Conclusion:

         I conclude by speaking from within my own tradition. The task of Christian political thinking today is to use our heritage to think our way into radically new world, which could not be anticipated, a world whose only present order is the order of the common fear, and that is the fear of a world gyrating out of control, far beyond national sovereignties, towards a common disaster. Moreover, as Christians dong political thinking, we must recognize that our starting point is one of relative affluence and power, which must increasingly be shared with others. At least as European and North American Christians, our task is to persuade our fellow countryman to the tasks of a new realism, a new way of life that is brought under the discipline of a more equal world.

         In that task, we can learn from St. Augustine that unless one begins with where people are, with their given perception of their own self interest, then you will not be able to move them. And from Aquinas we can learn that it is not impractical to hope that people will be rational, that if shown the impact of new world realities upon their old, more narrow perceptions of self- interest they will respond reasonably and modify their claims.

         From Augustine we can learn that pious hopes without the astute use of power cannot change the world. And from Aquinas we can learn that religion has that kind of power. The power to defined reality has traditionally belonged to religion; and it is a power whose responsibility, especially in  these times, should bear heavily upon us. It is the power to legitimate or de-legitimate political authority, because religion defines the world within which leaders are perceived as truly leading, or only wandering.

         Let us make no mistake. Political leaders can respond to new world realities only as religions redefine that world, and thus redefine what acting responsibly within that world means. I cannot overstate how seriously I think we need to take ourselves. Religion has been granted by most people in the world the power to tell them what is real. It is an awesome and terrible responsibility. We in religion have the power to legitimate or to de-legitimate secular rule. And our concrete situation is that the old way of making the world work no longer works.

        The French existentialist Albert Camus spoke eloquently of this. “Tomorrow”  he said, “the world may burst into fragments. In that threat hanging over our heads there is a lesson of truth. As we face such a future, hierarchies, titles, honors are reduced to what they are in reality: a passing puff of smoke. And the only certainty left to us is that of naked suffering, common to all, intermingling its roots with those of a stubborn hope.”

         We need a new politics. A politics guided by a new sense at what the future of the nation state must be if there is to be a human future at all. The prophet voice of the world’s religions is, I think, that last best hope of humanity. This must be a voice critically a wear of its own parochial base, and so able to transcend its narrow self-interests to wards a more comprehensive hope. This hope must be pursued within the tension of the Augustinian sense of the tragic limits of human moral achievements, and the optimism of St. Thomas about what may still be possible when the full dimensions of our predicament become clear.

Back