Religion: The Moral Foundation of Legitimacy

The intractable anarchy in Somalia is representative of the primal conflict permeating much of the Third World. One strategist has suggested that religion may be the only antidote for anarchy:

The key to a positive future in the Third World would be the rise and rapid spread of an alternative value framework and politico-economic system stressing population control, ecological sanity, intergroup cooperation, and deference to authority.

If religion is a cure for anarchy, it is a cure that can be worse than the disease. Fundamentalist religion has historically been a threat to democracy, human rights, and the rule of law. This chapter began with the ancient role of religion and war and has concluded on the same subject, but with a different twist: the idea that religion provides not only the motivation for violence (holy war), but, as the moral foundation of legitimacy, religion also provides the best hope for a lasting peace.

Vaclav Haval, who as president of the Czech Republic has personally experienced the violence of runaway self-determinism, was in Philadelphia to celebrate democracy and receive the Liberty Medal on the Fourth of July, 1994. He spoke of the need for religion in a 'disconnected, chaotic and confusing world', describing it as a 'forgotten awareness' that must be related to human rights:

This forgotten awareness is encoded in all religions. All cultures anticipate it in various forms. It is one of the things that form the basis of man's understanding of himself, of his place in the world, and ultimately of the world as such...

No American leader had a better understanding of the moral dimension of legitimacy than Thomas Jefferson. As the author of the Declaration of Independence and the First Amendment to the Constitution, Jefferson exemplified the importance of religious faith to the integrity and selfless service needed by all public leaders; but he also understood that the volatile mix of religion and politics required a separation between church and state to preserve religious and political freedom.

Jefferson's understanding of the moral dimension of legitimacy is preserved in a book he prepared for his personal use entitled The Morals of Jesus. It was distilled from the teachings of Jesus which Jefferson considered '... the sublimest morality that has ever been taught'. But while Jefferson embraced the teachings of Jesus as a moral code, he detested the way the church had converted these teachings into religious doctrine as '... corruptions of it which have been invested by priestcraft and kingcraft'.⁵²

Jesus taught the moral imperatives of agape (love) which are at the core of the great religions of the world: Judaism and Islam as well as Christianity. These moral teachings can be summarized in the golden rule: do unto others as you would have them do unto you. Biblical scholars disagree over whether this saying originated with Jesus or his contemporary, Rabbi Hillel. All would agree that it is more than a Judeo-Christian concept: it is a universal moral principle upon which altruistic adherents of all the world's religions can agree. And finding common ground among these often contentious religions is imperative to living together in peace.

The golden rule is at the foundation of the Just War Tradition and the Constitution; and as such is part of the spirit of our laws.

Fear generates hate, hate provokes counterhate, which in turn creates more fear - until fear and hate both explode into war, in our time truly the war to end all war, for there will be no one left capable of fighting World War IV.⁵³

Thomas Jefferson's legacy for legitimacy was a universal moral code based on the teachings of Jesus and a rule of law that would protect human rights from religious intolerance. At the same time he understood that intolerant and coercive religions were the enemy of democracy, human rights, and the rule of law.

Karl Marx once referred to religion as the opiate of the masses. That it is, but it is the kind of sedative required if order is to be restored from the chaos of primal conflict and anarchy. Military forces are no exception; to accomplish their missions in such unforgiving environments they must be sustained by faith⁵⁴ as well as professional competence and diplomacy. To promote effectively democracy, human rights, and the rule of law in such environments, US personnel must treat others as they would expect to be treated - such is the spirit of the law and of military legitimacy.⁵⁵