|
Religion and Public Policy: Human Rights, Conflict, and Ethics, edited by Sumner B. Twiss, Marian Gh. Simion, Rodney L. Petersen (Cambridge University Press, 2015)
Civic Goals and Moral Vision
#3 in series
Rev. Rodney L. Petersen, PhD
CMM Executive Director Emeritus
The correlation of public theology in secular democratic societies with public policy means promoting the common good. (John W. de Gruchy, “Public Theology as Christian Witness: Exploring the Genre,” International Journal of Public Theology 1 [2007]: 26-41.) It has to do with crafting a moral vision so as to engage a wide and often diverse public. There is a history here reflecting an evolving relationship between religion and the state in both Enlightenment and religious thinking in western societies on which the scholarship of David Little has thrown much light. Norman Thomas traces the further development of a secular vision for human rights, to emerge in the U.N. Charter (1945) and Declaration of Human Rights (1948) in which “the churches and their missionary agencies played a pivotal role” if not in later stages of development, certainly at their inception. (Norman E. Thomas, Missions and Unity. Lessons from History, 1792-2010 [Eugene, OR: Cascade Books, 2010]: 221-240. See the argument by Hilary Charlesworth, “The Challenges of Human Rights Law for Religious Traditions,” Religion and International Law by Mark W. James and Carolyn Evans eds. [Boston: Martinus Nijhoff Publishers, 2004]: 401-415.)
Public Theology: In seeking to craft a vision for an effective public theology with respect to public policy, Duncan Forrester argues out of his Christian tradition that public theology is, first, an effort to engage the secular world in terms of its issues while digging deeply into one’s own religious tradition for the resources to do so. (Duncan B. Forrester, “Working in the Quarry: A Response to the Colloquium” in William Storrar, Duncan B. Forrester [eds.] Public Theology for the 21st Century [New York: Continuum Press, 2004]: 431-438.)
Secondly, doing theology in this way offers a constructive contribution to public debate and to human flourishing. It has the potential and aim to make a positive contribution to the world in which we live, a theology that “heals, reconciles, helps, challenges” (Ibid., 436.). Thirdly, public theology is ecclesial theology, i.e., it is embodied in the life of a community of people who are seeking to give witness to God’s reign over all of life. Fourth, public theology is utopian in the sense that it keeps hope alive for a better world. It is open to the creative process that enables solutions to be found to urgent civic problems.
Interfaith Just Peacemaking: To these four points defining public theology may be added a fifth, the need to be intentionally interfaith in orientation, inclusive of the whole community while allowing for difference within the bounds of public safety. In the “Just Peacemaking” project outlined by Susan Thistlethwaite in Interfaith Just Peacemaking (2012), there is an effort made toward the “development of doctrine” carried out on an interfaith basis. (Susan Thistlethwaite, ed. Interfaith Just Peacemaking [New York: Palgrave Macmillan, 2012]). In crafting a moral vision to meet civic goals, public theology has to take into account different localities and different publics. John W. de Gruchy writes of such different localities by noting that: “there is no universal ‘public theology’, but only theologies that seek to engage the political realm within particular localities. There are, however, commonalities, both confessional and ecumenical, in approach and substance between theologies that do this.” (John W. de Gruchy, “From Political to Public Theologies: The Role of Theology in Public Life in South Africa,” in William F. Storrar and Andrew R. Morton, eds, Public Theology for the 21st Century [Edinburgh: T&T Clark: Edinburgh, 2004]: 45-62). David Tracy reminds us of the different “publics” with which a moral vision is concerned: academy, church and society. In the context of a pluralist society there may be many more publics as well, but this delineation is helpful in that it reminds us that different modes of discourse are applicable in different settings. Tracy observes that every “theologian must face squarely the claims to meaning and truth of all three publics” and address each accordingly. (David Tracy, The Analogical Imagination: Christian Theology and the Culture of Pluralism [London: SCM Press, 1981]: 29). For all theology, whether it be fundamental, systematic or practical (to use Tracy’s categories) is “determined by a relentless drive to genuine publicness to and for all three publics,” 31).
Human Flourishing: In terms of the ways by which public theology seeks to promote human flourishing, embody a community’s hope in the future and foster a better world, three of Forrester’s four points, such reflection is frequently engaged in issues of justice and peace, terms frequently combined as “justpeace” with particular resonance in specific locations and for specific publics. (See Glen Stassen, Just Peacemaking: Transforming Initiatives for Justice and Peace, 1992; John Paul Lederach, The Moral Imagination, 2004; and Kay Pranis, Peacemaking Circles. From Crime to Community, 2003.) In reflecting on violence, often borne out of conflict, psychiatrist James Gilligan writes that, “All violence is an effort to do justice or to undo injustice.” (James Gilligan, Violence. Reflections on a National Epidemic [New York: Vintage, 1996]). The implication of this perspective is to deepen our understanding of the social psychological dynamics inherent in violence in civil society and the necessity of a rule of law in specific local and international affairs. Work toward such ends is especially suitable for religious actors and NGOs who are frequently close to a people and work in a specific locale. The method for this work is through that form of diplomacy referred to as “multi-track” diplomacy.
Gilligan’s observation opens up for us an important perspective on the nature of violence, its relation to justice and the role of religious actors and others seeking social justice in society. Gilligan calls us to a view of justice that is “restorative,” or restorative justice, and toward the creation of societies characterized by “justpeace.” The term “restorative justice,” originating in indigenous communities and among sociologists and legal scholars, implies that attention be given to the effects of judicial procedures upon victims, offenders, and the community; i.e., that victims’ needs are met, that offenders learn responsibility and that communities find safety through just relationships. (Howard Zehr, Changing Lenses [Scottdale: Herald Press, 1990]: 181.) Our moral vision shapes how we deal with conflict toward the ends of civil society and civic order.
| 
