We, the Enemy
The Liberal State & the Decline of Pluralism
The modern idea of religious liberty assumes that it is the state above all that threatens such freedom—by establishing a state church or hampering the free practice of religion—and that the modern liberal state, in proclaiming its studied neutrality, its distance from religion altogether, is the ultimate protector of such liberty.
How deeply the liberal state is really committed to genuine religious liberty—at what point “neutrality” becomes hostility—is an open question. But genuine liberty also depends on “civil society”—communities and institutions that exist independent of, and in many ways prior to, the state.
Thus, it has long been realized that laws prohibiting racial discrimination are not sufficient—people do not truly exercise their rights in a society where popular attitudes and social institutions remain hostile.
A Herd of Independent Minds
Although “pluralism” is ritualistically extolled as a fundamental good, in reality there is less and less real pluralism in modern liberal society. While all points of view are supposedly welcomed, it usually turns out that only one point of view is finally accorded legitimacy. What George Orwell called “the herd of independent minds” all quickly come to agree on issues as diverse as embryonic stem-cell research, smoking, homosexuality, health care, and foreign policy.
Even state universities are essentially institutions of civil society rather than of the government, since state legislatures exercise only very limited control over them. Liberalism has become an orthodoxy that is enforced partly by the government but primarily through schools, charitable agencies, philanthropic foundations, professional societies, and even groups like the Girl Scouts.
But it is above all the communications media that are tirelessly alert to deviations from that orthodoxy. Thus, the ongoing story of American religion is almost always told in accord with a particular “master narrative”—open-minded liberals struggling to persuade their various churches to adjust to modernity, with those who resist such accommodation portrayed as unenlightened, possibly stupid, often malicious.
For the most part quite consciously, enlightened opinion, especially as established in the media and the universities, seeks to inhibit freedom of religion, not (principally) by legal restraint but by exacting a heavy social cost from believers—a strong sense of social isolation and inferiority.
This exists on all levels. Children realize that somehow the reality of God cannot be acknowledged in their schools, that religious belief is treated as some mysteriously sinister subject. The entertainment industry mocks traditional moral values, and the news media treat orthodox religion as a menacing atavism. Although sleeplessly vigilant against all kinds of stereotyping—racism, sexism, ageism, anti-Semitism, homophobia, Islamophobia—enlightened opinion fails to notice the most outrageous anti-Christian bigotry, when it does not openly embrace it.
Flourishing in Adversity
The irony of all this is encapsulated in the famous remark of sociologist Peter Berger, “If India is the most religious nation in the world and Sweden the most secular, the United States is a nation of Indians ruled by Swedes.” Perhaps never in history has a people lived under a ruling cultural regime so completely at odds with popular values. The regnant liberal jurisprudence openly holds that the people cannot be left to themselves on many questions but must be repeatedly corrected by enlightened judges.
That orthodox religion and traditional morality (the pro-life movement, notably) remain vital under these conditions is the strongest possible testimony to the authenticity of both, which, in the true Christian way, flourish in the face of adversity. Every day, believers are required to find yet more courage and stamina to maintain the rights that make it possible for them to do their duty.
—James Hitchcock, for the editors
James Hitchcock is Professor emeritus of History at St. Louis University in St. Louis. He and his late wife Helen have four daughters. His most recent book is the two-volume work, The Supreme Court and Religion in American Life (Princeton University Press, 2004). He is a senior editor of Touchstone.
A Journal of Mere Christianity—Delivered to Your Door
- Essays on theology, culture, and the Church
- Contributors from across the Christian traditions
Six print issues (one year) of Touchstone, plus full online access and PDF downloads for only $39.95.
Get a one-year full-access subscription to the Touchstone online archives for only $19.95.
bulk subscriptions
Order Touchstone subscriptions in bulk and save $10 per sub! Each subscription includes 6 issues of Touchstone plus full online access to touchstonemag.com—including archives, videos, and pdf downloads of recent issues for only $29.95 each! Great for churches or study groups.
Transactions will be processed on a secure server.
more from the online archives
25.6—Nov/Dec 2012
The Loss of Aristotelian Logic & the Social, Moral & Sexual Consequences by Peter Kreeft
32.5—September/October 2019
Some Trivial Thoughts on the Study of Philosophy by Graeme Hunter
calling all readers
Please Donate
"There are magazines worth reading but few worth saving . . . Touchstone is just such a magazine."
—Alice von Hildebrand
"Here we do not concede one square millimeter of territory to falsehood, folly, contemporary sentimentality, or fashion. We speak the truth, and let God be our judge. . . . Touchstone is the one committedly Christian conservative journal."
—Anthony Esolen, Touchstone senior editor
