noting that other political thinkers, including Rousseau’s republican influences Machiavelli and Montesquieu, had commented on the political uses of religion (Kelly’s and Master’s notes to Rousseau (1995), 264 n. 130). This admonition should remind us that our interpretations of Rousseau’s civil religion have surely been colored by two-and-a-half centuries of liberal argument that church-state separation is essential to liberty (a position with which I agree). But as a matter of interpretive practice we cannot assume that Rousseau started from this premise, and I believe that he framed the issues very differently in his own mind. Rousseau’s body politic metaphor can help clarify this matter too, albeit only indirectly. Rousseau referred to the body politic a few in his discussion of civil religion, but only in passing. Organic metaphors do not directly constitute the concept: if they did, we would expect Rousseau to refer to civil religion as the medicine of the body politic, or as the sinews which hold it together, or something similar, but nowhere does he do so. On the other hand, as I have argued, Rousseau did think that organic integrity was essential to the health and survival of the political body. The function of civil religion was to maintain the organic unity and integrity of the body politic, preventing its dissolution and death from factional infighting. If we start with this imperative” in mind, then closely follow Rousseau’s argument “unity about civil religion (Bk. IV Ch. VIII of and finally add a bit of historical Du contrat social), context, we can arrive at a reasonable explanation. This section of my interpretation will require many readers to set aside, for analytical purposes, their own mindsets about freedom and religion. Rousseau, in essence, argues that it is of religion and politics that not a separation brings an end to religious factionalism, but a of the two exactly the opposite of the liberal unity – position. In Bk. IV Ch. VIII, he begins by observing that religious wars did not occur under the polytheistic paganism of antiquity (OC 3.460-62; 4.216-17). Rousseau offers varied CW
noting that other political thinkers, including Rousseau’s republican influences Machiavelli and Montesquieu, had commented on the political uses of religion (Kelly’s and Master’s notes to Rousseau (1995), 264 n. 130). This admonition should remind us that our interpretations of Rousseau’s civil religion have surely been colored by two-and-a-half centuries of liberal argument that church-state separation is essential to liberty (a position with which I agree). But as a matter of interpretive practice we cannot assume that Rousseau started from this premise, and I believe that he framed the issues very differently in his own mind. Rousseau’s body politic metaphor can help clarify this matter too, albeit only indirectly. Rousseau referred to the body politic a few in his discussion of civil religion, but only in passing. Organic metaphors do not directly constitute the concept: if they did, we would expect Rousseau to refer to civil religion as the medicine of the body politic, or as the sinews which hold it together, or something similar, but nowhere does he do so. On the other hand, as I have argued, Rousseau did think that organic integrity was essential to the health and survival of the political body. The function of civil religion was to maintain the organic unity and integrity of the body politic, preventing its dissolution and death from factional infighting. If we start with this “unity imperative” in mind, then closely follow Rousseau’s argument about civil religion (Bk. IV Ch. VIII of Du contrat social), and finally add a bit of historical context, we can arrive at a reasonable explanation. This section of my interpretation will require many readers to set aside, for analytical purposes, their own mindsets about freedom and religion. Rousseau, in essence, argues that it is not a separation of religion and politics that brings an end to religious factionalism, but a unity of the two – exactly the opposite of the liberal position. In Bk. IV Ch. VIII, he begins by observing that religious wars did not occur under the polytheistic paganism of antiquity (OC 3.460-62; CW 4.216-17). Rousseau offers varied
Rousseau%20Body%20Politic%20General%20Will.docx