Strengthening Constitutional Self-Government

No Left Turns


Levenick and Novak on religion and the founding

Here, via Carol Platt Liebau, is Christopher Levenick's and Michael Novak's response to Brooke Allen's Nation article, on which I animadverted here.

Hat tip: The Conservative Philosopher, who also call our attention to this post on secular universities and the secular Left. It is a sad state of affairs when anyone actually has to say things like this:

University dialogue and debate on ethical and political issues in and out of classrooms should include faculty members who proceed from theistic and non-theistic perspectives. For example, theologians have thought deeply about issues of war and peace. Some are pacifists; other believe in the just war doctrine (with varying views about the conditions for a just war). In the Christian tradition, such theologians would point to scripture, but scripture is only the beginning of the inquiry for most of them. Moreover, to the extent, the debate is confined to scripture, it would be helpful for the secular left (or any informed citizen) to understand the nature of the debate. Obviously, the war and peace example could be multiplied across a broad range of issues. It is hard to imagine why university dialogue would not be enhanced by discussion from theistic and non-theistic perspectives.

But clearly, as the example of Brooke Allen indicates, even simple truths need to be reiterated from time to time.

Update: For a "balanced" view of religion and the founding, see this NYT article.

Categories > Religion

Discussions - 1 Comment

There’s a link in my earlier post. Here it is again.

Leave a Comment

* denotes a required field

No TrackBacks
TrackBack URL: