Research On Religion » France

Chris Soper on the Challenge of Religious Pluralism

tonygill — Sun, 09 Apr 2017 08:00:20 +0000

How do various democratic nations manage increasing religious pluralism around the world? Prof. Christopher Soper, a distinguished political scientist at Pepperdine University, answers this question and talks about the third edition of his book The Challenge of Pluralism, co-authored with Kevin den Dulk and the late Stephen Monsma. After Chris provides a few reflections on the scholarly influence of Prof. Monsma, we discuss how a third edition of this popular text suggested itself with a changing religious environment in many Western democracies, most notably the increase in Muslim populations in Europe. Prof. Soper notes that the impetus for the book back in 1997 was to answer three questions that remain more relevant than ever: 1) How much religiously-motived behavior that is contrary to societal welfare and norms can a democratic polity allow?; 2) To what extent should the state promote consensual religious beliefs in order to promote a shared set of values and virtues that are fundamental to limited democratic governance?; and 3) When religious groups and government agencies are active in the same fields of work, how can a society ensure that the state does not advantage one religious group (or secular belief system) over another? Chris then reviews the three models of church-state relations that he and his co-authors detail in the book: 1) the separationist model as exemplified by the United States and France; 2) the establishment model that includes England and Germany; and 3) the pluralist model in both its “pragmatic” (Australia) and “principled” variants (the Netherlands). He explains the dimensions of each model, noting that there is variation within each category. For example, while both the US and France are considered separationist, the historical trajectories of each country conditioned a more aggressive separationist position in France. For much of the second half of the interview, we walk through examples of these models with Chris giving background on each of the cases. Prof. Soper argues the case that the pluralist model is best at recognizing the importance of religion in the public square while still allowing space for secular claims. Our discussion also centers around how each of the states are meeting and accommodating increased religious pluralism, most notably with respect to the growing presence of Islam. With Islam being a much more decentralized faith tradition than the typical European Christian denominations, it has been difficult to absorb this religion into historical church-state models, particularly those of the establishment variant, but efforts have been made to do this. We finish our podcast with Chris giving his opinion about the viability of a Christian Democratic party in the United States (revisiting a question from an earlier podcast), and reflecting on what he has learned over two decades and three editions of his book. Recorded: March 28,2017.

The Challenge of Pluralism: Church and State in Six Democracies, by J. Christopher Soper, Kevin den Dulk, and Stephen Monsma.

Muslims and the State in Britain, France, and Germany, by Joel Fetzer and J. Christopher Soper.

Confucianism, Democracy, and Human Rights in Taiwan, by Joel Fetzer and J. Christopher Soper.

RELATED PODCASTS

Joel Fetzer on Confucianism and Democracy.

Ahmet Kuru on Islam in Europe.

Claire Adida on Discrimination towards Muslims in France.

Evan Haefeli on the Dutch Origins of Religious Tolerance.

Russ Roberts & Anthony Gill on Religion and Religious Liberty.

Ani Sarkissian on Religion and Religious Civil Society in Turkey.

Does American Need a Christian Democratic Party?

Does America Need a Christian Democratic Party?

tonygill — Sun, 12 Mar 2017 08:00:18 +0000

The American political landscape appears in chaos, and Christians are seemingly under assault in both the legislative arena and judicial system, or so says Hunter Baker, an associate professor of political science at Union University. Based upon these reflections, he began wondering whether the United States was in need of a Christian Democratic party to defend religious liberty and promote other Judeo-Christian values in the polity. To this end, Prof. Baker organized a symposium of scholars to write their thoughts on topic. The results were published in the Winter 2017 issue of the academic journal Perspectives on Political Science. We pick up this debate here with Prof. Baker and two additional scholars — Bryan McGraw (Wheaton College) and Micah Watson (Calvin College). Prof. Baker argues that a Christian Democratic party represents the best means of defending Christian interests in the public arena considering that lobbying attempts by religious organizations have not been entirely effective in convincing either the Democratic or Republican parties to protect religious freedoms and promote Christian values. Tony questions Hunter as to how effective such a partisan effort might be given that CD parties have not been able to hold back the tide of aggressive secularism in Europe, though Prof. Baker counters with evidence from Germany that shows how their CD party has favored traditional definitions of marriage and has been open to refugees. Prof. McGraw provides additional historical perspective in his segment of the debate, noting that CD parties were crucial in a number of European countries — most notably Belgium — during the late 1800s and early 1900s, and were also important in helping promote policies that favored religious interests such as funding for religious education. Nonetheless, Bryan points out that the political structure of the United States lends itself to a two party system wherein third parties have a hard time making any headway, and with Christianity much more diverse than in Europe, the chance for any one party to coalesce around a religiously-based platform would be very difficult. Prof. Micah Watson responds to all of this arguing that irrespective of whether a CD party could be successfully created in the U.S., it is nonetheless a bad idea because associating Jesus’s name with a variety of mundane policies that could divide citizens is not the proper use of the Christian mission. Tony asks if this even applies to potholes. Micah notes that while it may be acceptable to pray for pothole relief, building a political party around a single Christian identity would be difficult (echoing Bryan McGraw’s concerns) and bad for the long-term evangelization agenda of Christianity. Tony adds his own perspective to the debate with an intellectual appeal to public choice theory. (Those interested in reading Tony’s paper can request it via our Facebook or Twitter pages.) Prof. Watson shares some of his ideas for how Christians may engage the world politically based upon the ideas of C.S. Lewis. Recorded: March 3, 2017.

RELATED LINKS

Symposium on Christian Democracy in America in Perspective on Political Science (may require subscription or university affiliation).

Prof. Hunter Baker’s bio at Union University.

Prof. Hunter Baker’s article, “Can Christian Democracy Be America’s Next European Import?”

Prof. Bryan McGraw’s bio at Wheaton College.

Prof. Bryan McGraw’s article, “Europe’s Christian Democratic Parties and American Possibilities.”

Prof. Micah Watson’s bio at Calvin College.

Prof. Micah Watson’s article, “Another Meditation on the Third Commandment.”

Prof. Anthony Gill’s article, “Christian Democracy without Romance.”

The End of Secularism, by Hunter Baker.

Political Thought: A Student’s Guide, by Hunter Baker.

The System Has a Soul, by Hunter Baker.

Faith in Politics: Religion and Liberal Political Thought, by Bryan McGraw.

Natural Law and Evangelical Political Thought, edited by Jesse Covington, Bryan McGraw, and Micah Watson.

C.S. Lewis on Politics and the Natural Law, by Justin Dyer and Micah Watson.

The Political Origins of Religious Liberty, by Anthony Gill.

Rendering Unto Caesar: The Catholic Church and State in Latin America, by Anthony Gill.

RELATED PODCASTS

Should Christians Have Fought in the US War for Independence?

Hunter Baker on Secularism.

Hunter Baker on the Past and Future of the Religious Right.

Hunter Baker on the Future of Religious Higher Education.

Micah Watson on C.S. Lewis.

Francis Beckwith on Taking Rites Seriously.

David Buckley on the Demand for Clergy in Politics.

Nathanael Snow on the Evangelical Coalition and Public Choice.

J0n Shields on Democratic Virtues and the Christian Right.

Aaron Saiger on Religion and Charter Schools.

Claire Adida on Discrimination Towards Muslims in France

tonygill — Sun, 03 Jan 2016 09:00:18 +0000

France has one of the largest Muslim populations in Europe and issues of how this population has integrated into French national life has been a major topic in political debate. Prof. Claire Adida, an assistant professor of political science at the University of California – San Diego, discusses a large research project she conducted with David Laitin (Stanford) and Marie-Anne Valfort (Paris School of Economics). This project, published recently in the book Why Muslim Integration Fails in Christian-Heritage Societies (see below), examines the extent of labor force discrimination towards Muslims on religious (as opposed to racial or ethnic) grounds, and why such discrimination tends to be self-reinforcing.

Claire first talks about her general research agenda that looks at conflict and cooperation among different ethnic groups in Africa and how she came to be included in a research team examining Muslims in France. Prof. Adida provides us with a general overview of her study noting how the research team sought to sort out religious discrimination from other potential points of conflict, such as race or ethnicity. The presence of a Senegalese population that had both Muslim and Christian members, and which entered the country in roughly the same era, provided a unique opportunity to undertake a series of comparative experiments to gain explanatory leverage on this topic. Claire further lays out the religious demography of France noting how immigration from North Africa in the post-WWII era started to reshape the religious and ethnic landscape.

We spend significant portions of our conversation detailing the research methodology. While this may appear to be a mundane detail, how social scientists explore their topics can have an impact on what they find, thus the conversation is both worthwhile and enlightening. To determine whether labor force discrimination existed in France on a religious dimension, Prof. Adida and her collaborators sent vitas (résumés) to employers that were identical in all respects except for “religious markers,” which included Muslim or Christian sounding names and notations about volunteering for specific religious (or secular) organizations. Later, we also talk about a series of behavioral economics games (e.g., trust game, dictator game) that the team played with test subjects to discern different types of discrimination. All of this made use of the Senegalese population as a “natural” means of introducing controls into study (and we cover various limitations and methodological solutions in the research design).

Prof. Adida points out several important findings from this study at various points in our discussion. First, the research team was able to determine that labor-force (hiring) discrimination did exist in France and that it was significant on the dimension of religion. Muslim Senegalese women were much less likely to get interview calls than either a Christian Senegalese woman or one with a secular portfolio. Second, they explore the presence of two types of discrimination — “rational” and “non-rational” Islamophobia. Contrary to what the name may sound like, “rational Islamophobia” does not seek to morally validate discrimination, but rather is defined as discrimination based upon some collected information on the part of an individual. For instance, learning that Muslims may need to pray several times a day, an employer may not want to hire such an individual because they believe it would interrupt the work environment. It may also be that more conservative attitudes towards women that are held by Muslim may interfere with the goals of greater gender equity in the workplace. “Non-rational” Islamophobia, on the other hand, refers to emotional preferences (or “tastes”) that do not necessarily have a basis in information gathering. The research team discovers both types of discrimination are at play in France. We further explore the reasons for such discrimination and Prof. Adida introduces the concept of a “discriminatory equilibrium.” Given France’s history of secularism (laicite), native French will find it difficult to relate to immigrants who are more religious, have more socially conservative views, and who engage in religious practices that are publicly visible (e.g., wearing the hijab). Moreover, innate “non-rational Islamophobia” also pushes non-Muslim French citizens from wanting to interact with immigrants. This, in turn, provides little incentive for Muslims to seek ways to assimilate (or integrate) into secular French society, which results in this “equilibrium.” Claire discusses a few policy proposals that she and her co-authors have devised, along with what she learned throughout the process of the study. Recorded: December 21, 2015.

Why Muslim Integration Fails in Christian-Heritage Societies, by Claire Adida, David Laitin, and Marie-Anne Valfort.

Immigrant Exclusion and Insecurity in Africa, by Claire Adida.

Nations, States, and Violence, by David Laitin (co-author and research with Claire Adida).

Identity in Formation, by David Laitin.

Hegemony and Culture, by David Laitin.

RELATED PODCASTS

Ahmet Kuru on Islam in Europe.

Robert Delahunty on Alexis de Tocqueville and Religion

tonygill — Sun, 25 Aug 2013 08:00:51 +0000

Back in the 1830s, a young Frenchman by the name of Alexis de Tocqueville travelled to the United States to write a report about its prison system. Although he did write such a report, the trip became more notable when Tocqueville put pen to paper and generated a two-volume set of observations about American political and social life known as Democracy in America. While the book contains many profound observations, we invite Prof. Robert Delahunty (University of St. Thomas) to discuss Tocqueville’s thoughts on the importance of religion in a democratic society based on a series of posts he recently wrote on the Center for Law & Religion Forum hosted by St. John’s University Law School (see below).

Our discussion begins with an examination of the historical setting for Democracy in America, namely the Jacksonian era of U.S. history. Prof. Delahunty reviews the many social, economic, political, and religious changes taking place in this fledgling nation. He then reviews the personal background of Alexis de Tocqueville, who was only in his mid-20s when he journeyed to America. His early life as a Catholic is covered as well as his “deconversion” at about age 16. Interestingly, though harboring doubts about his Catholic faith, Alexis continued to participate in the Catholic Church throughout most of his adult life. Robert notes how these personal experiences come to shape Tocqueville’s views of American relgion, most notably the more mainstream form of Protestantism typical of the northern US at the time, and also how he understands the growing Catholic presence in America during the 1830s. Robert makes an interesting historical observation that Tocqueville seems to have overlooked the dynamic ferment that was the Second Great Awakening in America. We also cover Tocqueville’s political outlook, noting how his parents had been persecuted during the French Revolution and how Alexis was also influenced by various French Enlightenment thinkers.

We then plunge fully into Tocqueville’s thinking on church-state relations and the role of religion in society more generally. Robert connects Tocqueville to a long tradition of Western political thought about religion dating back to Niccolo Machiavelli. This dialogue with previous philosophers, and Machiavelli in particular, helps to anchor our conversation. Robert notes that religion has been seen as being connected to governance in three ways. First, religion has historically been used to sacralize or legitimize secular authority and the state. Second, religion serves to moralize the population in ways that are beneficial to a smooth-functioning society. Finally, he notes that religious groups and leaders have served a “prophetic role” of challenging abuses of state authority. It is the latter two functions, Delahunty argues, that Tocqueville comes to increasingly see as the important aspect of religion in a democratic republic. Tocqueville is concerned that American Protestantism may not be sufficiently prophetic enough in the era in which he observed the nation. Nonetheless, we explore how important religion is, and could be, in limiting what Prof. Delahunty calls the “political immagination.” Religion, as a force in civil society, helps to restrict the options before democratic political leaders preventing it from devolving to mob rule. We close with Prof. Delahunty’s thoughts about how Tocqueville’s philosophy could be useful for understanding church-state relations and the role of religion in America over the past half century. Recorded: August 23, 2013.

RELATED LINKS

Prof. Robert Delahunty’s bio at St. Thomas University.

Prof. Delahunty’s short blog articles on religion and Tocqueville at the Center for Law & Religion Forum.

“Russell Moore: From Moral Majority to ‘Prophetic Minority’,” by Naomi Schaeffer Riley in Wall Street Journal (mentioned in podcast; subscription required for access).

RELATED PODCASTS

Kevin den Dulk on Religion, Education, and Civil Engagement.

Jonathan den Hartog on the Spiritual and Political Life of John Jay.

Theodore Malloch on Spiritual Capital and Virtuous Business.

Jason Jewell on Why Christians Should Read the Great Books.

Joe Fuiten on Clergy and Politics.

Mark Koyama on the Economics of Jewish Expulsions

tonygill — Sun, 21 Jul 2013 08:00:04 +0000

Welcome new visitors. Please visit and “like” our Facebook Fan Page for weekly updates on future episodes.

In July of 1290, King Edward I issued an edict giving all Jews in England three months to leave the nation. While scholars previously have viewed this incident as another indication of Christian anti-semitism, those explanations cannot adequately explain why Jews were encouraged to settle in England and, at times, prohibitted from leaving the territory. Prof. Mark Koyama, an assistant professor of economics at George Mason University and senior scholar at the Mercatus Center, provides an alternative theory based upon the value of Jewish moneylenders to the feudal economy and how changes in the structure of the economy and royal tax collection led Jews to become a less valuable component of the economy over the 13th century.

We begin our discussion outlining the political economy of feudalism and the challenge that a king faces in collecting revenue in an environment where money is not very common. Mark then discusses how the feudal economy began changing in the 12th and 13th century as the wool trade began to grown in importance and how the economy became more monetarized. With the advent of a commercial and monetary economy, lending became a more valuable institution as a means of helping smooth out variations in an individual’s income over time. Mark details the importance of interest on loans in an economy and the different types of borrowing that occured in medieval England, which brings us to the point of discussing the comparative advantage Jews had in financial and commercial transactions.

Given the higher levels of literarcy and numeracy enjoyed by Jews in Europe (compared to Christians), and given the restrictions on lending placed on Christians via the Church’s usury laws, Jews occupied an important niche in the medieval economy in that they could provide the bookkeeping skills necessary to facilitate lending and other commercial transactions. With an expanding economy in the 11th and 12th century, the benefits of Jewish skills became obvious to the English crown and in 1190, Richard I (the Lionheart) established the Exchequer of the Jewry, giving Jews quasi-monopoly power over lending as a means of better keeping track of lending and being able to tax it more effectively. Prof. Koyama discusses the fascinating manner in which this institution operated, with records kept in a large chest with four locks, wherein the keys were held by two separate Christians and two separate Jews. This provided a safe storage place for lending records, whereupon the king could amble into a town, count up the financial transactions, and levy a tax (tallage) on those transactions.

While the Exchequer of the Jewry provided a very reliable source of income for the crown, the arbitrary nature of the tallage and changes in the medieval economy meant that the relative benefits of the Jewish moneylending institution decreased over the following century. The minor nobility became irritated with the random nature of tallage rates, which often led to defaults and their land being purchased on the cheap by the royal court. Their dissatisfaction with these events were directed at the Jews who demanded an end to the Exchequer of the Jewry. As the king found ways to impose excise taxes on the wool trade later in the 13th century, the value of the Exchequer dropped below the political costs that the system imposed. By 1275, lending via the Exchequer was ceased. However, as King Edward I still thirsted for revenue, he toyed with the idea of reinstating the Exchequer, which proved to be unpopular with the nobles in parliament. To placate the restlest barons and knights, and in response to various “baron revolts,” the Ed decided the only credible commitment he could provide to the nobility that he wouldn’t backtrack on promises was to completely remove the Jews from his island nation.

We learn that the Jews who were kicked out of England fled to France, whereupon they were shortly expelled from that territory as well. This provides us with the opportunity to discuss the more general political economic reasons why Jews were kicked out of so many locations in Europe at various points in time during the 14th through 17th centuries. Mark covers another study he conducted linking economic shocks to an increased probability Jews would be forced to leave a given locale. We finish by discussing the relevance of these historical events for the status of religious minorities in our contemporary world. Recorded: July 17, 2013.

RELATED LINKS

Prof. Mark Koyama’s bio at George Mason University and his personal website.

“The Political Economy of Expulsion: The Regulation of Jewish Moneylending in Medieval England,” by Mark Koyama.

“From Persecuting to the Protective State? Jewish Expulsions and Weather Shocks from 1100 – 1800.” by Warren Anderson, Noel Johnson, and Mark Koyama. Full paper can be found here.

RELATED PODCASTS

Timur Kuran on Islamic Law and Economic Development.

Jared Rubin on Christian and Islamic Economic History.

Timur Kuran on Islamic Economics.

Carmel Chiswich on the Economics of American Judaism.

Carolyn Warner on Religion & Generosity

tonygill — Sun, 09 Jun 2013 08:00:07 +0000

What motivates religious individuals to give, either of their time or money? And do such motivations vary across faith traditions? We look at the issue of generosity among religious communities with Carolyn Warner, professor of political science at Arizona State University, who reviews the findings of several studies she is conducting with co-researchers Adam Cohen, Ramazon Kilinc, and Christopher Hale. What makes this multi-faceted project so interesting is that, unlike previous studies that tend to focus only on Christian denominations in the U.S., Prof. Warner’s team compares Catholics and Muslims in four cities in Europe — Dublin (Ireland), Paris (France), Milan (Italy), and Istanbul (Turkey). In each city they survey and conduct some interesting experiments on both Catholic parishes and Muslim organizations. In other words, not only are the researchers examining Catholics in Ireland, but they make sure to study Muslims in that same city. Likewise, they find a Catholic population in Istanbul to compare as well.

We start with a discussion on the difference between charity and generosity, a difference that Carolyn and her co-authors find to be very important. Whereas the former term (charity) indicates a relationship that is vertical — between a “superior” handing down something to an “inferior” — the term generosity tends to be more horizontal in its meaning. Carolyn then talks about the general sociological issues involved in studying generosity, noting that individual and community giving represent a collective action problem and the acts of generosity can be viewed as either public goods or club goods depending on the target population of the generous acts. In general, club goods are directed towards members within the religious community (e.g., Catholics helping fellow Catholics in the parish), whereas the public good aspect of generosity refers to giving beyond the boundaries of one’s spiritual community (e.g., Muslims aiding non-Muslims).

We note that religion has always been attributed with generous giving and we review some of the general reasons why scholars believe religion has a positive effect. Carolyn mentions various aspects that have been explored in the past, including the role that community plays, the institutional setting, ritualistic behavior, heightened sensitivity to the plight of others that religious ideas impart, and theological exhortations to give. Given the inter-disciplinary composition of Carolyn’s research team, Tony asks how difficult it was for a social psychologist (Adam Cohen) and a political economist (Carolyn) to talk with one another and come to a mutual understanding of what might be at play in the act of generosity. Following this Carolyn explains the rationale for choosing the various research sites and the groups studied, including why the Gülen movement was chosen as the specific Muslim group to examine. This portion of the conversation encompasses the (supposedly) relevant differences in organizational structure and theology between Catholics and Muslims.

We then turn to the results of this study, focusing first on the findings from the semi-structured interviews. Carolyn notes how Catholics tended to frame their generosity in terms of “love of Jesus” and “love of others,” often pulling from Matthew 25:40, whereas Muslims tended to emphasize duty to God, noting that Allah had given individuals gifts and it was thus important to use those gifts to help others. We also discuss the differences in ritualistic giving behavior and how that motivates generosity within these two groups. Despite these differences, the research team discovered that both groups emphasize the “sense of community” as a motivational prompt for helping others. This sense of community is not only the desire to help others, but as with any other social organization, the desire to be with others. She also addresses whether or not these charitable activities were oriented towards in-group giving (i.e., club goods) or out-group (i.e., public good). This discussion is more nuanced than one might think with an interesting observation about Catholics in Istanbul and their socio-legal standing.

We finish with a discussion of the experiment that Carolyn’s team carried out. She describes the methodology and findings of the experiment. In addition to quirky problems that always arise when conducting social scientific research, the research team was surprised to find out that the Muslim participants did give their fee for participating in an experiment to a specific group, but not a group that they had initially anticipated. And if you are listening closely during this part of the interview you can hear Rocky J. Barkington, the official canine mascot of Research on Religion, providing some insightful commentary in the background. Carolyn then shares her broad-based conclusions regarding what the research team has found to date, including some thoughts on whether or not religious charity might substitute for government provision of social welfare. Recorded: May 29,2013.

RELATED LINKS

Carolyn Warner’s bio at Arizona State University.

Description of Warner’s generosity project at The Science of Generosity Initiative at the University of Notre Dame.

The Best System Money Can Buy: Corruption in the European Union, by Carolyn Warner.

Confessions of an Interest Group: The Catholic Church and Political Parties in Europe, by Carolyn Warner.

RELATED PODCASTS

Michael McBride on Religious Free-Riding and the Mormon Church.

Dan Hungerman on Religious Charity and Crowding Out.

Jonathan Fox on Religion & State Around the World

tonygill — Mon, 06 Aug 2012 08:00:57 +0000

Research on Religion is pleased to welcome our first guest from outside the United States. Prof. Jonathan Fox of Bar Ilan University in Israel joins us to discuss the research findings from his Religion & State Project, which has not only proven to be of enormous benefit to scholars worldwide in terms of the data that has been collected, but has produced a vast literature on the relationship between government and religious institutions. Prof. Fox tells us how the project came about and what it has been involved in over the past decade. We then delve into the nature of religion-state relations, a term that is applied more broadly than “church-state relations” since Jonathan’s project encompasses all of the major faith traditions around the globe. We talk about definitional issues surrounding religious liberty and religious freedom, and differentiate this from the concept of “separation of religion and state.” We note that religious liberty and/or separation of religion and state is not just some dichotomous switch that one can turn on or off, but rather encompasses a number of different policies and decisions about what types of activities are permissible in society. Jonathan illustrates this with references to Baal, wiccans in San Francisco, and the Church of the Flying Spaghetti Monster. Prof. Fox then reviews the various broad patterns of religion-state relations including the separationist, neutrality, and laicism (or “laicite” in French) models. The U.S. is one of the few examples worldwide of the “separationist” model, and Jonathan points out how most of (secular) Europe tends to either have state-supported churches, state-favored churches, works on the “neutrality” model or — as in the case of France — tries to limit religious expression from the public sphere as much as possible. We then review some of the non-constitutional means whereby governments regulate religious minorities, including definitional issues of what constitutes a religion, what constitutes “hateful” religious speech, and even non-application of laws on the books. Tony provides some examples from Latin America based on his own prior research. The conversation then veers in a different direction to examine how religious beliefs and organizations influence the political landscape of their respective countries. Prof. Fox works through several categories in how this occurs in terms of conditioning worldviews, providing legitimacy, and organizing through religious institutions. The issue of worldviews is illustrated via how the European and Arab world diverged on their perspectives on the role of religion in politics following the Treaty of Westphalia (1648), wherein the Europeans removed religion from the realm of politics, and the Holy Roman Empire’s defeat of the Ottomans at the Battle of Vienna (1683), which began several centuries of Europe’s dominance over Arab Muslim territory. Jonathan also notes that it is not just a clash of religious worldviews that determines political outcomes, but a clash between religious and secular worldviews that has become a factor in our world as of late. We then turn to the issue of legitimacy with Prof. Fox providing a very relevant analogy to explain the concept using the often familiar issue of trying to parent children. This discussion of how religions can legitimate governments opens the door for Jonathan to mention Tony’s first book, Rendering Unto Caesar, and Tony provides an example for how religious organizations can actually harm themselves by legitimating clearly unpopular governments. A bit of discussion of Turkmenistan and North Korea also ensues. We finish up with Jonathan’s thoughts on how religious organizations are ideally suited for mobilizing collective political action and his thoughts on what he has learned over the past decade working with his Religion & State Project. Recorded: July 22, 2012.

RELATED LINKS

Jonathan Fox’s biography at Bar Ilan University.

The Religion and State Project, created and directed by Jonathan Fox.

A World Survey of Religion and the State, by Jonathan Fox.

Religion, Politics, Society, and the State, by Jonathan Fox.

Bringing Religion into International Relations, by Jonathan Fox and Shmuel Sandler.

Religion, Civilization and Civil War, by Jonathan Fox.

An Introduction to Religion and Politics: Theory and Practice, by Jonathan Fox (forthcoming).

The Association of Religious Data Archives (ARDA) at Penn State University (run by Roger Finke).

The Church of the Flying Spaghetti Monster (as noted in the podcast).

Rendering Unto Caesar: The Catholic Church and the State in Latin America, by Anthony Gill (mentioned unprompted by Jonathan in the podcast).

RELATED PODCASTS

Timothy Shah and the Case for Religious Liberty.

Thomas Farr on Religion, Religious Liberty, and US Diplomacy.

Allen Hertzke on Religious Liberty.

Roger Finke on Religious Persecution.

Lan Chu on Catholicism in Vietnam

tonygill — Mon, 22 Aug 2011 08:00:12 +0000

Despite having lived under a highly-nationalistic and communist regime for over three decades (and a half century in the northern part of the country), the Catholic Church continues to makes its spiritual and social presence felt in Vietnam. Prof. Lan Chu, an assistant professor in the Department of Diplomacy and World Affairs at Occidental College, explains how the Catholic Church has survived in this turbulent and often repressive environment. We start with a brief discussion of the Catholic Church in Southeast Asia, noting how it came with Portuguese missionaries but was then largely associated with French colonization. Prof. Chu notes how Catholic priests assisted in forging a national identity during the Japanese occupation of the region during World War II, and then how things changed following the 1954 Geneva Accords that divided Vietnam into two separate countries, North and South. We track both the conditions and reactions of the Church in both the North and South, noting how each developed a different culture. Interestingly, whereas the presence of the southern Vietnamese Catholic bishops at Vatican II helped to create a more critical position of the Diem regime and a more conciliatory attitude towards communism, the bishops in the north were prevented from travelling to Rome, isolated from Vatican II’s message and subsequently developed a more hard-line stance to the communist regime. Despite the fact that the Viet Minh regime exercised control over the selection of bishops and controlled the ordination of priests, the limited pool of candidates from which to choose from meant that Catholic leaders were still able to maintain a degree of independence. We discuss what happens to the Church following the North Vietnamese invasion of the south and unification of the country in 1975. Prof. Chu notes how Catholic leaders have been able to carve out a social space for themselves by using the regime’s own rhetoric on human rights to assert their own political rights and social activity in society. The current regime has often encouraged the Church’s charitable activity as a means of providing needed social services for the population. Throughout the interview we make comparative references to the Catholic Church in other communist countries such as Poland and Cuba. We finish with some speculation about the likelihood that Catholics will help promote political liberalization in the country. Recorded: August 10, 2011.

RELATED LINKS

Prof. Lan Chu’s website at Occidental College.

RELATED PODCASTS

Karrie Koesel on House Churches in China.

Karrie Koesel on Religion & Politics in China.

Roger Finke on Religious Persecution.

Catherine Wanner on Religion in Russia.

James Felak on John Paul II & Communism.

Margarita Mooney on Religion & Haitian Immigrants

tonygill — Mon, 08 Aug 2011 08:00:34 +0000

Although the 2010 earthquake in Haiti generated a great deal of media attention to the plight of individuals living in that country, there has been less focus on the large populations of Haitians who have fled their native country over the past several decades to places such as the United States, Canada and France. Prof. Margarita Mooney — assistant professor of sociology at the University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill and a Faculty Fellow at the Carolina Population Center — examines how personal faith and religious organizations assist immigrants adapt to their new surroundings. We briefly review the history of Haiti and the difficulties that immigrants face in a foreign country. Our discussion then turns towards how religion — both personal faith and church institutions (specifically the Catholic Church) — can assist immigrants in finding a personal and communal identity. During the middle of the interview, we take an interesting detour to discuss the methodology behind Prof. Mooney’s research. We have an open discussion regarding how Margarita’s initial expectations for her fieldwork were somewhat frustrated until she began listening directly to her interview subjects about the important role that faith plays in their lives. We talk about how many scholars have often overlooked the role of faith and also discuss what role a researcher plays in studies that involve direct observation. This is a very insightful discussion for both graduate students, undergraduates and non-academics who will gain insights into how social scientifice research is conducted. Afterwards, we talk about what role Catholic religious organizations (both parishes and social service groups) have played in assisting immigrant Haitians in Miami, Montreal, and Paris. Margarita notes that the efforts of Notre Dame d’Haiti and the Pierre Toussaint Center in Miami has been much more successful in helping Haitians adopt to their new circumstances than similar organizations in Montreal and Paris. Prof. Mooney explains this by the specific relationship that local and national governments play in partnering with religious institutions. At the conclusion of the podcast, Margarita shares insights she gleaned from her research on religious organizations with how that may help secular groups better serve their own constituencies. Recorded: July 15, 2011.

RELATED LINKS

Prof. Margarita Mooney’s personal website and website at the University of North Carolina.

Faith Makes Us Live: Surviving and Thriving in the Haitian Diaspora, by Margarita A. Mooney.

Pierre Toussaint Center (Miami).

Ahmet Kuru on Islam in Europe

tonygill — Mon, 21 Feb 2011 09:00:40 +0000

How is contemporary Europe adjusting to the growing presence of Muslim immigrants and their second and third generation progeny? Prof. Ahmet Kuru — assistant professor of political science at San Diego State University — joins Tony to discuss the origins and demographic composition of Muslim immigration in post-WWII Europe. We primarily focus our discussion on France, Great Britain and Germany, though the responses of other countries are mentioned as well. Prof. Kuru notes how the demand for labor in the post-war era, combined with differering colonial legacies, shaped the issues surrounding the accomodation of Muslim immigrants in different parts of Europe. While Great Britain made citizenship for immigrants easy based on whether an immigrant came from a former colony, countries such as Germany made citizenship more difficult and existed under the expectation that immigrants would eventually return to their place of origin. Our discussion covers Prof. Kuru’s research on assertive secularism, wherein nations (e.g., France) intentionally seek to remove religion from the public sphere (though the implementation of such policies is not always consistent). We cover the recent ban on the Muslim headscarf (hijab) and oher controversies such as mosque construction and funding for religious education. We close out our discussion with a discussion of how religious policy is changing in Turkey and how that relates to the European situation, and why Muslims in the United States have found it esier to accomodate to the cultural and political landscape than in Europe. Recorded: February 7, 2011.

RELATED LINKS

Prof. Ahmet Kuru’s website at San Diego State University.

Secularism and State Policies toward Religion: The United States, France, and Turkey by Ahmet T. Kuru.