Jacques Maritain on political theology
| Author | William McCormick |
| DOI | 10.1177/1474885112471263 |
| Published date | 01 April 2013 |
| Date | 01 April 2013 |
| Subject Matter | Articles |
European Journal of Political Theory
12(2) 175–194
!The Author(s) 2013
Reprints and permissions:
sagepub.co.uk/journalsPermissions.nav
DOI: 10.1177/1474885112471263
ept.sagepub.com
EJPT
Article
Jacques Maritain on political
theology
William McCormick
University of Texas at Austin, USA
Abstract
While ‘political theology’ has attracted widespread attention for decades, it is often
taken to be too fideist for orthodox Christianity and too illiberal for secular politics. But
in the work of Jacques Maritain one finds a defence of a certain political theology, one
whose character is key to grasping Maritain’s justification of another controversial con-
cept: ‘Christian philosophy’. In this study I draw out Maritain’s distinction between
Christian philosophy and theology, paying particular attention to the relevance of
their differences in the realm of practical thought. To illustrate what Maritain has in
mind by these claims, I further consider his intriguing classification of the political works
of Thomas Aquinas. I argue that distinguishing between rival notions of political the-
ology clarifies the opportunities for dialogue between believing and secular citizens.
Keywords
Carl Schmitt, Christian philosophy, Jacques Maritain, political theology, Thomas Aquinas
The rise of Islam as a political problem has had a two-fold effect in the West. On
the one hand, it has awakened our communal identity as a particular culture bound
by tolerance and reason. On the other hand, it has raised questions about the
integrity of that identity, and particularly whether western religion has been ade-
quately reconciled to modern secular rationalism.
1
The first effect was famously
anticipated by Samuel Huntingon in The Clash of Civilizations.
2
Yet the great
objection to that thesis, namely that culture is not destiny, is as pertinent as
ever, for persons can question the norms and mores of their culture. And so
today we question whether the western culture of our time has assayed the
proper relation of religion and politics, and especially whether a religion that
claims to be based upon revealed truths is ‘irrational’ and therefore ‘illiberal’.
This problem emerges most fully in discussions of political theology, or rather in
the lack of discussion. For Carl Schmitt’s name has become a conversation stopper.
Corresponding author:
William McCormick, University of Texas at Austin, Department of Government, 1University Station A1800,
Austin, TX 78712-0119, USA.
Email: wam2@utexas.edu
His critique of liberalism would seem to require a radical reorganization of political
society along theological lines that satisfies no one. Yet political theology has been
a possibility for millennia before Schmitt, and in many other forms.
3
Moreover, the
questions raised by the concept go far beyond debates about secularization,
the relation between early and late modernity, and the collusion of philosophers
in the Nazi regime.
4
Is a political theology necessarily closed to reason? Does it
sacramentalize the state and thereby exclude non-believers from citizenship and
office? And can believing citizens contribute positively to the life of a liberal or
secular polity through that faith?
The specific issue of Schmitt’s political theology occupied the French thinker
Jacques Maritain for only a few paragraphs, yet even a cursory study of those
words reveals that the problems at issue in the nature of political theology are
among the dominant themes of Maritain’s work. To think seriously about political
theology, Maritain argued, requires an examination of the full range of man’s
rationality, and to what if anything higher it is open. His treatment of political
theology thus emerges from a far wider consideration of the inner connections
between philosophy, theology and what he called ‘Christian philosophy’. This
approach clarifies the meaning of political theology and whether it is in fact neces-
sarily irrational and illiberal.
This article proceeds in three steps. First, I consider Maritain’s brief discussion
of Carl Schmitt. I then outline Maritain’s arguments on the distinction between
theology and philosophy, which are the key to differentiating political theology
from what Maritain calls ‘separated philosophy’ and ‘Christian philosophy’. After
briefly considering some helpful criticisms of Maritain’s arguments, I return to the
problem of Carl Schmitt.
Political theology: German and French
In chapter 3 of Integral Humanism, Maritain proposes to discuss the spiritual/
temporal distinction as pivotal to making sense of the modern conditions in
which Christianity finds itself (IH 212). Above all, Christianity must so distinguish
the temporal from the spiritual because the spiritual transcends man:
For the Christian, the true religion is essentially supernatural and, because it is super-
natural, it is not of man, nor of the world, not of a race, nor of a nation, nor of a
civilization, nor of a culture, nor of civilization, nor of culture – it is of the intim-
ate life of God. It transcends every civilization and every culture; it is strictly universal.
(IH 213)
The great challenge of Christian culture, Maritain argues, is to keep what is par-
ticular and accidental to each society open to that which transcends it. For one
thing, no culture can be as universal as the supernatural faith, so it must conform
itself to the faith’s universalism rather than demand that this faith conform itself to
that culture. Yet if conformity to faith is a goal of culture, it is nonetheless a goal
176 European Journal of Political Theory 12(2)
To continue reading
Request your trial