Thank you for this interview. As a Duke MPP student a decade-ish ago, unfortunately I didn’t get to audit a class with him. However, a Div school friend of mine at the time had me read Resident Aliens. It was a transformative vantage point for the policy world I live/work in.
Thanks, John. Hauerwas always worth listening to. But his admission that 6 January made him more committed to the rule of law than before is kind of telling of a significant blindspot in his political thinking. Wasn't there abundant, overwhelming evidence, pretty much everywhere in the world not least the USA, of the indispensability of the rule of law as a non-negotiable minimum benchmark of
a stable and just society (however imperfect its practice) long before this? I'll keep reading him anyway!
Hi Jonathan, thanks for reading! Yes, I think you're right. I take it that "rule of law" in the context of our exchange is a shorthand for "relying on a legal system that requires the threat or use of violence." It's not that he wasn't previously aware of it but perhaps that the events of January 6th made him think more directly about it. (The broader question of his relationship to the law--and particularly the violence of the law--has long intrigued me, which is what motivated the symposium I mentioned in my post.)
I've been frustrated by what I perceived as Hauerwas' influence on practical political theology over the years (put very simply as a kind of withdrawal from political life). This interview suggests that he's been misinterpreted. "Endurance" is not withdrawal but rather a particular kind of connection that is powerful in its own way.
Thanks for this comment! I think the withdrawal argument misreads Hauerwas, and I think you're right to highlight the significance of "endurance." (There's a similar argument to be made about the "resident" part of his "resident aliens" book title.) That said, Hauerwas isn't always entirely clear on this point. I think the most sophisticated and charitable critique is Jeff Stout's chapter on Hauerwas in Democracy and Tradition. And I think (if I'm remembering correctly), Hauerwas responds to that critique at the end of Performing the Faith.
Prof Inazu, I loved this (what I could understand) and I love Hauerwas. Resident Aliens is one of my all-time favorite books and articulates what I believe the church should be in the world.
Thank you for this interview. As a Duke MPP student a decade-ish ago, unfortunately I didn’t get to audit a class with him. However, a Div school friend of mine at the time had me read Resident Aliens. It was a transformative vantage point for the policy world I live/work in.
Thanks, John. Hauerwas always worth listening to. But his admission that 6 January made him more committed to the rule of law than before is kind of telling of a significant blindspot in his political thinking. Wasn't there abundant, overwhelming evidence, pretty much everywhere in the world not least the USA, of the indispensability of the rule of law as a non-negotiable minimum benchmark of
a stable and just society (however imperfect its practice) long before this? I'll keep reading him anyway!
Hi Jonathan, thanks for reading! Yes, I think you're right. I take it that "rule of law" in the context of our exchange is a shorthand for "relying on a legal system that requires the threat or use of violence." It's not that he wasn't previously aware of it but perhaps that the events of January 6th made him think more directly about it. (The broader question of his relationship to the law--and particularly the violence of the law--has long intrigued me, which is what motivated the symposium I mentioned in my post.)
I've been frustrated by what I perceived as Hauerwas' influence on practical political theology over the years (put very simply as a kind of withdrawal from political life). This interview suggests that he's been misinterpreted. "Endurance" is not withdrawal but rather a particular kind of connection that is powerful in its own way.
Thanks for this comment! I think the withdrawal argument misreads Hauerwas, and I think you're right to highlight the significance of "endurance." (There's a similar argument to be made about the "resident" part of his "resident aliens" book title.) That said, Hauerwas isn't always entirely clear on this point. I think the most sophisticated and charitable critique is Jeff Stout's chapter on Hauerwas in Democracy and Tradition. And I think (if I'm remembering correctly), Hauerwas responds to that critique at the end of Performing the Faith.
Prof Inazu, I loved this (what I could understand) and I love Hauerwas. Resident Aliens is one of my all-time favorite books and articulates what I believe the church should be in the world.
Great post!