What is the source of that liberty, equality and fraternity that are now the guiding principles of the West, if not the modern world?
Historians note the anomaly that these principles originated and developed only in Western civilization. In this sense, they are not universal. Of late, however, these principles are being exported to the rest of the world. One may say they are Western in origin but universal in their application.
But where do the principles come from? With the death of Heidegger and Sartre, Jurgen Habermas is now regarded as perhaps our leading living philosopher. Habermas is also an atheist. Yet when Habermas found out that the European Union in its charter gave full acknowledgement to ancient Greece and Rome, but none to Christianity, he erupted in learned outrage.
Habermas's argument is that it is philosophically illiterate to locate the roots of the West in Athens but not in Jerusalem. In fact, Habermas argues that Jerusalem--by which he means Judaism and Christianity--is far more responsible than Athens for the modern principles of liberty, equality and fraternity. In "A Time of Transition," Habermas writes:
For the normative self-understanding of modernity, Christianity has functioned as more than just a precursor or catalyst. Universalistic egalitarianism, from which sprang the ideals of freedom and a collective life in solidarity, the autonomous conduct of life and emancipation, the individual morality of conscience, human rights and democracy, is the direct legacy of the Judaic ethic of justice and the Christian ethic of love.
Habermas's point is that there is too much arrogance in contemporary atheism. Even the atheist is standing on mountain erected by Christianity. How ungrateful it is to scorn the mountain that is still holding you up! How ridiculous the posture of the man who cannot acknowledge the very foundation that sustains him from below!
This is what Christians mean when they say that America is a Christian society. This is not a call for theocracy or "rule of the priests" but rather a call for a public acknowledgement of the historic role of Christianity in shaping our institutions, our values and our culture. The opinions of several leading Supreme Court justices on church-and-state issues would benefit greatly from a slight familiarity with the history that Habermas is talking about.
Habermas's argument would have struck a chord with the greatest atheist of modern times, the philosopher Nietzsche. Nietzsche argued that if you want to get rid of the Christian God, at least have the honesty and the guts to repudiate the Christian ideals of human dignity, human equality and human liberty.
Yet our village atheists want to have it both ways. They want to reject God but preserve at least certain core aspects of the Christian legacy. Nietzsche would have had nothing but scorn for these little men of unbelief, Lilliputians hurling their tiny javelins at the Christian God while they continue to live off His inheritance.
Reader Comments ( Page 3 of 29)
31. DD: You have your Magna Charta history a bit wrong. The forcing of King John by the barons to sign the Magna Charta was a political and power move rather than a religious event. King John was a poor ruler who abused power, entered into ill-conceived military endeavors and generally was viewed by his barons as squandering the influence of Britain (wow, sounds a lot like W). At the same time, the Church got pissed off at John who had exiled some high ranking Church members because they didn't involve him in the choosing of the Archbishop of Canterbury, and act in which the King traditionally had substantial influence. The Pope excommunicated John because of the slight and to get back into the Pope’s good graces, John ceded Ireland to the Church as a territory (boy, hasn’t that worked out well over the years). That really pissed off the Barons more who decided to further limit the powers of the King under civil law by forcing John, pretty much at sword-point, to sign the Magna Charta. I’m not sure I see a divine influence here…but I do see the power grab by the Church being a factor in the baron’s revolt.
John Galt at 12:04PM on Aug 7th 2008
32. 16. tmo at #10:
Your question is answered in The Everlasting Man. Read more if you want to stop showing the ignorant you are.
Reepicheep
Name calling and bible quoting just as I predicted. I read it but it's been a while, like most of bible it wasn't well written or particularly memorable (If you don't think reading it will grant you enternal life it's a pretty awful read). Why don't you sum it up for me. If you read it and understood it then you should be able to state it's meaning in your own words(in grade school this is called comprehension).
I do always enjoy the christian assumption that I reject their bullshit because I don't understand it.
tmo at 12:32PM on Aug 7th 2008
33. Secular Europe rightly describes you moral parasites as "christian atheists" you behave like christians while casting off the select little bits you don't like (usually to do with sex) then make the idiotic assumption that your behavioural standard is self evident.
Kind of like Ted Hagge when he snorts Meth and hires young men to please him sexally and then preaches the good news at his mega church? or old school hypocrits like Jimmy Swaggart and Jim Baker who just liked hookers and banging employees?
Well it is different,though, we don't have to lie to anyone if we engage in such behavior(for the record I don't).
It seems your point is that unless one behaves in a totlally immoral and irresponsible way they are a hypocrit if they don't believe in Christianity?
A little arrogant don't you think?
I actually think taking good ideas from something(Jesus seems like a good dude to me) and rejecting the bad(the oft mentioned bashing babies heads againsty rocks for instance) and the just plain stupid(world wide floods, people turning to salt, being swallowed by whales, ect.) is an exellent way to do things.
Even the most devout do it this way. I bet you'd be hard pressed to find a Christian still endorsing slavery(the bible does) and I'm willing to bet a lot of meat was eaten this Friday(and not just be Ted Hagge).
tmo at 12:48PM on Aug 7th 2008
34. sexually, eternal.
apologies for these mistakes and others I have no doubt missed. I do like these words together though.
tmo at 12:50PM on Aug 7th 2008
35.
The Habermas statements that DoubleD bases this page on are located at the following website:
refershttp://chiesa.espresso.repubblica.it/articolo/20037?eng=y
The question and answer section is interesting as well.
JefFlyingV at 12:52PM on Aug 7th 2008
36. 'by Ted Hagge'
tmo at 12:52PM on Aug 7th 2008
37. They really should learn from actual rational atheists (usually french) that hedonistic materialism is your only real option.
When did we start listening to the French? I was under the immpression that since they didn't want us to invade Iraq every thing they said was wrong, evil, and stupid. Has this changed?
tmo at 12:58PM on Aug 7th 2008
38. You've been beating the "Athens vs Jerusalem" argument to death for far too long, Dinesh. There's no denying that the bulk of this country's population has been Christian from the very beginning, so naturally Christians have had a great deal of influence. But you always want to give the credit to Christianity, not Christians. But the great Christian inventors, lawmakers, artists, etc. didn't create anything because they prayed for it and Jesus spontaneously made it happen - they had to consider variables, use knowledge gained from past experience, and apply what they knew in the real world; their Christianity was coincidental.
And please, PLEASE stop misrepresenting Nietzsche all the time! You obviously don't understand his writing in the least. He said that when you throw out Christianity you have to throw out the old justifications for dignity, equality & liberty (like the arbitrary idea that we were all "created" equal), but that doesn't mean the concepts have to be thrown out just because God isn't part of the equation! It's not as if the world was devoid of kindness or justice until Christianity - or even Judaism - came on the scene; they just happened to be very good marketers of those kinds of ideas (imagine that - oppressed people decrying oppression & such). They were around before Christianity, and they can exist just fine without it - you just don't listen when people try explaining that to you.
Jason at 12:35AM on Aug 10th 2008
39. God, of course, did not die, Nietzsche was a crackpot, and Habermas is a minor philosopher.
How is it possible that DD is unaware that Western thought developed from the atheism of the seventeenth and eighteenth century European Enlightenment?
The ancient Greeks heavily influenced Jews, Gentiles, and most all of us, as have all of the 30,000 or so generations of humans.
DD attributes more indignation to Habermas than he actually possesses. Perhaps someone at a cocktail party mentioned him.
The U.S. most definitely is not a Christian nation. What DD and others fail to realize or acknowledge is that our founding fathers were desciples of Voltaire, Hume, Locke, Rousseau, Paine, Descartes, and many others.
The fathers were, and always had been, governed by the political influence of religion, AND WANTED NO MORE OF IT. Not religion, just its political influence.
Surely, most of you are familiar with the story of Roger Williams, who was tossed out of Massachusetts for preaching that God gave man a conscience and expected him to use it. Tossed out by those seventeenth century Puritans who left England to escape from mandatory state imposed religion. Tossed out by those Puritans who mandated their own form of religion.
Almost every colony required a religious test to vote, hold political office, or own property. All of them discriminated against those of unfavored religions or no religion. Who needs that?
The founders didn't, and that's why we are a secular nation. Only in a completely secular nation can there be complete freedom of and from religion.
naturalpuppy at 1:21PM on Aug 7th 2008
40. This morning I attended the funeral of a 20 year old Christian woman. Several of her college friends spoke words of tribute and I was interested to hear Muslims, Jews, agnostics and atheists, all commending her for her unwavering faith and the profound effect it had made on each of their lives. Apparently she was born with a heart defect and was labeleld a 'miracle baby' from day 1. For most of her life she endured recurring sickness, pain and surgery, yet through it all never complained; never quit encouraging her friends to be all they could be and never wavered in her faith in her Savior, Jesus. What began as a sad, sorrowful service of mourning, ended as a celebration of a life well lived; a life dedicated to the personification of Christ's message of love and forgivness. In conclusion, as we sang 'It is Well with my Soul', I was reminded of how vane and often trivial the comments, including my own, are on this blog. It was a reality check I won't soon forget.
fanman at 1:19PM on Aug 7th 2008
41. D'Souza says, "What is the source of that liberty, equality and fraternity that are now the guiding principles of the West, if not the modern world?"
I'm going to go with the French Revolution.
not-pboyfloyd at 1:21PM on Aug 7th 2008
42. How ironic, how true, well said, Dinesh.
The anti-God folks are like spoiled children who want all the privileges they are accustomed to, without every wanting the moral and character disciplines required to amass such luxuries. They are like spoiled teens receiving a sports car with their driver's license at age 16, then complaining that their parents are unfair to them for not paying for a long summer vacation, as well.
In our society, the anti-God crowd are also trying to rewrite history, by erasing and denying the Christian roots and influences of this country. Rewriting history used to be a problem in totalitarian communist countries, now it is a problem in the USA. The contemporary faculty of too many universities reject God while praising communism, and shrugging off the tremendous body count of the last century, (courtesy of regimes intent on also banning religion, as well), as if these record-breaking mass murders were some strange anomaly coming from otherwise "fine" atheistic mindsets. Survival of the fittest is the philosophy that kills, as its natural end. It is the Christian concept of charity and mercy that says be good to those whose lot in life is lesser than your own, do not oppress. Atheism, seen in its full glory in the Soviet Union of the last century, is license to murder.
America was better off when our religion had freedom, and immorality was silenced. Today those roles are reversed, with a vengeance, by anti-Christian folks. In the Christian America, the Godless were tolerated to live immoral lifestyles but to keep that shameful living discreet. Now the immoral have taken over the culture, demanding to be mainstream, and demanding that religious values be ashamed and silent.
Sometimes it looks like the bad guys are winning -- for a little while. God will pay them all back with His eternal judgment, as the Bible promises.
Is it wise to live immorally, but spend eternity on fire in Hell? Not hardly. That is what atheists tell us all to do, though.
Rev 3:16 at 1:28PM on Aug 7th 2008
43. That's Ted Haggard, tmo. I often drive by the church he built. Very impressive, with all the flags flying. Many years ago he conducted services in his basement, but the neighbors complained about all the traffic and parking problems.
Ted and his peers preach a new form of Christianity, which is often called the prosperity gospel. They preach that Christianty should make you materiually rich as well as spiritually rich.
naturalpuppy at 1:34PM on Aug 7th 2008
44. To: Logician (Post #4)
You said: "No serious intellectual or scholar denies that the essence of "the West" is an amalgam of Graeco-Roman and Christian ideas."
Doesn't Richard Dawkins do this very thing? Doesn't he vehemently deny the "positive influence" of Christianity on the West? Your statement, therefore, implies that Dawkins is not a serious intellectual or scholar, a conclusion with which I agree.
You also said: "However, just because Christian ideas are a key foundation of "the West" does not prove that Christianity is true, anymore than the fact that ancient Greek philosophy is another key foundation proves that the Greek gods are real."
You draw a valid conclusion here, but it misses the point of Dinesh's article, which did not attempt to defend the "truth" of Christianity. He was simply arguing for its positive influence on the origins of Western civilization.
I recommend reading a little more carefully next time before responding. Otherwise, your logic may continue to be irrelevant to Dinesh's articles.
Troy at 1:43PM on Aug 7th 2008
45. Unfortunatly for you DD the word is PROTESTANT. Your Catholic Church was a useless venal corrupt organization until Martin Luther came along and broke the Pope's power. Your Catholic Church still thinks Protestants are heritics but you can't do anything about it anymore. You alwyas try to point out about the West and it's Christian traditions when you Christians are split into different factions that totally disagree with one another. I know Protestants that believe the Pope is the anti-christ. Your a joke DD............
Larry at 1:48PM on Aug 7th 2008