Civil Religion: Rousseau And Bellah

The term “civil religion” has been used with different implications and different emphasis. The origin of the term “civil religion” traces all the way back to French sociologist Jean-Jacques Rousseau, who argued that “no State has ever been founded without Religion serving as its base,” the presence of divinity that provides the moral and spiritual foundation in a modern society. (Rousseau & Gourevitch, 1997, p. 147) Civil religion, in this context, is not being associated with any particular religion, but a broad acknowledgment of the Deity that rewards the “good” and punishes the “bad”; it constitutes the meaning of a good citizen and act as a unifier. This concept has since been popularized in the study of American politics and religion

Rousseau believes civil religion is an idiosyncrasy created by the government to unify citizens, whereas Bellah believes that American civil religion is part of a self-understanding in America. Rousseau was more critical about the role Christianity play in politics: “Christian law is…more harmful than useful to a strong constitution” due to its orientation toward spiritual world and idolatry of a priestly figure (Rousseau & Gourevitch, 1997, p. 146; Gorski, 2011, p. 182). In addition, Rousseau was not as convinced as Bellah that people can hold the government accountable using civil religion. Comparing the two, however, Bellah provided a more solid explanation for civil religion in America, it is not the “best” but he made it more relatable in the context of American politics. His detailed exploration of American politics: Kennedy’s inauguration, solemn occasions, the Declaration of Independence, and the connection between the founding fathers of America and religious figures in the Bible. His research is uniquely “America” (although he made the case that all society have a civil religion). He studied the relation between American politics and religion extensively, almost

Philip Gorski (2011) illustrated the “existence of multiple and competing religion-political traditions” within America (Gorski, 2011, p. 183), and argued that civil religion can generation a “sense of inclusion and equality similar to liberal secularism, while also constructing solidarity and collective identity like religious nationalism.” (Williams and Fuist, 2014, p. 932) Civil religion is a “proper balance between individual autonomy and the common good.” (Gorski, 2011, p. 180) Rather than simply unifying all citizens, Civil religion ease the tensions between different or even opposing values. Gorski explored the different catalyst for the civil theology, one example is the Civil War created a platform for the prophetic voice of Frederick Douglass and “priestly authority” (Gorski, 2011, p. 197) by Abraham Lincoln. He also explained the contribution of President Barack Obama in dealing with “the religious mosaic of contemporary America and the divide between religious and secular America” (Gorski, 2011, p. 205), an objective of civil religion. Gorski updated Bellah’s concept of civil religion, yet he did not address the issue of blood sacrifice, a significant element studied by Carolyn Marvin and David W. Ingle (1996). They argued that civil religion provides unity through blood sacrifices. Their usage of the term “civil religion” parallel to American patriotism.