A strange distinction: Religion and civic life since Martin Luther King Jr

Martin Luther King Jr. is an American civil saint whose his life and work blended religion into his civic engagement. Yet prominent political theorists and religious ethicists writing since the Civil Rights Movement fail to make a place for King's type of activism. Drawing heavily upon King's "Letter from Birmingham City Jail," this dissertation problematizes the work of several religious and political thinkers by contrasting their theoretical work with King's life and work.;John Rawls is the most influential post-Civil Rights Movement liberal and his theoretical work draws a stark line between religion and politics. Rawls assumes that this division is necessary for the preservation of democracy and he demands that religious people re-frame their political ideas using nonreligious language. This dissertation shows that Rawls's work would effectively exclude King even though King's movement resulted in a massive expansion of democracy. It turns next to Stephen L. Carter's criticism of such exclusion of religious in the name of democracy and Richard Rorty defense of it.;It is hard to overestimate the influence of Stanley Hauerwas on American religious ethics in the era since Martin Luther King. This dissertation also shows that Hauerwas presumes that Rawls is right, that democracy requires religious language be translated in to nonreligious language. Hauerwas is simply unwilling to sacrifice fidelity for the sake of democracy. Christians, he suggests, should opt out of civic life rather than translate their ideas.;Finally, this dissertation shows that Jeffrey Stout's pragmatism as outlined in his book Democracy and Tradition is a vast improvement over Rawls, Rorty and Hauerwas. Stout engages each of those thinkers while remembering the witness of Martin Luther King Jr. Despite his significant improvement, Stout still maintains, though in a weakened form, a distinction between sacred life and secular life. King, in "Letter from Birmingham City Jail," called this "a strange distinction." This dissertation argues for further opening up democratic discourse to a wider variety of religious voices.