New Claimants to Religious Tolerance and Protection

Abstract

Introduction In The Myth of the Judeo-Christian Tradition, Arthur A. Cohen questions the notion that a "Judeo-Christian" tradition even exists, and suggests that it is an invention of twentieth century American politics spawned by efforts to form a cultural consensus and, in the process, homogenize religious identification and promote interfaith harmony. The conception of such a tradition is, in Cohen's words, " ... mythological or, rather, not precisely mythological but ideological and hence, as in all ideologies, shot through with falsification, distortion, and untruth." A political use of the term "Judeo-Christian" has gained particular currency in the latter part of the twentieth century as reliance on certain religious values, symbols and rhetoric in public discourse has both generated and reflected popular approval, the ideal of separation of church and state not withstanding. Common assumptions about the place of religion and morality in public life are being reevaluated. In an era of greater conformity and consensus-building, ushered in by a general swing toward conservatism in North American politics, an effort is being made to resurrect a shared set of traditional beliefs and values thought once to be the backbone of American and Canadian life. Instead of celebrating diversity and pluralism in North America, the emphasis has been placed on the merits of unity and a shared sense of ethics. Conservatives are engaged in an effort to redefine American values and beliefs and ameliorate what they see as deplorable conditions precipitated by the liberalism, secularity and moral relativism of the 1960s. This corrective impulse is proving to be an important factor in reshaping both the religious and political scene. It is in this context that the meaning of difference has been obscured. A commitment to pluralism has been an important part of the heritage of North American societies, especially Canada, since their inception and yet what is meant by reference to the "Judeo-Christian" tradition remains ambiguous. Rather than promoting interfaith harmony, the current use of the concept functions to exclude those who are judged to deviate from the social and cultural norm or to be nonbelievers, i.e., persons conceived to be a threat to the bedrock values of America. Observers of the North American religious scene have noted that religion is used as a means of negotiating one's place in society and establishing identity. Public figures appeal to our sense of national identity and patriotism by talking about the United States as a 'judeoChristian nation," which, in effect, serves to exclude other religious groups (such as Muslims) and nonreligious groups from the mainstream of American sociery. What is implied by reference to "Judeo-Christian" is even narrowerthose who actually mean to promote an exclusively Christian America6 use it to signify the defense of purportedly Christian-cum-American values and life-style from the inroads of secular humanism. President Reagan, in his 1983 speech to the National Association of Evangelicals in Orlando. Florida, ...