political sphere either as a basis for voting, political preferences, or policymaking. As Weithman rightly notes, liberal democratic commitments to religious toleration and church-state separation are sometimes thought to be incompatible with citizens taking their religiously based political views as the basis of important political decisions.49 He asks whether there is a difference between religious and political leaders and ordinary citizens, or between fora, in terms of the appropriateness of religious political inputs. Weithman considers that these questions regarding the suitable role of religious convictions in the political sphere force us to think more critically and more deeply about the nature of citizenship. He argues that citizens may offer exclusively religious arguments in public debate and that they may rely on religious reasons when they cast their votes.50 Because voting and advocacy are collective enterprises, they must be conducted responsibly and reasonably, in Weithmans view. The context is here significant. He notes
Weithman, 2002, 2. Ibid. 49 Ibid. 50 Ibid., 3.
47 48

THE ROLE OF RELIGION IN THE PUBLIC SPHERE

73

that citizens in liberal democracies such as the United States are deeply divided on the nature and demands of citizenship. Sometimes these disagreements stem from the political activities of religious organizations. However, in those societies where the political role of such organisations is more valued this is less of an issue. Religious organizations may be instrumental in facilitating peoples political participation and in developing their sense of citizenship. They may also generate debate regarding the conditions of participation and the goods that should be conferred by various levels of participation. Weithman underscores the need to distinguish between those who violate the obligations of citizenship and those whose politics we dislike. In other words, restrictions on religious political argument are sometimes based on assumptions about what religious citizens stand for, when in reality there may be considerable diversity of opinion. Departing somewhat from the almost exclusive reliance on conceptual argumentation in political philosophy, Weithman wisely employs empirical data and contextual differences to query presumptions, and to assess what he calls the reasonability of deep disagreement.51 SECULARISM AND ITS DISCONTENTS While some writers have sought ways to popularise religion for the Western consumer, or have tried to find cogent arguments for a greater public role for religion locally or globally, others approach these questions by addressing the tension between secularism and religion. Or, to be more specific, they see growing antagonism between the secularism and rightsbased individualism of modern democratic states and the resurgence of religion with its communitarian emphasis. For example, the summer 2003 issue of the prestigious journal Daedalus: Journal of the American Academy of Arts and Sciences is devoted to the topic of secularism and religion. Several of the writers address the possibilities of religious pluralism and freedom, while others, such as renowned religion analyst Martin Marty, search for new paradigms, such as religio-secular world, to represent these changing global dynamics.
51 Ibid., 5. In this connection see also the work of Mark Chaves, e.g. Chaves, Stephens, and Galaskiewicz, 2004. On a lighter, more ironic note, there is no knowing where or what type of religion may appear in Americas public sphere. Starting in December 2003, the figure of a guardian angel will be used in television, radio, print, outdoor and Internet advertisements and public service announcements directed to the USs 37 million Hispanics, to emphasize the importance of preparing for potential terrorist attacks. Just like any good guardian angel, we want this one to be everywhere, Homeland Security Secretary Tom Ridge said in a speech to announce the start of the spiritually themed campaign. http://www.hispanicbusiness.com/news/newsbyid.asp?id=13960.

74

ROSALIND I.J. HACKETT

One of the best scholarly takes on the contested place of religion in the public (local, national and international) sphere is anthropologist Talal Asads latest book, Formations of the Secular: Christianity, Islam, Modernity.52 In keeping with his understanding of modern anthropology, he explores this phenomenon in societies differently located in time and space. He shows how such embedded concepts as secularism and religion are supported or challenged by a variety of sensibilities, attitudes, assumptions, and behaviors.53 He is particularly interested in how secular discourse is perceived from the periphery of the modernization process. One of Asads main arguments is that the modern idea of a secular society involves a distinctive relation between state law and personal morality, with the result that religion becomes a matter of (private) belief. However, translating into a legal right the individuals ability to express and practice his or her beliefs freely brings religion back into the public domain.54 These ideas developed in Western Europe in tandem with the formation of the modern state. In the final chapter of the book, on Reconfigurations of Law and Ethics in Colonial Egypt, Asad probingly examines how the secular was thought about and translated in Egypt prior to involvement with modernity. He finds that the reconfigurations of law, religion and ethics in colonial Egypt created new social spaces in which secularism could grow. One of his most important conclusions is that [a] secular state is not one characterized by religious indifference, or rational ethicsor political toleration. It is a complex arrangement of legal reasoning, moral practice, and political authority. This arrangement is not the simple outcome of the struggle of secular reason against the despotism of religious authority.55 To get beyond the notion that religion and secularism are competing ideologies, it behoves us, Talad avers, to look at what people do with and to ideas and practices,56 and why meanings and concepts change. He also argues that religion has always been involved in the world of power, and that the categories of politics and religion turn out to implicate each other more profoundly than we thought.57 In other words, modern state power is highly pervasive, and it seeks to regulate all aspects of individual and social life.58
Asad, 2003. Ibid., 17. 54 Ibid., 205f. 55 Ibid., 255. 56 Ibid., 194. 57 Ibid., 200. 58 Ibid., 199.
52 53

THE ROLE OF RELIGION IN THE PUBLIC SPHERE

75

Similarly nuanced analysis of the concept of the secular is also provided by historian Nikki Keddie, who emphasizes the fact that the word secular has had a far greater variety of meanings than current usage may suggest.59 For centuries in Europe it referred to the change in clerical status whereby a monk became a secular priest. It was only in the nineteenth century that it began to refer to a doctrine of secularism, i.e. a belief that religious institutions and values should play no role in the affairs of the state. Keddie also provides a helpful comparison of the rise and fall of secular and religious politics in various parts of the world, noting the contextual factors which influence these trends. For example, Muslim countries have negative views of secularism because they associate it with autocratic rule and Western influence. By comparison, Islam as a force for mobilization still seems relatively untainted. Yet, somewhat paradoxically, Keddie notes, the Islamic country where anti-clerical feelings run highest and secularist reforms are most successful is in present-day Iran. Constant battles, as in South Asianamely India and Sri Lanka between religious nationalisms and secular movements serve to weaken support for secularism in a region, in Keddies judgement.60 So too does the imposition of secularist ideas from the top down, without ensuring support for them at the popular level or from religious leaders. Since Western political hegemony is less of an issue in India than it is in the Muslim world, there are many Indian intellectuals who defend secularism even if they may criticize its application.61 In fact, Keddie states that contemporary India has probably produced the largest body of writing in the modern world debating the merits of secularism. With the controversial efforts of the present Indian government and the ruling party (BJP) to promote Hindu nationalism to the detriment of religious minorities,62 a number of recent publications advocate the need to move beyond current understandings of secularism in order to effectively protect minority interests.63 So the very least that we can learn from the writings of scholars such as Asad and Keddie is the need to historicise and contextualise the concepts of secularism and religion. Seen in their many different historical contexts, these concepts are not always as unequivocal, or as polarized, , as is commonly assumed.64 Furthermore, secularisation has been in progress around the world for far longer, and its success has been far more partial,
Keddie, 2003, 14f. Ibid., 28. See also Tambiah, 1992; Gombrich and Obeyesekere, 1988; Juergensmeyer, 1993. 61 See, e.g., Bhargava, 2000; Madan, 1998. 62 Kishwar, 1998; Noorani, 2000. 63 Chandokhe, 1999; Massey, 2003. 64 See, e.g., An-Naim, 2000.
59 60

76

ROSALIND I.J. HACKETT

than is often known, not least because of the backlashes and counterbacklashes engendered by insensitive policies. CHANGING PUBLIC SPHERES AND NEW CHALLENGES TO RELIGIOUS CO-EXISTENCE In some parts of the world, such as Latin America, the concern is less about secularisation and the marginalisation of religion, but more about the rise of new religious groups competing for power, recognition and resources. Disestablishment of state religions, or dismantling of complicities between dominant religious groups and state power, have changed the stakes of co-existence between religious communities. Against the backdrop of the forces of democratisation, mediatisation, and the global market, religious groups are compelled to justify their existence to state and consumers alike. These processes are clearly visible in many Latin American countries, where the powerful Roman Catholic Church now has to compete in the marketplace along with the burgeoning evangelical groups and indigenous revival movements. Political scientist Dan Levine, who has been conducting research on religion and politics in this region for many years, observes: Latin America is now approaching a state of pluralism (among Christian groups) for the first time in its history. This religious pluralism entails not only a multiplicity of voices speaking in the name of religion but also a conflict for voice within specific groups. The spread of literacy and the access to mass media have diffused the tools of religious expertise into many hands.65 Works by local and international scholars reflect efforts to interpret this new pluralism. Some have even adopted a market model and talk about Latin Americas new religious economy.66 Levine offers a positive reading of the politicisation of religion in Latin America. A story that not long ago could be told with confidence about how Catholicism supported and reflected the established order became a story in which religion (Protestant as well as Catholic) has become a source of new ideas about how to organize society and politics, and how to lead the good life. It is no exaggeration to say that many of
65 Levine, 2000, 135. The three presidential candidates in the December 2003 elections in Guatemala reflected this plurality: one was a Catholic, another an evangelical Protestant, and the third a priest of the Mayan indigenous religion. 66 Chesnut, 2003; Gill, 1998.

THE ROLE OF RELIGION IN THE PUBLIC SPHERE

77

the regions most significant movements for change would have been unthinkable without religious participation and legitimation.67 Levine also points out that the pluralisation of religious voices, and their growing activism and public presence, have immediate consequences for democracy. He states that in a plural environment, it is to everyones interest to maintain open civil society with guarantees of free speech and equal access to institutions and to public spaces.68 This is especially important as these societies leave behind the dictatorships and religious monopolies which so characterized the Latin American scene up until the late 1980s. Levine points to the emergence of discourses on citizenship that is, of the human and civil rights of the personwhich have been helpful in modernizing the state. Efforts to accommodate religious and cultural diversity in transitional states and new democratic dispensations are naturally subject to extensive scrutiny. The new South Africa is a good case in point, with its explicit recognition of religious and cultural minorities and celebration of the countrys diverse heritage after decades of neo-colonial repression. The key sites for negotiating the new South Africa have been the constitution,69 religious broadcasting,70 and religion education.71 The new government has, for the most part, resisted efforts to continue to privilege South Africas Christian majority (over 70% are Christians according to the most recent census).72 Many of the religious leaders who fought for liberation from the brutal apartheid regime have become officials of the new government.73 Interestingly, many European counties have shown themselves to be regressive in terms of honouring the rights of minority religious groups in their territories. Alarmed at the growth of immigrant populations, particularly Muslims (there are now an estimated 4-5 million Muslims in France, for example),74 some European governments have taken draconian measures to curb the activities of non-conventional and unpopular religious

Levine, 2000, 123-124. Ibid, 135. 69 van der Vyver, 1999. 70 Hackett, 2004. 71 Chidester, 1994; Gruchy, 1995; Steyn, 1999; Tayob and Weisse, 1998. 72http://encarta.msn.com/fact_631504863/South_Africa.html (accessed March 6, 2004). 73 Hefner, 2000, emphasizes the importance of civil institutions and public civility, as well as civilized state, in the democratization of Indonesia. Different religious groups were included in the broad base of civil society organizations that championed political and social reform. 74 Ewing, 2002; An-Naim, 2000.
67 68

78

ROSALIND I.J. HACKETT

groups.75 Sects are feared for their purported negative psychological and Americanising effects. In eastern Europe and Russia we find similar patterns of cultural preservation and animosity toward competing religious options.76 The wearing of the Muslim veil in the workplace and schools has been hotly contested in France and Germany. French President Chirac has developed the idea that the veil or scarf is a sign of aggressive proselytism and has recently proposed controversial new legislation banning the wearing of religious symbols in public schools.77 The rise of religion in identity politics and the public debates about multiculturalism have given culture, and particularly cultural practice, a new prominence in national and international politics. Frequently the disputes over symbols, resources, recognition and access are resolved in the legal sphere.78 Legal scholar Upendra Baxi explains that the right to difference is evidence of the deployment of the logics and paralogics of human rights by actors seeking to subvert the monological view of human rights through a pluri-universalistic praxis.79 He emphasizes that with the assertion of cultural and religious rights in modern democratic contexts, we are confronted by some of the most intractable problems of conflict of rights where self-chosen sedimentation of identity within a religious tradition is at odds with the universalistic mode of detraditionalisation of the politics of difference, demanding gender equality and justice.80 The ongoing controversy, referred to above, over the possible inclusion of references to God or to Europes Christian heritage in the new constitution of the European Union would be another pertinent example.81 What possibilities are there for new, more equitable conversations about religious difference and conceptions of the good life, asks respected and
75 See, especially, Seminar on Freedom of Religion or Belief in the OSCE Region, 2001; Richardson, 2004. 76 This overt or covert denial of the rights of minority religions has been flagged by Human Rights Without Frontiers (Belgium), http://www.hrwf.net, as not being part of the test for being admitted into the European Union. 77 http://www.reuters.com/newsArticle.jhtml?type=worldNews&storyID=4498057 (accessed March 6, 2004). For comparative analysis, see Gunn, 2004. 78 Parekh, 2000; Barry, 2001. See, also, the forthcoming special issue of Culture and Religion, on Law and Human Rights, guest edited by Rosalind I. J. Hackett and Winni Sullivan. 79 Baxi, 2002, 83. 80 Ibid. See, also, Tahzib-Lie, 2000; Cook, 1994. 81 http://www.csmonitor.com/2003/0410/p07s01-woeu.html (accessed March 6, 2004).

THE ROLE OF RELIGION IN THE PUBLIC SPHERE

79

popular commentator, Bill Moyers?82 Moyers wants to learn from difference but not be alienated by it, nor expect it to be glossed over by liberal common denominators.83 Similarly, a team of renowned North American legal and cultural experts have recently published their extensive deliberations on how to balance communitarian demands (of which religious identity is a dimension) with the standards of modern liberal democracies.84 Martha Nussbaum writes about these issues from the standpoint of women.85 CONCLUDING REMARKS The eruption of religion into changing political landscapes the world over, as briefly adumbrated in the present essay, seems to indicate two important findings. First, the management of religious and cultural difference, and the treatment of minorities, has emerged as a key element of successful governance. Second, these issues necessitate public debate, with educational and media sites emerging as significant popular locations for this purposesupplementing initiatives by political and religious leaders. It is indeed heartening to learn that the awareness of heightened risks of religious conflict, or the threats to peace posed by extremist religious groups, has engendered an upsurge in inter-religious dialogue in many parts of the world, and an increased attention to the significance of religious education and religious broadcasting. I would here cite the efforts of the South African government to have its religious programming reflect the new rainbow nation of post-apartheid South Africa.86 Similarly, Professor Abdelfattah Amor, the Special Rapporteur of the Sub-Commission on Freedom of Religion and Belief of the United Nations Commission on Human Rights, has launched meetings and publications since 1995 to explore the role of school education in relation to religious tolerance and intolerance.87 However, we must be vigilant concerning the forces of deregulation and liberalization that inevitably accompany democratisation and globalisation. While the new opportunities afforded religious individuals and communities to represent themselves and participate in the public sphere are undeniable,
Moyers, 2000. Cf. Jean Bethke Elshtains rejection of liberal monism for postulating a single vocabulary of political discussion, Elshtain, 2003. 84 Shweder, Minow, and Markus, 2002. 85 Nussbaum, 2000; cf. Hackett, 2001. 86 See Hackett, 2004. 87http://www.unhchr.ch/huridocda/huridoca.nsf/0/DFDC01ED0062E4C8C1256DB1 004EB2C8/$File/N0347258.doc?OpenElement (accessed March 6, 2004). See also Larsen and Plesner, 2002.
82 83

80

ROSALIND I.J. HACKETT

and indeed long overdue in many instances, they can equally lead to new forms of separationism and demonisation of religious others. The development of civil society values of tolerance, cooperation and civility can easily be subordinated to the logic of the market, or the pressures of religious and political fundamentalisms.88 It therefore behoves us to play our humble parts, whether as religious or political leaders, educators, lawyers, media professionals, human rights activists, or simple laypersons, and whether as members of majoritarian or minoritarian groups, in ensuring that the call for more public expressions of religion is responded to in the most equitable way possible. REFERENCES An-Naim, Abdullahi A, Consciousness of vulnerability, in: A Human Rights Message, Ministry of Foreign Affairs, Government of Sweden (eds.), Stockholm: Government of Sweden, 1998, 16-19. , Human rights and Islamic identity in France and Uzbekistan: mediation of the local and the global, Human Rights Quarterly 22, 2000, 906-41. , Human rights, religion and secularism: does it have to be a choice?, Keynote Address, 18th Quinquennial World Congress of the International Association of the History of Religions, August 5-12, Durban, South Africa 2000. Appleby, R. Scott, The Ambivalence of the Sacred: Religion, violence, and reconciliation, New York: Rowman and Littlefield, 2000. , Retrieving the missing dimension of statecraft: religious faith in the service of peacebuilding, in: Douglas Johnston, (ed.), Faith-Based Diplomacy: Trumping realpolitik, New York: Oxford, 2003, 231-58. Appleby, R. Scott, Emmanuel Sivan, and Gabriel Almond, Strong Religion: The rise of fundamentalisms around the world, Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 2003. Armstrong, Karen, A History of God: The 4,000 year quest of Judaism, Christianity and Islam, New York: Ballantine Books, 1994. , The Battle for God, New York: Knopf, 2000. Asad, Talal, Formations of the Secular: Christianity, Islam, Modernity, Stanford: Stanford University Press, 2003. Barker, Eileen, The opium wars of the new millennium: religion in Eastern Europe and the former Soviet Union, in: Mark Silk (ed.), Religion on the International News Agenda, Hartford, CT: The Leonard E. Greenberg Center for the Study of Religion in Public Life, 2000, 39-59.
88

See Appleby, Sivan, and Almond, 2003.

THE ROLE OF RELIGION IN THE PUBLIC SPHERE

81

, Why the cults? new religions and freedom of religion and belief, in: Tore Lindholm, W. Cole Durham and Bahia Tahzib-Lie (eds.), Facilitating Freedom of Religion and Belief: Perspectives, impulses and recommendations from the Oslo Coalition, Dordrecht: Kluwer (forthcoming 2004). Barry, Brian, Culture and Equality: An egalitarian critique of multiculturalism, Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 2001. Baxi, Upendra, The Future of Human Rights, New York: Oxford University Press, 2002. Beyer, Peter, The modern emergence of religions and a global social system for religion, International Sociology 13, 1998, 151-72. Bhargava, Rajeev (ed.), Secularism and Its Critics, New York: Oxford University Press, 2000. Carter, Stephen L., The Culture of Disbelief: How American law and politics trivialize religious devotion, New York: Anchor Books, 1994. , God's Name in Vain: The wrongs and rights of religion in politics, New York: Basic Books, 2000. Casanova, Jose, Public Religions in the Modern World, Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1994. Castells, Manuell, The Information Age: Economy, society and culture, Oxford: Blackwell, 1997. Vol. I: The Rise of the Network Society; Vol. II: The Power of Identity; Vol. III: End of Millennium. Chandokhe, Neera, Beyond Secularism: The rights of religious minorities, Delhi: Oxford University Press, 1999. Chaves, Mark, Laura Stephens, and Joseph Galaskiewicz, Does government funding suppress nonprofits political activities? American Sociological Review 69, 2004, [page numbers?]. Chesnut, R. Andrew, Competitive Spirits: Latin America's new religious economy, New York: Oxford University Press, 2003. Chidester, David, Gordon Mitchell, A. Rashied Omar, and Isabel Apawo Phiri (eds.) Religion in Public Education: Options for a new South Africa, (2nd ed.), Cape Town: University of Cape Town, 1994. Connolly, William E., Why I Am Not A Secularist, Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press, 1999. Cook, Rebecca (ed.), Human Rights of Women: National and international perspectives, Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press, 1994. Cox, Brian, and Daniel Philpott, Faith-based diplomacy: an ancient idea newly emergent, The Brandywine Review of Faith and International Affairs, 1/2, 2003, 31-40. Craycraft, Kenneth R., The American Myth of Religious Freedom, Dallas: Spence, 1999.

82

ROSALIND I.J. HACKETT

Demerath, N. J., Crossing the Gods: World religions and worldly politics, New Brunswick, NJ: Rutgers University Press, 2001. de Vries, Hent, Religion and Violence: Philosophical perspectives from Kant to Derrida. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press, 2002. Docherty, Jayne Seminare, Learning Lessons from Waco: When the parties bring their gods to the negotiation table, Syracuse: Syracuse University Press, 2001. Eickelman, Dale F. and Jon W. Anderson (eds.), New Media in the Muslim World: The emerging public sphere, Bloomington, IN: Indiana University Press, 1999. Eickelman, Dale F., and Armando Salvatore, The public sphere and Muslim identities, European Journal of Sociology 43, 2002, 92-115. Elshtain, Jean Bethke, Liberal monism, Daedalus, 132/3, 2003, 78-79. Ewing, Katherine Pratt, Legislating religious freedom: Muslim challenges to the relationship between church and state in Germany and France, in: Richard Shweder, Martha Minow, and Hazel Rose Markus (eds.), Engaging Cultural Differences: The multicultural challenge in liberal democracies, New York: Russell Sage Foundation, 2002, 63-80. Gifford, Paul (ed.), The Christian Churches and the Democratisation of Africa, Leiden: E. J. Brill, 1995. Gifford, Paul, David Archard, Trevor A. Hart, and Nigel Rapport (eds.), 2000 Years and Beyond: Faith, identity and the common era, New York: Routledge, 2003. Gill, Anthony, Rendering Unto Caesar: The Catholic Church and the state in Latin America, Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1998. Gombrich, Richard, and G. Obeyesekere, Buddhism Transformed: Religious change in Sri Lanka, Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 1988. Gopin, Marc, Between Eden and Armageddon: The future of world religions, violence, and peacemaking, New York: Oxford University Press, 2000. Gruchy, J. W. de and S. Martin (eds.), Religion and the Reconstruction of Civil Society, Pretoria: University of South Africa, 1995. Gunn, T. Jeremy, Under God but not the scarf: the founding myths of religious freedom in the United States and lacit in France, Journal of Church and State, 46/1, 2004, 7-23. Habermas, Jrgen, The Structural Transformation of the Public Sphere: An inquiry into a category of bourgeois society (reprint edition), Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 1991. Hackett, Rosalind I. J., Conflicting rights: Martha Nussbaum's creative solution, Soundings, 83/3-4, 2001, 615-25. , Mediated religion in South Africa: balancing air-time and rights claims, in: Birgit Meyer and Annelies Moors (eds.), Media, Religion and the Public Sphere, London: James Currey, (forthcoming 2004).

THE ROLE OF RELIGION IN THE PUBLIC SPHERE

83

Hefner, Robert W., Civil Islam: Muslims and democratisation in Indonesia, Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 2000. Hoover, Dennis R., Charitable choice and the new religious center, Religion in the News 3/1, 2000 http://www.trincoll.edu/depts/csrpl/RI NVol3No1/charitable_choice_2000.htm (accessed April 22, 2004). Huntington, Samuel, The clash of civilizations? Foreign Affairs, 72, 1993, 22-49. ,The Clash of Civilizations and the Remaking of World Order, New York: Simon and Schuster, 1996. Jenkins, Philip, The Next Christendom: The coming of global Christianity, New York: Oxford University Press, 2002. , The next Christianity, The Atlantic Monthly, October 2002, http://www.theatlantic.com/issues/2002/10/jenkins.htm (accessed April 22, 2004). Johnston, Douglas (ed.), Faith-Based Diplomacy: Trumping realpolitik, New York: Oxford University Press, 2003. Johnston, Douglas and Cynthia Sampson (eds.), Religion, The Missing Dimension of Statecraft, New York: Oxford University Press, 1994. Juergensmeyer, Mark, The New Cold War? Religious nationalism confronts the secular state, Berkeley and Los Angeles: University of California Press, 1993. , Terror in the Mind of God: The global rise of religious violence, Berkeley and Los Angeles: University of California Press, 2003. Kaplan, Robert D., Looking the world in the eye, The Atlantic Monthly, 288/5, 2001, 68-82 http://www.theatlantic.com/issues/2001/12/ kaplan.htm. Keddie, Nikki R., Secularism and its discontents, Daedalus, 132/3, 2003, 14-30. Kishwar, Madhu, Religion at the Service of Nationalism and Other Essays, Delhi: Oxford University Press, 1998. Lampman, Jane, New scrutiny of role of religion in Bushs policies, The Christian Science Monitor, March 17, 2003, 1. Larsen, Lena, and Ingvild T. Plesner (eds.), Teaching for Tolerance and Freedom of Religion or Belief, Oslo: Norwegian Centre for Human Rights, 2002. Levine, Daniel H., The news about religion in Latin America, in: Mark Silk (ed.), Religion on the International News Agenda, Hartford, CT: The Leonard E. Greenberg Center for the Study of Religion in Public Life, 2000, 120-42. Madan, T. N., Modern Myths, Locked Minds, Delhi: Oxford University Press, 1998. Massey, James, Minorities and Religious Freedom in a Democracy, Delhi: Manohar/ Centre for Dalit/Subaltern Studies, 2003.

84

ROSALIND I.J. HACKETT

McCutcheon, Russell T., Critics Not Caretakers: Redescribing the study of religion, Albany, NY: State University of New York Press, 2001. Meyer, Birgit, Editorial, Journal of Religion in Africa, 33/2, 2003, 125-128. Moyers, Bill, Genesis and the Millennium: An essay on religious pluralism in the twenty-first century, including eight ecumenical responses, Derek H. Davis (ed.), Waco, TX: J. M. Dawson Institute of Church-State Studies, 2000. Noorani, A. G., The RSS and the BJP, New Delhi: LeftWord, 2001. Nussbaum, Martha C., Women and Human Development: The capabilities approach, New York: Cambridge University Press, 2000. Odinkalu, Chidi Anselm, Back to the future: the imperative of prioritizing for the protection of human rights in Africa, Journal of African Law, 47/1, 2003, 1-37. Parekh, Bhikhu, Rethinking Multiculturalism: Cultural diversity and political theory, Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 2002. Philpott, Daniel, The challenge of September 11th to secularism in international relations, World Politics, 55, 2002, 66-95. Richardson, James T., Minority religions (cults) and the law: comparisons of the United States, Europe and Australia, University of Queensland Law Journal, 18/2, 1995, 183-207. Richardson, James T. (ed.), Regulating Religion: Case studies from around the globe, Dordrecht: Kluwer, 2004 Robertson, Roland, Globalisation: Social theory and global culture, London: Sage, 1992. Rudolph, Susanne Hoeber and James Piscatori (eds.), Transnational Religion and Fading States, Boulder: Westview Press, 1997. Sampson, Cynthia and John Paul Lederach (eds.), From the Ground Up: Mennonite contributions to international peacebuilding, New York: Oxford University Press, 2000. Seminar on Freedom of Religion or Belief in the OSCE Region: Challenges to law and practice, The Hague: Ministry of Foreign Affairs, the Netherlands, 2001. Shweder, Richard, Martha Minow and Hazel Markus (eds.), Engaging Cultural Difference: The multicultural challenge to liberal democracies, New York: Russell Sage, 2002. Silk, Mark, From the editor: a different kind of spiritual politics, Religion in the News, 2/2, 1999, http://www.trincoll.edu/depts/csrpl/RINVol2No /spiritualpolitics.htm. Steyn, H. Christina, The role of multi-religious education in the transformation of South African society, in: Thomas G. Walsh and Frank Kaufmann (eds.), Religion and the Transformation of Southern Africa, St. Paul, MN: Paragon House, 1999, 131-142. Stout, Jeffrey, Democracy and Tradition, Princeton: Princeton University Press, 2003.

Tahzib-Lie, Bahia, Applying a gender perspective in the area of the right to freedom of religion or belief, Brigham Young University Law Review, 2000, 967-88. Tambiah, Stanley J., Buddhism Betrayed? Religion, politics and violence in Sri Lanka, Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1992. Tayob, Abdulkader and Wolfram Weisse (eds.), Religion and Politics in South Africa, New York: Waxmann Munster, 1998. van der Veer, Peter, The victim's tale: memory and forgetting in the story of violence, in: Hent de Vries and Samuel Weber (eds.), Violence, Identity and Self-Determination, Stanford: Stanford University Press, 1997, 186-200. van der Vyver, Johann, Constitutional perspectives of church-state relations in South Africa, Brigham Young University Law Review, 1999, 635-672. Weithman, Paul (ed.), Religion and Contemporary Liberalism, Notre Dame, IN: University of Notre Dame Press, 1997. , Religion and the Obligations of Citizenship, New York: Cambridge University Press, 2002. Witte, John, Jr., The new freedom of public religion, Editorial Opinion, Center for the Interdisciplinary Study of Religion, Emory University, n.d.

Commentary
Muslih T. Yahya
My assignment here is not to summarize the lecture of Professor Hackett and I am not going to attempt to do that. Rather, I will try to highlight some of the salient points that she has made and on which I have comments and observations. This does not necessarily indicate agreement or disagreement with other points that I may not mention because I do not have comments on them. SCHOLARSHIP AND BIAS In the preamble to her presentation, Professor Hackett hints that as a scholar of religion and a concerned academic, she felt compelled to ask critical reflective questions . . . on moves to accord religion more influence in public life, in a relatively unbiased way. (The emphasis is mine.) This precisely is what she tries to do as she examines what seems to have
63

86

COMMENTARY

informed the recent clamour for expanding shariah law in Nigeria, and the increasing wave of display of Godliness in the public sphere in other parts of the world. I am impressed, not only because of the Professors apparently careful choice of words in this subtle declaration, but also because we are in some kind of agreement. This approach to the study of religion agrees with the call I made a little over three years ago. This was in my contribution89 to the Round Table on the Interface Between Research and Dialogue especially in Africa, at the 18th Quinquennial Congress of the International Association for the History of Religions in Durban in August 2000. This point is important because bias, tradition, and preconceived notions to a large extent affect the thinking of many writers and their attitude to the relationships between religion and state, and also between one belief system and another. This, I believe, is the reason why diehard secular political scientists and social critics want to ensure that religion in general or particular belief systems remain the missing dimension in statecraft. As Professor Hackett observes, such writers are usually not willing to hear that there are modern cases in which religion or spiritual factors have played helpful roles in preventing or resolving conflict and achieving non-violent change. THE WEST AND THE SIGNIFICANCE OF RELIGION In a keynote lecture delivered in London,90 Ali Mazrui argued that Western culture seems to have a homogenizing effect on the rest of the world. This however, is only pretentious because there are other cultures, such as the Islamic culture, which also have strong bases and cannot be pushed aside or be brought to extinction. Nevertheless, and in Mazruis words: Western hegemony precipitated widespread homogenisation of values, styles and institutions.91 Therefore, when this culture effectively pushed religion aside or away in the official conduct of public affairs, other non-Western attitudes to religion came to seem to many admirers of Western culture as unusual . In this paper, Professor Hackett cites many recent books, journals and website publications to show that history has proven wrong the earlier expectations of the West on the significance of religion and predictions of Western scholars on its future. The titles of many of the books and articles92 are enough to reflect the new thinking. Some of them are: FaithYahya, 2004. Mazrui, 2000. 91 Ibid. 92 Complete bibliographical details are given in Hacketts list of references.
89 90

THE ROLE OF RELIGION IN THE PUBLIC SPHERE

87

Based Diplomacy: An Ancient Idea Newly Emergent (Cox and Philpot, 2003); Religion, the Missing Dimension of Statecraft (Johnston and Sampson 1994); and 2000 Years and Beyond: Faith, Identity and the Common Era (Gifford et al., 2003). Others like The Clash of Civilizations (Huntington, 1993) and The News About Religion in Latin America (Levine, 2000) also put up quite revealing arguments. In other words, rather than enter into decline because of secularisation and privatisation as some Western scholars had predicted, religion is making greater incursions into the public sphere all over the world. To my mind the reason for this is that the West had put too much emphasis on the material aspect of human existence and had ignored the spiritual aspect. What is strange about this is the fact that once upon a time, Godlessness used to be a major accusation some communities in Western Europe levelled against the Soviet Union. To many societies, morals and ethics matter, whether or not they are mentioned in the constitution, or are recognized in the judicial system. Secularism, however, leaves this to individual whims and caprices. Professor Hackett cites a legal scholar, John Witte, as seeing the shift to more public religion in the US context as both inevitable and necessary. However, whether or not this new public show of religious tendencies is accompanied by practical involvement in the performance of religious rites and obligations is an entirely different issue. For instance, in many parts of Europe, culture and tradition grant recognition to Christianity or a specific denomination of it, either tacitly or openly. This not withstanding, most churches in those places are still virtually empty at times when they ought to be full. SEPTEMBER 11 AND RELIGION Hackett rightly observes that the events of September 11, 2001 made the significance of religion to assume considerable prominence in public discourse in the American scene. The context in which this happened is worth noting. I am not quite sure that the general public knows, as yet, the truth about September 11. Certainly, there are numerous non-religious causes of grievances, agitation, aggression, and international violence in various parts of the world today. Many publications are available now, which suggest that the planners and executors of the incident may be different from the ones the world is being told are the culprits. One such publication is the book 9/11: The Big Lie.93 The review of this book in the New York Times, quoted on the books cover, says that it challenges the entire official version of the September 11 attacks. Similarly, the book
93

Meyssan, 2002.

88

COMMENTARY

September 11: Before and Beyond94 argues that the truth about what really happened on September 11, 2001 goes beyond what is being portrayed presently: The truth and answers to all the questions as to who the real oppressors and terrorists are does not lie in the present but are firmly rooted in history.95 With alternative sources of information such as these, it is not likely that the real truth, if it were ever admitted, would connect the incident with religion in the sense that the American public, the European public and, indeed the whole world are presently made to believe. Indications are that the super powers have the power to cause things to happen the way they want them to. But whenever such things happen, whatever they (the super powers) tell the world are the causes, remain the causes, and whoever they say are the culprits remain the culprits. Again in the words of Professor Ali Mazrui, the sins of the powerful acquire some of the prestige of power.96 However, the curiosity about the significance of religion which September 11 has generated in the American and the European public may eventually be instrumental to bringing out, sooner or later, not only the real truth about the incident, but also the right attitude to religion. THE DEBATE ON SECULARISM One important point raised in this paper is how the definition, interpretation, or concept of secularism may determine the attitude to it. The paper dwells extensively on the views of the authors of two recent publications.97 These are Talal Asads book Formations of the Secular: Christianity, Islam, Modernity (2003) and Nikki R. Keddies article Secularism and its Discontents (2003). I share, to a large extent, the fascination of the presenter with the two publications. She concludes on the basis of their arguments that there is the need to historicise and contextualise the concepts of secularism and religion. I agree, especially for reasons I will mention shortly. CONTEMPORARY CHALLENGES TO RELIGION The paper observes on a lighter, more ironic note that there is no knowing where religion or what type of religion may appear in Americas public sphere. I think that our definition of religion should not be so lose and trivial that a new religion emerges every other day and will be part of
Harun, 2002. Ibid., viii. 96 Mazrui, 2000. 97 Complete bibliographical details given in Hacketts list of references.
94 95

THE ROLE OF RELIGION IN THE PUBLIC SPHERE

89

what we are talking about when we discuss the role of religion in the public sphere. I believe that in order to attain its proper position in the public sphere and be given its due respect, religion itself needs to undergo some kind of screening. This, to my mind, is because religion is too open to all sorts of manipulation and exploitation. This indeed, is one thing that those who are opposed to the involvement of religion in state affairs have against it, and this is where scholars of religion have a highly significant role to play. Incidentally, religion can be its own instrument of screening. I believe that basically, religion has one long, continuous history and one purpose, from the time of the very first human being on earth to what we may want to regard as the end of the world. The cause and course of divergence, the implications of the ensuing plurality and the codes of interaction among the divergent belief systems should be part of the investigation. It should not be impossible for scholars of religion to help mankind to arrive at a kind of strategy to over-come the emergence of religions or religious practices of doubtful seriousness. Such strategies would help arrive at some global (not local) criteria with which religious groups would, in the words of the presenter of this paper, be compelled to justify their existence to state and consumers alike. This, to my mind, is part of the historicisation and contextualisation of the concept of religion (along with secularism) that was recommended above, and with which I agreed. THE ROLE OF THE CONSTITUTION, EDUCATION, AND THE MEDIA One consistent argument in this paper is that, subject to constitutional provisions, education and the media have crucial roles to play in the dissemination of information on the place and role of religion in the public sphere. Impressed by the experience in South Africa, the presenter sees the constitution, religious broadcasting, and religious education as key sites for involving the various interest groups in the carving out of the role and status of religion in the public sphere. My interpretation of this with regards to the constitution is that the designers of the constitution of a nation need to bear in mind the religious environment in the country. The point here is not necessarily that a state religion or even state religions are declared or identified. Rather, it is that religion be granted recognition, not only in the constitution itself, but also in such a way that the atmosphere is made conducive for the individual practice of religion. A person should not be forced or compelled to be involved in practices that are contrary to the injunctions of religion, simply because he is a public officer. The presenter cites Weithman (2002) as wondering if state support for religion as in the endorsement of religious

90

COMMENTARY

codes of conduct would be consistent with liberal democracy. My answer is yes, if citizens of the country agree to it and so state in their constitution. This, to my mind, is because, liberal democracy should enable people to sit down together and fashion out their constitution and codes of conduct in such a way that they would take care of logical and contestable interests of all concerned. While the role of the constitution may be straightforward if properly handled, that of religious broadcasting and religious education may not be that simple. The tendency, as is the experience in Nigeria, is for privately run educational institutions which throw their doors open to all, to influence the religious leaning of students who go through them, to the dissatisfaction of some parents of such students. Some public schools in places where a particular belief system is dominant also often take the liberty to be biased in favour of such a belief system. Similarly, electronic and print media houses are often found highly biased for or against particular belief systems. CONCLUSION The conclusion of the presenter is that the more visible presence of religion in the public sphere is a global phenomenon, which has unavoidably necessitated an overdue rethinking of the role of religion in this regard. She sees this rethinking as an essential ingredient of good governance anywhere in the world which requires the input of all stakeholders, with educational and media institutions having crucial roles to play. She warns however, against the emergence of new forms of separationism and demonisation of religious others. Once again, I agree. I want to add however, that while the dialogue between religion and state is essential, interfaith dialogue is crucial. The purpose of the latter is to foster interfaith and intercultural understanding, respect and harmony, and minimize, if not eradicate interfaith distrust and suspicion. I believe strongly that in this regard, international scholars of religion and the International Association for the History of Religions (IAHR) are arbiters who cannot afford to sit on the fence. One obvious merit of this paper is its richness in what many people would see as oven-fresh information on new journal, book and website publications on the issue under discussion. This apparently comes from the presenters wealth of personal experience and familiarity with very current sources that reflect a wide spectrum of ideas on the issue of religion and state at various levels of governance. Here, however, I try as much as possible to avoid the temptation to review those publications and comment on them, rather than commenting on the paper before us. All the same,

THE ROLE OF RELIGION IN THE PUBLIC SPHERE

91

these references are quite beneficial for follow-up unbiased researches on this issue. REFERENCES Harun, Abdulhakeem, September 11: Before and beyond, Nigeria: New Era Institute for Islamic Thought and Heritage (NEWITH), 2002. Mazrui, Ali, Pretender to universalism: western culture in a globalizing age, keynote address for the Royal Society of Art and the BBC, delivered in London, England on June 15, 2000, http://www.bbc.co.uk/ worldservice/people/features/world_lectures/mazrui_lects.html (accessed 17 April 2004). Meyssan, Thierry, 9/11: The big lie, London: Carnot Publishing Ltd., 2002. Yahya, Muslih T., Christian-Muslim relations in Africa south of the Sahara: the interface between research and dialogue: a Muslim view, in: Klaus Hock (ed.), The Interface between Research and Dialogue: Christian/Muslim relations in Africa, Munster: Lit Verlag, 2004, 1-31.