Free & Open to the Public
RSVP: [email protected], (212) 636-7347
In the post-9/11 world, where boundaries between faith and global politics are fluid, religion is often criticized for stoking extremism and underwriting violence. But can the enmeshed relationship between faith and politics also be the starting point for a new era in peacebuilding and conflict resolution?
How can religious leaders and foreign policy makers work together to lay the foundations for peace in hotspots around the globe? Join us for a forum on the intersection where secular politics and the world’s faith traditions meet.
R. Scott Appleby, Marilyn Keough Dean of the Keough School of Global Affairs, University of Notre Dame
Shaun Casey, Special Advisor for Faith-Based and Community Initiatives, U.S. State Department
Robin Wright, journalist, foreign policy analyst and author of Rock the Casbah: Rage and Rebellion across the Islamic World
Eliza Griswold, author of The Tenth Parallel: Dispatches from the Fault Line between Islam and Christianity
Although the political scene was very different in 1960 than it is now, the panel agreed that the issue of how much religious faith should be a part of the job of president of the United States is very much alive in the current presidential race.
“Credit it or decry it, religion seems to be doing a lot of things, but disappearing doesn’t seem to be one of them,” moderator Peter Quinn said in his opening remarks.
The panel agreed that the question that JFK had to refute — Would his faith unduly influence his decisions? — has become practically passé. Republican presidential hopeful Mitt Romney, for example, took the opposite tact, saying in a recent speech that his faith would be the bedrock of the morality guiding his decisions. Panelist J. Bryan Hehir, the Parker Gilbert Montgomery professor of the practice of religion and public life at the Kennedy School of Government at Harvard University said that today voters are more interested in leaders’ personal faith.
“Kennedy’s argument, however you interpret it, was that religious choice is private,” he said. “Today people demand some explicit articulation of a relationship of a person’s personal conviction and their public stances. Whether you like Romney’s speech or not, that’s what he tried to do.”
]]>