On Lilla’s The Stillborn God: Religion, Politics, and the Modern West
Mark Lilla’s The Stillborn God patterns a historical emergence of a relevant and perplexing paradigm of the modern west positioned as it were between political theology and a secular modernity. His short tome articulates one thread in a multi-systemic process to address core philosophical developments from “fundamental dynamics of Christian political theology” through the Enlightenment and liberal theology that originated the modern political state. Lilla’s primary thesis seeks response to two primary questions; 1) What developments drove a “return to political theology” and 2) What knowledge can our exploration of these conditions tell us about the fragility of the current state of political life? The text offers a conversation that elucidates upon historical episodes and waves of philosophical thought that for better or worse impact the experimental political positions of the modern west.
The narrative of Part I explores the intersection of politics and religion characterized in a picture of Christian Europe arising within crisis and dogmatic uncertainty that ultimately gives rise to religious wars; ultimately culminating in a break or “Great Separation”. He depicts a break from the past, or previous ways of thinking, but approaches this in an account that focuses on the theological underpinnings specific to Christianity, contrasted with its Judiac roots and Islamic society, that give rise to this particular precarious occurrence. Explorations of the work of philosophical giants elucidate Lilla’s tracing of political theology throughout philosophical thought grappling centrally with Hobbes’ solution that seeks to rationally quell the chaotic potential of religion in the political sphere. Herein a philosophical shift is marked that repositions the questions arising with religion and politics into a human centered investigation with Rousseau and Kant.
Subsequently, this historical narrative develops with special attention to an emerging German context and a rise of liberal theology. Hegel’s work is illuminated herein as a distinct turn in the philosophical conversation surrounding the role of religion and its usefulness in society and closely ties the development of societal ethical life to development of religious moral life. “Hegel attributes religion to an almost vitalistic power, speaking of it as the groundwork of the people’s shared spirit”. Lilla’s shift in focus towards this period of tumultuous history within Part III mirrors shifting thought in a “third wave of modern philosophy of the mind” and characterize a seeming failure to realize the aspirations of the Great Separation and thus, served to catalyze a brand of motivated apocalyptic political theology with martial implications exemplified by Barth and Rosenzweig that contributed to the rise of the National Socialism in the 1930s.
Lilla’s insights are profound in that they address a perspective shared by Rousseau, Kant, Hegel, Barth and Rosenzweig that theological components may be inherent to the human experience (whether through psychology, morality, purpose, and/or conscience) that will continue to influence political discourse in ways that, to Lilla, render our current system “fragile”. Understanding the differences between societies that do not share the history and foundation that Lilla outlines in this text, is one of the more important conversations of our time; as modern western society occupies a unique position of state-church separation that must be guarded from potentially disastrous outcomes for western secular democracy if allowed to take root today.
Though Lilla’s narrative text should be applauded for its functional, philosophical approach to such a complex and relevant topic, any definitive conclusions that may be drawn from it should be considered within a fuller scope of socio-cultural research. Philosophical writings, such as those of Kant and Rousseau, have been read through a lens of usefulness in supporting Lilla’s assertions and not portrayed within a wider context of philosophical thought of a particular historical moment. For instance, each philosopher (along with the prevailing societies wherein their discourses emerge) occupied a Christian subject position influencing their writings. If we are to understand any construct or institution in social life we must consider a bias of our own modern interpretation about what any of these concepts or institutions may mean, the underlying power dynamics in their discourse, and what discipline claims authority to the truth we ground our assumptions on. Lilla privileges the secular institutional knowledge regimes and the claims to validity that enlightenment reason and colonial ideals grant to those perspectives.
Furthermore, Lilla neglects to offer alternative interpretations or embedded considerations of rebuttal of his own work. Narrating history in this way, as the linear march of progress or the evolution towards modernity, neglects a nuanced discontinuous perspective wherein the problematization of religious resurgence into the political arena is rather a multidirectional discursive interplay of unequal power distributions within society. Though he does recognize the unpredictable arrangement of circumstances that gave rise to our current modern political state, the close of Chapter six makes a linear progress assumption evident in Lilla’s reflections on the messianic views that “belonged in the past” and whose “conditions did not exist in the modern state” prior to the neglectful oversight of liberal theologians.
Despite the argument in favor of a renewed commitment to the Great Separation, Lilla neglects to explore the possibilities for political thought wherein a religious component is removed. American “inalienable rights” endowed by our Creator certainly would take a back seat in their claim to moral authority that underscore movements towards human rights and equality. Furthermore, the text neglects exploration of the tumultuous consequences of the atheist state wherein these components are not removed. One can certainly argue that the religious wars of the 16th century were not disproportionately violent or underwritten by an unstable motivating passion that exceeded the tumultuous outcomes of Stalin’s Soviet Union or Mao’s PRC.
Another perplexing disparity emerges when one considers the complexity of the rise of National Socialism in German and other conditions that carry variable and influential motivators beyond the implications of political theology; such as the rise of Communism, failing banks and economic instability in Germany, Adolf Hitler’s charismatic regime and leadership, and failures in the Treaty of Versailles. To attribute the rise of the Nazi’s to one characterization of weak liberal theology is, perhaps, a simplistic perspective.
Despite oversights that would inevitably draw this book into many competing and exhaustive directions, Lilla’s case is strong that modern political thought neglects taking up the religious question in ways that for better or for worse, are the heritage of the modern west. His account does justice to the perilous attempts in philosophy to navigate a “third path” to utilize or neglect the question of God and the unanticipated, or uncontrollable outcomes that arise in that narrative. The strength of Lilla’s argument lies in the exposition of these scholarly works in a way that relates their very dense and abstract nature to a recognizable social process relevant to modern political investigations. One might only ask, how we are to relate our history explored in the Stillborn God to that of Lilla’s “other shore” as tensions grow in modern global relations.
Lilla, M. (2007) The Stillborn God: Religion, Politics, and the Modern West. Knopf.
