Why Religion? Why Now?

Abstract

This chapter discusses the paradox embodied by the main theme of this volume: religion and world politics. The text in this book, explicitly or implicitly, refers to the emergence or resurgence of religion in international affairs. Yet, the paradox is that the scholars in this volume and in other sources who speak of a return or a resurgence of religion have a valid point. In reality religion has never been absent from international affairs. But the study of world politics—particularly the formal discipline of international relations—and the practice of world politics—particularly formal interstate diplomacy—have both treated religion as inconsequential, a reality which could be ignored by scholars or diplomats without any diminishment of their understanding of the world. Sorting out the paradox of this volume requires a determination of why religion has been marginalized in the past, what factors have brought about its “resurgence” in fact and in theory, and how the relationship of religion and international affairs should be pursued in theory and practice.

Contesting the Dynamics of Secular Development: An Ontology of Trinitarian Well-Being as Christian Rationale for Human Well-Being

“…Although the origins of Western development, and its articulation of human well-being, had a thoroughly theological dimension, after WWII, as governments became dominant funders of what is now considered the aid industry, organisations adopted the pragmatic sensibilities of religious conviction, while simultaneously ignoring its theological origins (Barnett and Stein 2012, 3-8;Hehir 2012). As such, a plundered form of Christian cosmology continues to influence the contemporary landscape of international development.…”

Measuring Long‐Term Patterns of Political Secularization and Desecularization: Did They Happen or Not?

“…Theories of secularization's timing—and impliedly its causation—are at least as diverse as theories of its form. Hehir () attributes secularization to the political theory inculcated in the Westphalian state system (see also Baskan ; Philpott ). Juergensmeyer () argues that secularization's proximate cause was not Westphalia but the Enlightenment, especially as it evolved in England and America (Juergensmeyer :26; see also, Fox :18–20).…”

Ciência política e religião, um caso de subestimação? Análise comparativa dos conteúdos das revistas de ciência política europeias entre 2010-2015.

“…A (Hehir, 2012;Snyder, 2011); se mantendo, por consequência, como um objeto de estudo atual e desafiante. Por outro lado, o fato de, em alguns dos países selecionados, o estudo formal e organizado da ciência política se ter iniciado só muito recentemente.…”

“…O autor verifica um crescimento regular, tanto no número de unidades como no valor relativo das UP, entre os quatro períodos temporais da sua análise. envolvem o religioso (Hehir, 2012;Huntington, 1996;Kepel, 1991;Snyder, 2011) e pelo fato de, segundo Philpott (2002, p. 69), a academia da disciplina ser "de fato secularizada", tal como a ciência política -oferecerá outra boa análise comparativa. Para esse exame, contrariamente ao que sucedeu quando se investigaram as temáticas mais frequentes em ciência política -onde selecionámos as revistas com maior número de UP e US codificadas -, foram escolhidas revistas do mesmo país no qual a ciência política parece ter estado menos atenta ao religioso.…”