The 21st century has witnessed the revival of religion’s participation in the public sphere. Jose Casanova aptly described the phenomenon as the “deprivatization of religion” which is a digression from the positivist prediction of religion’s irrelevance after the metaphysical stage. The increasing engagement of religion in matters of politics and public policy has attracted a number of scholars to take interest in the debate or discussion of the same. This has lead, to borrow Jose Casanova’s idea, to an “unexpected public interest derived from the fact that religion leaving its assigned place in the private sphere, had thrust itself into the public arena of moral and political contestation.”2 Speaking on the same thematic interest, Jurgen Habermas, though advancing a practically different thesis on the role of religion in the public sphere nonetheless, acknowledges the value and place of religious discourses in the formation of public discourse.3 He draws insights from Rawls’ liberal view that religious doctrines may be introduced in public political discussion at any time provided that they are presented properly with sufficient political reasons.4 The renowned political philosopher practically suggests therefore that comprehensive religious doctrines may be admitted into public discourse on the condition that they are translated into rational and publicly comprehensible arguments.
ISSN 0118-1521 (Print)
Philippine E-Journals
