Tony Blair on Faith & Justice

New York has a great piece in this past week’s issue about Tony Blair’s faith work following his departure from British politics.

The article goes some way in drawing what I see as the distinction between religious progressives and religious fundamentalists:

“I would identify three aspects to faith when we talk about it as an objective force,” [Blair] says. “One is that faith can become a means of self-identity: This defines my culture; this defines my political attitude.” One can intuitively understand this statement in the context of wars with religious components: I’m Sunni, and you’re Shia; I’m Catholic, and you’re Protestant.

“A second aspect,” he says, “is that it’s just part of my tradition: ‘I grew up in a certain type of society that was defined by my faith.’” My father’s father’s father practiced this faith, in other words, and that’s why I’m a Catholic/Hindu/Jew.

“And then there is a third way,” he says, “faith as spiritual awakening: faith as it defines my values and beliefs, not in a cultural sense but in a personal sense.”

And this final aspect of faith, if you think about it, best describes Tony Blair’s. His faith is personally and deeply felt, something he’s studied and thought hard about, something that’s quietly animated his life choices and provided a code of values to live by. The second aspect doesn’t describe him—he hardly had a faith tradition in his family if his father was an atheist—nor does the first: Faith couldn’t have distinguished his political identity if he couldn’t even talk about it when he was in politics.

George W. Bush may also experience faith as spiritual, a force that defines his values and beliefs. We should grant him that. But faith absolutely distinguishes him politically. Though he may never have said outright that he’s the leader of a Christian nation, he reportedly told Palestinian leaders that he believed God told him to end the tyranny in Iraq, and he has described, now infamously, the war on terror as “a crusade.”

“I call it ‘thick’ and ‘thin’ religion,” says Miroslav Volf, Blair’s co-teacher at Yale this past semester. “‘Thin’ is a cultural resource that provides a canopy over who we are, and it functions to legitimize, to sacralize, what we would have done in any case. Whereas a ‘thick’ religiosity has commitment, a sense of values, a sense of historical depth. And my theory,” he says, “is that when you have a thinning out of religion, it’s more likely to promote violence.”

I very much like Volf’s characterization: “To sacralize what we would have done in any case.” It immediately brought to mind the religious Zionist movement’s use of Torah to justify the most reprehensible actions of the settler movement.

I just worry that it can be tossed back in the other direction, being all too-familiar with the argument that progressive Jews likewise distort Torah to suit their own agenda.

Anyhow, read the full article here, and no, don’t worry, Blair does not get a pass for his support of the Iraq War.

You can also listen to and watch segments of Blair’s provoking Yale seminar, “Faith & Globalization,” here.

Tags: iraq, politics, religion, spirituality, tony blair, War