Is Privatization of Faith Possible in Public Leadership Decision Making?

• In Event: Interactive Roundtable Discussions
  In Interactive Roundtable: Public Leadership Interactive Roundtable Discussions

Short Description

Is there such a thing as “privatization of faith” in public leadership? Aquinas, Augustine, Calvin, Luther, Strauss, Gandhi, Confucius and Mencius because of their emphasis on ethics and politics, and others will serve as the context for this discussion.

Detailed Abstract

Long associated with public leadership in Western places, such as the United States, is the belief that the public arena holds no place for one’s involvement of faith as a public leader. McGuire and Spickard (McGuire, 2002) assert that at the macro level in America and Scandinavia there is an “increasing relegation of religion to the private sphere” (p. 287), thus resulting in privatization of faith in public matters. However, one must ask if this is a realistic idea in the sense if one were to explore the root beliefs forming a public leader’s decision and policy making process and actual decision and policy itself, they would find at the heart of those policies a particular ideology, theology, or philosophy; they would find a worldview.

According to Cosgrove (2006), a worldview is a set of “assumptions or beliefs about reality that affect how we think and how we live” (p. 19). Our worldview thus speaks to us in terms of reality, knowledge, human nature, human problems, solutions to these problems, human value, human purpose, ethics, suffering, the meaning of life, and human desire (Gosgrove, 2006). Palmer (2007) further notes that actions are justified through one’s worldview, priorities and values are determined, the meaning of events are assessed, and relationships to God and others are explained. He states that everyone has a worldview, and explains that a worldview consists of the elements: ideology, narrative, norms, practices, experience, and a social dimension or element (Palmer, 2007). In other words, public leaders inevitably have a particular worldview that informs their decision making. To make decisions against this worldview, against what one knows to be true, can jeopardize one’s conscience and integrity with what one believes to be true. It does not mean that a particular worldview is reality in the face of truth, only that people make decisions based on these assumptions. However, in exploring worldviews of faith in public leadership, there is an opportunity to utilize those positive aspects of faith to guide decision making in the public sector for the common good, prosperity, freedom, and liberty of its citizens. In other words, it can move societies toward change that results in the above mentioned terminal values that may encourage persons to a collective conscience these values play in human dignity.

While a public affinity, as McGuire and Spickard note, is directed toward limited faith involvement in a public leader’s decision making (McGuire, 2002), in practice it is argued that one’s faith worldview does indeed inform the leader and the direction he or she takes as they carry out their official duties. For example, the mention of “unalienable rights” within the United States’ Declaration of Independence (1776), which inspired the need and development for a constitution, attests to this nuance. This leads one to ask why there is this supposed discrepancy between expressed views and those internalized that drive public decision and policy making. However, to ensure correct understanding of this paper, the role of faith is not to be interpreted as the government establishment of a particular religion, but of the influence that faith has in a leader’s decision making. This discussion may further contribute to understanding virtue based leadership theories such as Bass and Steidlmeier’s (1998) argument of authentic transformational leadership as an ethical leadership style, and Patterson’s (2003) servant leadership theories that incorporate virtue as primary tenants and characteristics of servant leadership because of its relationship to virtue that faith subsumes.

And, as globalization and immigration continue, it may benefit public leaders to better understand the relationship between faith and public leader decision making. Yet, this exploration cannot be undertaken without exploring the historical philosophical and theological perspectives on the role of church (subsuming the notion of faith) and state. In an effort to better understand this relationship, the root causes of this relationship, and as a means for understanding the primary question of this roundtable, this discussion will focus on various Western and Eastern perspectives from Aquinas, Augustine, Calvin, Luther, Washington, Adams, Jefferson, and Strauss in the Western influence, to the Eastern thought of Ganhdi, and Confucius and Mencius because of their emphasis on ethics and politics. These thinkers powerfully influenced ideas on the role of faith for the former or ethics for the latter in relationship to its role and the state. Yet, history reveals that the thoughts of these thinkers cannot be understood out of context. And, to compare their thoughts to today’s context requires caution, noting that our contexts are very different. In an age where strife and faction resulting from this close integration of faith and politics concerns those in many parts of the world, and rightfully so, there might be some principles we can glean as public leaders from these comparisons. Hopefully it will also inspire persons around the globe to better understand how faith informs a public leader’s policy and decision making pursuits. Thus, it is the goal of this roundtable to explore with participants these questions:

1. Why is there a growing secularization and privatization in faith and public leadership?
2. Does faith play a predominant role in leader decision making?
3. Can faith play a positive role in public leadership, such as promoting justice, liberty, and freedom?
4. What does theology and philosophy states of the proper role, looking through the views the above noted thinkers?
5. What are some historical lessons (through cross-national and cultural examples) one may learn from the negative role it can play in public leadership?
6. What does faith mean for public leader today, in particular its role in those virtues underpinning authentic transformational (as expressed through the work of Bass and Steidlmeier) and servant leadership ?

Participant

• Jacqueline A Faulhaber, Johnson University