Opinion – Why We Should Abandon Christian Realism |
A basic starting point for the combination of Christianity and IR’s theory of realism must be that Christianity has influenced realism, or that they share some fundamental assumptions about the world, so much so that a combination is justified. We refer here to what can be considered Christian based on biblical scripture, exegesis, and revelation, and its combination with the specific IR theory of classical realism, as opposed to other theoretical branches of IR realism. In recent years, a renewed interest for Christian realism and its core scholars can be observed (Polinder 2024; Moore 2020; Troy 2018). We also see how the powers that be, from Trump to Putin, use the church for their worldly purposes. There is thus a need for an analysis of what Christian realism means. This article will try to make sense of this theoretical combination and identify core commonalities and shared assumptions – but argue that Christian realism rests on unstable foundations as what separates Christianity from realism seems to be greater than what warrants a combination. Besides, the theoretical insights that Christian realism offers are not so different from classical realism that it justifies a new moniker.
The strongest theoretical connection between Christianity and classical realism lies in moral imperfection. Classical realism refers to the problem of human nature (Morgenthau 1946, 1948), and Christianity refers to sin as the fundamental problem of man. Human nature is self-interested and power-seeking vices such as covetousness, hubris, vainity, and recklessness push human beings and states into reoccurring conflict and strife, war and misery. There are further commonalities in the cyclical understanding of how political kingdoms, or great powers, rise and decline through wars, and how they impose transient hegemonic rule over their subjects – from Egypt to Babylon and Rome, from Russia to the United Kingdom and the United States. Utopian schemes of various kinds have been implemented but they invariably fall short due to moral decay and unrighteousness. First-order sin thus aggregates and becomes second-order “social sin” (Niebuhr 2013).
Another reflection offers further similarities between the utopian skepticism prominent among classical realist thinkers and the truth that Jesus speaks to power. The example of Jesus forgiving a woman taken in adultery illustrates what I mean. Let us start with the text:
The teachers of the law and the Pharisees brought in a woman caught in adultery. They made her stand before the group and said to Jesus, ‘Teacher, this woman was caught in the act of adultery. In the Law, Moses commanded us to stone such women. Now what do you say?’… Jesus bent down and started to write on the ground with his finger. When they kept on questioning him, he straightened up and said to them, ‘Let any one of you who is without sin be the first to throw a stone at her.’… At this, those who heard began to go away one at a time, the older ones first, until only Jesus was left, with the woman still standing there (John 8:3-9).
The teachers of the law and the Pharisees brought in a woman caught in adultery. They made her stand before the group and said to Jesus, ‘Teacher, this woman was caught in the act of adultery. In the Law, Moses commanded us to stone such women. Now what do you say?’… Jesus bent down and started to write on the ground with his finger. When they kept on questioning him, he straightened up and said to them, ‘Let any one of you who is without sin be the first to throw a stone at her.’… At this, those who heard began to go away one at a time, the older ones first, until only Jesus was left, with the woman still standing there (John 8:3-9).
If we look at the intricacies of the biblical pericope, it is revealed that it is hard, if not impossible, to implement a utopian order without turning against your own principles (here exemplified by adultery vs murder, 6th vs 5th commandment). Neither would a utopian project be able to transcend power, as the necessity of force will always be........