Democracy without Christianity?

Democracy in the abstract is never a guaranteed net benefit to society. Minority groups in the Arab world, particularly religious minorities, learned this the hard way during the aftermath of the 2003 U.S.-led invasion of Iraq. It’s a mistake to limit the work of the American founders to raw majoritarian democracy. Rather, the ordered liberty they sought to uphold relied on metaphysical foundations and the Western world’s Judeo-Christian social precepts.

But in a recent piece at Christianity Today, Paul D. Miller argues that democracy doesn’t need a cultural Christian majority. It’s true that a democratic society might not need a Christian majority. But liberal democracies all over the world exist because of the Christianization that occurred through European colonization and imperialism. Miller lists South Pacific and African states as examples of non-Christian societies that have functional democracies, apparently unaware that much of the South Pacific was Christianized through American, British, and French missionaries. Botswana, one of the supposedly non-Christian countries or what he ambiguously calls “new Christian societies,” is 80 percent Christian. Even the “new Christian” language is specious when we consider that Roman Catholic missionaries have been active in Asia and Africa since the 1500s. Japan’s government, although never Christian officially, was heavily influenced by Christian commitments to liberal democracy during the Meiji Era (Japan has had more Roman Catholic prime ministers than the United States has had Catholic presidents). While Miller’s assertion is well intentioned and understandable given the unusual populist syncretism between religion and politics among revivalist groups, his conclusion is ultimately shortsighted and deals with the wrong question.

About the Author

Miles Smith IV

Miles Smith IV is a professor in the history department at Hillsdale College.

Featured Tags

Franklin Delano Roosevelt

Constitutional Government

Democracy in the abstract is never a guaranteed net benefit to society. Minority groups in the Arab world, particularly religious minorities, learned this the hard way during the aftermath of the 2003 U.S.-led invasion of Iraq. It’s a mistake to limit the work of the American founders to raw majoritarian democracy. Rather, the ordered liberty they sought to uphold relied on metaphysical foundations and the Western world’s Judeo-Christian social precepts.

But in a recent piece at Christianity Today, Paul D. Miller argues that democracy doesn’t need a cultural Christian majority. It’s true that a democratic society might not need a Christian majority. But liberal democracies all over the world exist because of the Christianization that occurred through European colonization and imperialism. Miller lists South Pacific and African states as examples of non-Christian societies that have functional democracies, apparently unaware that much of the South Pacific was Christianized through American, British, and French missionaries. Botswana, one of the supposedly non-Christian countries or what he ambiguously calls “new Christian societies,” is 80 percent Christian. Even the “new Christian” language is specious when we consider that Roman Catholic missionaries have been active in Asia and Africa since the 1500s. Japan’s government, although never Christian officially, was heavily influenced by Christian commitments to liberal democracy during the Meiji Era (Japan has had more Roman Catholic prime ministers than the United States has had Catholic presidents). While Miller’s assertion is well intentioned and understandable given the unusual populist syncretism between religion and politics among revivalist groups, his conclusion is ultimately shortsighted and deals with the wrong question.