Religion and Democratic Citizenship: Inquiry and Conviction in the American Public Square (review)

Review 1

In Political Liberalism, John Rawls explained that his goal was to offer a response to critics who charged that A Theory of Justice assumed too much uniformity amongst the citizens who deliberate in an ideal state for his lessons to apply in real life. So, he asked himself, how can we incorporate the real diversity we find in the United States into his theory while also explaining the political stability we exhibit (post civil war, of course) which is crucial for democratic deliberation. Rawls credits the U.S. Constitution with much of America's success at attaining stability, for it can be seen to focus on liberty and the avoidance of impositions on free and equal individuals—even though it took time to expand the document's circle of inclusion. J. Caleb Clanton's new book, Religion and Democratic Citizenship, correctly notes that Rawls's efforts in Political Liberalism and in later iterations of his theories are at the center of deep and ongoing debates about the place of religion in politics. Clanton's book offers a novel look at the issues for debate, which is refreshing given just how much work has been published on Rawls and on religion and politics. The central concern of Clanton's book is to address the conflicts that arise among the different ways of addressing the democratic tension between religion and politics.

Clanton labels three strategies for addressing the relation between religion and politics: separatist, reconstructivist, and integrationist. With each of them, Clanton finds fault. The view that is attractive, at least initially, to many of my own religious students is the integrationist one. It recommends, Clanton writes, "that religion in its unaltered form should be integrated into political life … [usually insisting] upon a particular religious source for all normative theory" (p. 9). On its face, Clanton explains, this strategy appears doomed for failure in a democratic society that exhibits vast differences in religious belief. The other two views are easy to grasp given Clanton's clear and simple categorization. According to the separatist strategy, religion must be kept out of politics, as in Rawls's ideal of public reason. The third strategy, which Clanton calls reconstructivist, has various formulations. People like William James and John Dewey sought to offer a new way of thinking about religion, a reconstruction that was consistent with democratic values. The reconstructivist, like the integrationist, hopes to allow a role for religion in politics, but not just any type of religious belief will do. For it is clear that certain overarching and conflicting religious doctrines cannot simultaneously be true, such as in the obvious differences between atheism, monotheism, and polytheism. Thus, the reconstructivist strategy is to help people rethink their religious beliefs with the aim of ensuring compatibility with democratic values. With this straightforward three-part distinction in place, Clanton reveals his intention of showing that "the separatist (seen particularly in Rawls) and reconstructivist (seen particularly as emerging from pragmatists) proposals likewise [as the integrationist view before] seem doomed" (p. 9).

To contemporary debates amongst mainstream analytic philosophers, Clanton offers a reminder of how classical American pragmatists thought about religion and an analysis of the contributions of neo-pragmatists. Having introduced the "Tension in Our American Public Philosophy" (Chapter 1), Clanton's second chapter examines "William James and That Old-Time Religion: The Jamesian Roots of the Reconstructivist Strategy." Clanton then progresses through an analysis and critique of neo-pragmatists like Richard Rorty and Cornel West, before examining Rawlsian public reason and later reformulations of his views. After a critique of Jeffrey Stout's theological approach to politics, which Clanton also deems to be lacking, he closes with an examination of Socrates and Peirce, returning to the pragmatic tradition, to offer some suggestions for how we might guide religious believers in a minimal fashion to ensure their religious engagements' compatibility with democracy.

Clanton's framework for thinking...