Good and Bad Ways to Think About Religion and Politics

*Clear, useful guide to a subject too often characterized by confusion and loud rhetoric*??"There is nothing greater than indignation to stimulate a writer to write, and my outrage has been stirred mightily by reading so many wrongheaded 'takes' on how religion and politics ought to be related," says Robert Benne.??In this book Benne describes and analyzes the two main bad ways of relating religion and politics - "separationism" and "fusionism" - and offers a better way that he calls "critical engagement." He first explains this approach in theoretical terms and then reflects on the practical ways in which such convictions reach the public sphere of policy. This better way derives in large part from the Lutheran tradition, with a few tweaks to adapt the tradition to deal with the new challenges of our present situation.??  
***-Publisher.***  
  


In this book, Benne describes and analyzes the wrong ways to relate religion and politics and offers a better way.  
Benne calls the two main bad ways of relating religion and politics separationism and fusionism. Secular separationists decry all involvement of religion in politics; religious separationists, on the other hand, advocate abstaining from politics in the name of religious purity. Fusionism comes in many types, but the type that most concerns Benne is the use of religionin this case Christianityfor political ends, which turns religion into an instrument for purposes other than its own main reason for being. Rejecting these bad ways of relating religion and politics, Benne offers a better way that he calls critical engagement which derives from the Lutheran tradition, with a few tweaks to adapt the tradition to deal well with the new challenges of our present situation.  
As Benne points out, The question is not so much whether American religion will have political effects. It most definitely will. The more serious questions are: Should it? How should it? In this book, Benne offers a clear and useful guide to a subject too often characterized by confusion and loud rhetoric.Read less