"The Missionary Roots of Liberal Democracy" by Robert D. Woodberry

 Robert D. Woodberry has written a fascinating research essay entitled "The Missionary Roots of Liberal Democracy."

Here is the abstract of the paper:

This article demonstrates historically and statistically that conversionary Protestants (CPs) heavily influenced the rise and spread of stable democracy around the world. It argues that CPs were a crucial catalyst initiating the development and spread of religious liberty, mass education, mass printing, newspapers, voluntary organizations, and colonial reforms, thereby creating the conditions that made stable democracy more likely. Statistically, the historic prevalence of Protestant missionaries explains about half the variation in democracy in Africa, Asia, Latin America and Oceania and removes the impact of most variables that dominate current statistical research about democracy. The association between Protestant missions and democracy is consistent in different continents and subsamples, and it is robust to more than 50 controls and to instrumental variable analyses.

I put the following notes together for a talk based on Woodberry's paper.  It has a number of quotations from the essay.

________________ 

·     Article: “The Missionary Roots of Liberal Democracy” by Robert D. Woodberry in American Political Science Reviewvol. 106, no. 2 (May 2012), 244-274.[1]

 

·     Purpose of the article: explain the influence of religion—particularly a specific kind of Protestant Christianity—on the development of democracy around the world

 

o   “Most theories about democracies emphasize the material interests of different social classes and either ignore or minimize the role of cultural and religious interests.” (p. 244)

 

o   “More broadly, this article challenges many aspects of traditional modernization theory (i.e., that liberal democracy and other social transformations traditionally associated with “modernity” developed primarily as the result of secular rationality, economic development, urbanization, industrialization, the expansion of the state, and the development of new class structures). Although all these elements may matter, they are not the only causes. Moreover, those “causes” must be explained. I argue that Western modernity, in its current form, is profoundly shaped by religious factors, and although many aspects of this “modernity” have been replicated in countries around the world, religion shaped what spread, where it spread, how it spread, and how it adapted to new contexts.” (p. 244)

 

·     The kind of religious groups that were most influential

 

o   “In particular, conversionary Protestants (CPs) were a crucial catalyst initiating the development and spread of religious liberty, mass education, mass printing, newspapers, voluntary organizations, most colonial reforms, and the codification of legal protections for nonwhites in the nineteenth and early twentieth centuries.  These innovations fostered conditions that made stable representative democracy more likely—regardless of whether many people converted to Protestantism.  Moreover, religious beliefs motivated most of these transformations.” (pp. 244-245)

 

o   Woodberry adds a note about the definition of “CPs”:

 

§ “Conversionary Protestants(1) actively attempt to persuade others of their beliefs, (2) emphasize lay vernacular Bible reading, and (3) believe that grace/faith/choice saves people, not group membership or sacraments.  CPs are not necessarily orthodox or conservative.” (p. 244)

 

·     “The Origin of Democratic Theory and Institutions” (p. 248)

 

o   “Those who doubt the religious roots of democracy typically overemphasize its Athenian, Enlightenment, and Deist roots.” (p. 248)

 

o   Athenian roots—cautions

 

§ “Modern democracy differs greatly from Athenian democracy” (p. 248)

 

·     “Athenian democracy was direct, limited to the elite hereditary Athenian families, excluded more than 80% of Athenians, never expanded to Athenian-controlled territories, and was unstable.  Modern democracy has elected representatives, separation of powers, constitutions, ‘natural’ rights, legal equality, and broad citizenship and has often been very stable.” (p. 248)

 

·     “Greek classics were most consistently available in the Eastern Mediterranean and the Muslim world, but democracy did not thrive there; the Roman Empire circled the Mediterranean, and the Renaissance flourished in Southern Europe, but democracy did not thrive in those places either.  The ‘Athenian seed’ germinated only after 2,100 years in alien soil: Northwest Europe and North America.” (p. 248)

 

o   Enlightenment roots—based in religious precedents

 

§ “Enlightenment theorists incorporated many legal and institutional innovations from earlier religious movements (Berman 1983; Nelson 2010; Waldron 2002; Witte 2007). In fact, arguments for political pluralism, electoral reform, and limitations of state power were originally framed in religious terms (Bradley and Van Kley 2001; Clarke 1994; Ihalainen 1999; Lutz 1988; 1992; Nelson 2010; Witte and Alexander 2008).  For example, Calvinists tried to reconstruct states along “godly” lines and limit sinful human institutions. Perhaps as a result, most Enlightenment democratic theorists came from Calvinist families or had a Calvinist education, even if they were either not theologically orthodox or personally religious (e.g., John Locke, Rousseau, Hugo Grotius, Benjamin Franklin, John Adams, Patrick Henry, James Madison, and Alexander Hamilton),⁹ and they secularized ideas previously articulated by Calvinist theologians and jurists (Hutson 1998; Lutz 1980; 1988; Nelson 2010; Witte 2007).¹⁰ For example, Hobbes’ and Locke’s social contracts are secular versions of Puritan and Nonconformist covenants, and Locke’s ideas about the equality of all people are explicitly religious (Waldron 2002;Woodberry and Shah 2004).

 

“Although stated in secular form, the U.S. Constitution and Bill of Rights derive most directly from earlier colonial covenants, compacts, and bills of rights that were generally justified explicitly in biblical and

theological terms; many were written before Hobbes and Locke expounded their ideas. Only 7 of the 27 rights enumerated in the U.S. Bill of Rights can be traced to major English common law documents (Lutz 1980; 1988; 1992; Witte 2007). Even between 1760 and 1805, political writings quoted the Bible more often than either Enlightenment or classical thinkers (34% versus 22% and 9%, respectively; Lutz 1984).” (p. 248)

⁹ Montesquieu had a Calvinist wife and based many of his arguments on Puritan rule in England.

¹⁰For example, natural rights, the social contract, separation of powers and freedom of expression and association: “Every one of the guarantees in the 1791 [U.S.] Bill of Rights had already been formulated in the prior two centuries by Calvinist theologians and jurists” (Witte 2007, 31).

 

o   “Thus modern democratic theory and institutions area confluence of streams, not a uniquely Athenian or Enlightenment creation. Although Enlightenment and Greek thought were important, they are not a sufficient explanation for liberal democracy. Religious ideas, institutions, conflicts, and social bridging were also important. In summary, the ideas that shaped the first successful democratic movements were heavily influenced by Protestantism, not just by “secular” classical and Enlightenment thought. Moreover, ideas are not enough. Without conditions that dispersed power beyond a small elite and prevented life-and-death struggles between secular and religious forces, democracy did not last. In the next subsections I discuss how CPs fostered greater separation between church and state, dispersed power, and helped create conditions under which stable democratic transitions were more likely to occur.” (p. 249)

 

·      Key areas Woodberry documents the conditions CPs promoted that help foster democracy

 

o   Printing, Newspapers, and Public Sphere 

o   Education

o   Civil Society

o   Colonial Transformation

 

·      Printing, Newspapers, and Public Sphere

 

o   “One mechanism through which CPs dispersed power was massively expanding access to printed material and news. Scholars often claim that printing and capitalism birthed the public sphere and that the public sphere in turn enabled democracy (Habermas 1989; Zaret 2000). CPs greatly accelerated the development of mass printing, newspapers, and the public sphere or several reasons. First, CPs changed people’s ideas about who books were for. According to CPs, everyone needed access to “God’s word”— not just elites. Therefore, everyone  needed to read, including women and the poor. Moreover, books had to be inexpensive and in language that was accessible to ordinary people, not in foreign languages or classical versions of local languages. Second, CPs expected lay people to make their own religious choices. They believed people are saved not through sacraments or group membership but by “true faith in God”; thus, each individual had to decide which faith to follow. CPs used printed material to try to convert people, which forced other groups to use such materials to compete for ordinary people’s allegiance. This competition helped give rise to mass printing.” (p. 249)

 

o   “In the West, the development of CP movements also predicted many of the major advancements in the quantity and techniques of printing. For example, CP Bible and tract societies helped spark a nineteenth century printing explosion. Their drive to print mass quantities of inexpensive texts preceded  major technological innovations and helped spur technological and organizational transformations in printing, binding, and distribution that created markets and facilitated later adoption by commercial printers (Bayly

2004, 357; Bradley 2006, 38–39; Brown 2004; Howsam1991; Nord 2004).” (p. 249)

 

·      Education

 

o   “Another mechanism through which CPs dispersed power was through spreading mass education. Much statistical research suggests that formal education increases both the level of democracy and the stability of democratic transitions (Barro 1999; Bollen 1979; Gasiorowski and Power 1998).19  

 

“CPs catalyzed the rise of mass education all around the world. CPs advocated mass literacy so that everyone could read the Bible and interpret it competently. Their attempt to convert people through education threatened other elites and spurred these elites to also invest in mass education.” (p. 251)

 

·      Civil Society

 

o   “CPs also dispersed power by developing and spreading            new organizational forms and protest tactics that allowed non-elites, early nationalists, and anticolonial activists to organize nonviolent political protests and, in British colonies, form political parties prior to independence.  Many scholars argue that this type of organizational civil society helps foster democracy (Fung 2003; Putnam 1993).” (p. 252)

 

·      Colonial Transformation

 

o   “CPs also dispersed power by publicizing colonial abuses, advocating for changes in colonial policy, and transferring ideas, skills, and networks that helped colonized people organize anticolonial and nationalist movements. Some scholars suggest that British colonialism fostered democracy, but this may be because CPs had greater influence in British colonies. CPs forced the British to allow religious liberty, but were not able to do this in historically Catholic regions. Religious liberty increased the flow of Protestant missionaries to British colonies, heightened competition between religious groups, and freed missionaries from direct state control. Missionaries were then better able to limit colonial abuses and spur mass printing, mass education, and organizational civil society. Religious liberty also made it easier for local people to organize early nonviolent anticolonial and nationalist organizations.” (p. 253-254)

 

o   “In British and American colonies, religious liberty and private mission financing weakened officials’ ability to punish missionaries and freed missionaries to critique abuses, while popular support allowed missionaries to punish colonial officials and settlers. For example, colonial magistrates and governors were reprimanded or removed, military officials were put on trial for murder, confiscated land was returned to indigenous people, and so on. Thus, Protestant missionaries spurred immediate abolitionism, as well as movements to protect indigenous land rights, prevent forced labor, and force the British to apply similar legal standards to whites and nonwhites.  Although others participated in these movements, it was the missionaries who provided detailed information and photographs that documented atrocities. Missionaries also provided emotional connections to distant people and mobilized large groups through church talks and mission presses.  Without missionaries, mobilizing mass protests would have been difficult. The missionary-enabled mobilization made it more difficult for the British to sustain colonial violence or to apply different legal standards to whites and nonwhites. It helped create a cocoon in which nonviolent, indigenous political movements could develop and increased the incentives for colonial officials to allow gradual democratization and decolonization.” (p. 254)

 

·      Conclusion

 

o   “The historic prevalence of CPs is not the only cause of democracy, but CPs seem both important and neglected in current research. This does not mean that CPs consistently directly supported democracy nor is mass conversion to Protestantism necessary. Yet in trying to spread their faith, CPs expanded religious liberty, overcame resistance to mass education and printing, fostered civil society, moderated colonial abuses, and dissipated elite power. These conditions laid a foundation for democracy and long-term economic growth. Once CPs catalyzed these transformations and others copied them, CPs’ unique role diminished.” (p. 268)

 

o   “Distinct theologies and organizational forms lead to distinct outcomes.” (p. 269)

---

     [1]Available online: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/235503063_The_Missionary_Roots_of_Liberal_Democracy.  Note: Woodberry’s article is filled with substantiating documentation embedded throughout the text.  In my quotations below I have chosen to remove most of the internal citations so as to make for smoother reading.

Scientific Foundations: Platonism vs. Christianity

 

Some thoughts from Nancy Pearcey and Charles Thaxton's book:

“One of the most distinctive aspects of modern science is its use of mathematics—the conviction not only that nature is lawful but also that those laws can be stated in precise mathematical formulas. This conviction, too, historians have traced to the Biblical teaching on creation.

 

“The Biblical God created the universe ex nihilo and hence has absolute control over it.  Genesis paints a picture of a Workman completely in charge of His materials. Hence in its essential structure the universe is precisely what God wants it to be.

 

“This idea was alien to the ancient world.  In all other religions, the creation of the world begins with some kind of pre-existing substance with its own inherent nature.  As a result, the creator is not absolute and does not have the freedom to mold the world exactly as he wills.

 

“For example, in Greek philosophy the world consists of eternal matter structured by eternal rational universals called Ideas or Forms.  In Plato’s creation myth, the creator (demiurge) is an inferior deity who did not create from nothing; he merely injected reason (Ideas) into reason-less matter.  And even that he did imperfectly because matter was stubborn stuff, capable of resisting the rational structure imparted by the Ideas.  In short, this is a creator whose hands are tied, as Hooykaas writes, in two respects:

 

‘He had to follow not his own design but the model of the eternal Ideas; and second, he had to put the stamp of the Ideas on a chaotic, recalcitrant matter which he had not created himself.’

 

“As a result, the Greeks expected a level of imprecision in nature, a certain fuzziness at the edges.  If some facts did not fit their theories, well, that was to be expected in an imperfect world.  Individual things were, after all, only rough approximations to the rational Ideas or Forms.  As historian Dudley Shapere explains, in Greek thought the physical world ‘contains an essentially irrational element: nothing in it can be described exactly by reason, and in particular by mathematical concepts and laws.’

 

“By contrast, the Christian doctrine of creation ex nihilo means there is no pre-existing substance with its own independent properties to limit what God can do.  God creates the world exactly as He wills.  For a Platonist, if a line in nature is not quite circular, that is because nature is an only partially successful approximation to geometrical Ideas.  But for a Christian, if God had wanted the line to be circular, He would have made it that way.  If it is not exactly a circle, it must be exactly something else—perhaps an ellipse.  The scientist can be confident that it is exactly something, and not mere capricious variation from the ideal.

 

“A striking example can be found in the work of Kepler, who struggled for years with the slight difference of eight minutes between observation and calculation of the orbit of the planet Mars.  Eventually this slight imprecision drove him to abandon the ideas of circular orbits and to postulate elliptical orbits.  If Kepler had not maintained the conviction that nature must be precise, he would not have agonized over those eight minutes and would not have broken through a traditional belief in circular orbits that had held sway for two thousand years.  Kepler spoke gratefully of those eight minutes as a ‘gift of God.’

 

“Thus the application of geometry and mathematics to the analysis of physical motion rests on the Christian doctrine of creation ex nihilo.  The implication is that God is omnipotent; there is no recalcitrant matter to resist His will.  In the words of physicist C. F. von Weizsacker: 

 

‘Matter in the Platonic sense, which must be “prevailed upon” by reason, will not obey mathematical laws exactly: matter which God has created from nothing may well strictly follow the rules which its Creator has laid down for it.  In this sense I call modern science a legacy, I might even have said a child, of Christianity.’

 

“Historian R. G. Collingwood expresses the argument most succinctly.  He writes: ‘The possibility of an applied mathematics is an expression, in terms of natural science, of the Christian belief that nature is the creation of an omnipotent God.’”[1]

      [1]Nancy R. Pearcey and Charles B. Thaxton, The Soul of Science: Christian Faith and Natural Philosophy (Wheaton, Ill.: Crossway, 1994), 27-29.

* Note: Here is a video I did for class going over this section of text by Pearcey and Thaxton: