The Religious Test: Why We Must Question the Beliefs of Our Leaders Rating :
Customer Reviews
Most helpful customer reviews
7 of 11 people found the following review helpful.
An excellent, thoughtful, challenging book
By Russell Arben Fox
Linker's book is well-written, thoughtful, challenging, and absolutely worth reading. It isn't a scholarly text, though it is informed by a great deal of scholarship; nor is it, though many will assume otherwise, a polemical attack on religious believers in the public square. Rather it is a smart, even wise, book which asks hard questions about exactly how, and in what way, and to what degree, those with "traditionalist" religious beliefs can effectively present themselves as democratic participants in a secular liberal state like our own.
By "traditionalist" believers (a term that Linker uses occasionally, but does not rely upon), the book considers those whose faith in divine authority leads them to trust in revelations and commandments not based on any other kind of publicly available reasoning (this would be certain conservative Catholics and Mormons), or whose commitment to a literal interpretation of the Bible leads them to dismiss and seal themselves off from debate over scientific and other intellectual arguments (some evangelical Protestants), or other similar examples. Linker, who has extensive experience with the arguments and ambitions of the "theoconservative" Christian right, wants to make sure that those whose beliefs align align with that and similar movements (which he sees as involving a close-mindedness and authoritarianism incompatible with a liberal society) do not unthinkingly fill up our public square with ideas and policies that will ultimately work against all our freedoms.
As should be apparent, Linker's vision of the United States as a "secular liberal state" is not a casually assumed one; he takes the fundamentals of pluralism, incommensurability, toleration, individualism, progress, and so forth very seriously. As such, those who have complaints about this book basically fall into three camps: 1) those religious conservatives and traditionalists who are unconcerned at how their theology and their practices potentially challenge the premises of liberal democracy, and who want to be able to use the rules of liberal democracy to advance goals that are, whether they realize it or not, illiberal; 2) those religious believers, who may or may not be conservative or traditional, who do not recognize their actual beliefs and practices in the sometimes overly philosophical or ahistorical analysis arguments which Linker makes, and would like to defend their participation in liberal democratic politics accordingly; and 3) those who think his picture of the "secular liberal state" is flawed in this first place--that democracies are not, and shouldn't be, nearly as separate from authoritative moral traditions or collective religious "establishments" of one sort of another as he makes them out to be. I would count myself in the third camp (and you can read my long response to Linker[...] if you're so inclined). But that third group is bound to be the smallest; the first two types of critics will be much larger.
Of the first one, there's probably little point in urging them to embrace the book; after all, Linker is writing primarily to his fellow liberals, not to convince illiberal folk that they're wrong. Of the second group though, Linker has something important and thought-provoking to say; even if it is true that some of his are wrong, or his picture of certain practices and beliefs is incomplete, honest believers in traditionalist religions (and I am one myself) owe it to themselves to think about what Linker is saying--to think, in other words, about their own potential illiberality, and why that ought to make them pause when they think about voting for their co-religionists (or run for office themselves!).
Linker makes clear throughout the book--and in particular in his final chapter, when he attacks many atheists as being just as "illiberal" as some traditionalists!--that he respects conservative, illiberal religious beliefs...at least as much as probably any secular liberal who rejects any authoritative account of the universe possibly could. He sees an important place for saints in American society, be they the sort that close themselves off and develop their own distinct communities, or the sort that engage themselves in public witnessing and works to and along our public liberal order. He just cares enough about that order as he understands it that he doesn't want to see it further compromised from within by those who wrongly important their own authoritative notions into what he sees as a necessarily neutral, pluralistic space. I think his understanding of that space is wrong--but that doesn't mean his thoughts and counsel to anyone who appreciates the virtues of living in a tolerant democratic society aren't worth listening to. They very much are.
5 of 8 people found the following review helpful.
An Important Take on What Should Be a Settled Issue
By Michael Austin
More than 200 years after the United States of America was founded as a religiously neutral state guaranteeing religious freedom to all, one might suspect that Damon Linker's main argument in _The Religious Test_--that the United States should be a religiously neutral state guaranteeing religious freedom to all--would be a banal truism, something comparable to, say, a defense of the Copernican model of the universe or the health benefits of handwashing.
But alas, this is not the case. Some of the shrillest voices in our society now demand, through their votes, that our leaders demonstrate their religious devotion in the performance of their duties--and they also demand that our history be rewritten to obscure the fact, plain to anyone who reads the original texts, that our Founding Fathers thought this a very bad idea. Only slightly less shrill, and perhaps ultimately more dangerous, are the "new atheists" who advocate the use of state power to rid us of religion altogether, by, among other things, punishing parents who raise their children religiously as child abusers.
As long as these fundamentally illiberal voices are part of our public sphere we will need books like _The Religious Test_ to remind us that the principle of religious liberty requires a religiously neutral state and that public figures can only uphold the principles of religious freedom by agreeing to take a neutral stance towards all forms of belief (including unbelief) in the performance of their official duties.
1 of 3 people found the following review helpful.A fine survey for believers and atheists alike
By Midwest Book Review
THE RELIGIOUS TEST: WHY WE MUST QUESTION THE BELIEFS OF OUR LEADERS examines different elements of religious belief systems and links to political leadership, considering if a candidate's religious convictions should be off-limits to public scrutiny. There are some beliefs, Linker maintains, that are incompatible with high office and even sometimes in a democracy: he examines connections between church and state and how these beliefs operate in a fine survey for believers and atheists alike.
Product Description
A manifesto seeking to exhort both believers and atheists to behave better in the public sphere.
The Constitution states that “no religious test” may keep a candidate from aspiring to political office. Yet, since John F. Kennedy used the phrase to deflect concerns about his Catholicism, the public has largely avoided probing candidates’ religious beliefs. Is it true, however, that a candidate’s religious convictions should be off-limits to public scrutiny?Damon Linker doesn’t think so, and in this book he outlines the various elements of religious belief—including radical atheism—that are simply incompatible with high office, and sometimes even active citizenship, in a democracy. In six forceful chapters he enlightens us to the complicated interrelations between churches and states, consistently applying a political litmus test to a range of theological views. Along the way, he clearly explains, among other topics, why the government in a religiously tolerant society must not promote a uniform, absolute code of ethics and behavior; why the conviction that America is worthy of divine attention is dangerous; and why the liberal position on the political deregulation of sex is our nation’s only hope for conciliation.
In this provocative, hard-hitting manifesto, Linker exhorts both believers and atheists to behave better in the public sphere, and he offers a carefully charted road map for doing so.
Product Details
- Amazon Sales Rank: #1509803 in Books
- Published on: 2010-09-27
- Original language:English
- Number of items: 1
- Dimensions: 8.50" h x5.75" w x1.00" l,.79 pounds
- Binding: Hardcover
- 251 pages
No comments :
Post a Comment