Mendieta, Eduardo and Jonathan Vanantwerpen eds., The Power of Religion in the Public Sphere

Abstract

hinking about religion in the public sphere is timely. The Arab Spring and the political turmoil in countries from Algeria to Bahrain give a new actuality to the question of the role of religion in the sphere of public deliberation. In this time of political transformation, questions arise about which role religion should play in the newly democratized countries of the Middle East. How does religion play out in public discussion and is represented in the newly drafted constitutions? Along with the crucial notion of civil society, the public sphere—as a sphere beyond family, state, and economy—is understood as the discursive infrastructure of a democratic society. The publication of the prominently casted volume, The Power of Religion in the Public Sphere in early 2011, bringing together the talks given at a conference in New York in October 2009, explores this renewed actuality. The four participants in this public discussion — Jurgen Habermas, Charles Taylor, Judith Butler, and Cornel West — are not only philosophers that leaped beyond their discipline, they are also paradigmatic models of public intellectuals. The volume consists of the papers of these four philosophers, the reprinted discussion between them and an afterword by Craig Calhoun. Jurgen Habermas, in his opening paper, sets the stage in two regards: his seminal study, Structural Transformation of the Public Sphere (1989), still serves as the focal point of all discussions on the public spheres, and his recent turn towards religion as a moral resource for secular societies make him the paradigmatic expert in the field. His contribution challenges the notion of “the political” suggested by Carl Schmitt as a solution to the increasingly socially differentiated society with its technocratic momentum. However, to restore “the political” as the legitimating source of authority in the form of an authoritative figure is no longer akin to a secular, pluralist society. Habermas takes side with a Rawlsian model of liberal democracy and shares his demand for a translation of religious arguments into secular language. Habermas ends on the importance of this translation process and the use of religion as moral resource for secular societies.