ICU 60th Anniversary Project Lecture
Passionate Conviction and Inclusive Community
By Dr. George Rupp
Date: September 17, 2013

ICU 60th Anniversary Project Lecture
Passionate Conviction and Inclusive Community
By Dr. George Rupp
Date: September 17, 2013

Introduction
Dr. George Rupp was invited to give a lecture at the International Christian University
on September 17th, 2013. ICU President Junko Hibiya opened the presentation bythanking the Japan University Accreditation Association (JUAA) for bringing Rupp toJapan, and she gave the audience a brief outline of his distinguished career. Dr. Rupp
has thus far served as the youngest dean ever of Harvard Divinity School, and has also
served as president at both Rice University and Columbia University. He is currently asenior fellow at the Carnegie Council for Ethics in International Affairs.

LectureRupp opened his lecture by discussing the idea of convictions. An individual’s convictions, he says, are those affirmations, commitments, and practices that lie at the core of
their “personal and social identity.” He described how some believe strongly that theirconvictions are “absolutely right, and others are unquestionably wrong.” Other people“decline to discuss such convictions,” and ask that people show tolerance for the beliefsof others. Rupp stated that while both mindsets may have been useful in the past, in thisage of globalization, neither extreme is viable on its own.

The Al-Qaeda attack on September 11, 2001 is an extreme example of the conflict01

between these two mindsets, but many other examples exist. The conflicts in Ireland,
Chechnya and Sri Lanka are all examples of religious or social conflict, Rupp said, andwith such “carnage” looming over the world, he believes that the Western idea ofsecular liberalism will naturally become more attractive. This liberalist school ofthought holds that “…religions and other ideological views should be tolerated, butmust remain private convictions that do not shape public outcomes.” Rupp reminded
the audience that, while the number of right-of-center voices are increasing in both theUS and Japan, the secular liberal view was “dominant in much of the world in recent
decades.”

Rupp referred to a line from a poem by William Butler Yeats called The Second
Coming, which he believes captures the situation well: “the best lack all02

conviction, while the worst are full of passionate intensity.”

The etymology of the word “conviction” may hold some answers to the conﬂictthat stems from it, according to Rupp. The Latin word from which conviction
comes means, “to overcome” or, “to conquer.” Therefore, he continued,conviction means to be convinced of something and have all doubts removed.
However, Rupp added that it also refers to the act of ﬁnding someone guilty ofa crime. He concluded that it “connotes conﬁdence, certainty, corroboration ofviews that opponents dispute. But the word is deployed to identify perpetratorsof what is taken to be evil as often as it is used to designate advocates ofworthy causes.”

Rupp admitted that it is difficult to go against the idea that “passionate convictions”
should be kept under control, particularly now that terrorism is such a threat to peace.
However, while a stance of tolerance is attractive, it cannot be based in simple“openness to all views” and “acceptance of multiple perspectives.” It must also
acknowledge and evaluate the core values that motivate the people who are bringing
these conflicts to life. This approach follows the traditional standpoint that more than
one perspective could be valid, and therefore “rejects any claim to exclusive truth.”
However, it also recognizes that convictions can legitimately influence both personal
preferences and public policies. Neither of Yeats’ extremes – “lack of conviction” or“passionate intensity” – is adequate. Many can claim to have great passion for their own
convictions, and “lack of conviction” is both an unfair description of secular ideology
demanding tolerance, and a stance that cannot help but lose out to passion.

03

Rupp believes that the West needs to take the central path with more “robust, publicappraisal” of these conflicting views that until now “have been relegated to the status ofprivate preferences.” He stressed that since everyone knows that personal convictions
have an influence on society, “we can no longer afford the luxury of pretending that is
not the case, even if the alternative is less comfortable than an ethos that simply
tolerates any and all positions.”

As globalization continues to progress, the world’s various cultures will come into
greater contact with each other, and Rupp thinks that we should have a morecomparative perspective that involves giving public attention to what would normallybe private opinion. This comparative perspective will allow for both external andinternal criticism, allow us to compare what are “ostensibly quite different
communities,” and also allow us to see the great diversity within what are nominally“unified traditions.”04

Rupp described how this diversity can be seen by comparing 4th century Catholics inNorth Africa, the 15th century Christian Orthodox Church in Constantinople, and 18thcentury English Deism. It can also be seen in the rich Jewish traditions, which arenormally simplified as simply “orthodox, conservative, and reform.” Even greater
variety can be seen in Hinduism, which Rupp believes is even more remarkable as thereligion developed only in India. Buddhism is almost the ultimate example of variety,according to Rupp, as it spread out across Asia, and eventually further, blending withother religions and cultures as it went and spawning an “almost limitless” number of
permutations, all the while living in peace with other traditions. Rupp described Islamas “the third great missionary religion” after Christianity and Buddhism, and that it too
has become rooted in a great variety of cultures. Islam is another good example, Rupp
says, as it resisted complete indigenization, partly by requiring liturgical study of theQuran to be undertaken in Arabic. However, even with that resistance, there is still“great diversity in Islam, far more than is suggested…by the tendency of the West…toidentify Islam with the Arabian Peninsula.”

Rupp emphasized that religious people almost never take the stance that their own
beliefs are only personal priorities, and that their faith should be removed from any
discussion of public policy. They believe in their convictions, and publicly advocate thebenefit their convictions could bring to society. Rupp admits that it would surely “besafer” if such convictions were kept private, as the world is embroiled in conflict that isat least partly based in religious beliefs, but that viewpoint is often “not acceptable tothose whose deepest convictions would be relegated to the status of private preferences.”05

This religious diversity also provides room for self-criticism of beliefs, and presents theopportunity for people to more easily accept the values of others. This minority viewneeds to have a stronger voice. For example, Rupp stressed, there are moderate Muslims
who make an effort to live alongside other religions, and believe in Jihad as a spiritualstruggle, not a violent one. These are the Muslims who are competing with theextremists for the right to represent Muslims as a whole, and their voices need to beheard.

However, among those moderate Muslims are also those who are critical about thesecularism and individualism of the West. They view Western culture as materialisticand hedonistic, and therefore lacking in all conviction. This tends to lead to a“passionate intensity” that may be reminiscent of that intensity shown by the mostextreme of Muslim adherents. Therefore, Rupp believes that in order to encourage
greater internal criticism within Islam, the West has to be prepared to be criticizeditself for the prevailing trends in its own traditions. As he said, “We can more effectively
engage opposition if we are willing to address social patterns deplored not only by those
who attack us, but…including even many of our friends and allies around the world.”

For example, John Locke was noted to have helped lay down the traditions of thepresent-day “political and economic orientation of Western liberal democracy.”
However, Locke also believed in the formation of the state to protect against “excesses ofindividualism.” Similarly, Kant was concerned with preserving human freedom andmoral autonomy while also acknowledging the power of scientific knowledge. More
importantly, Kant believed that this freedom and autonomy was imbedded in a shared06philosophy that required
interaction with others.

Rupp pointed out that even
Adam Smith –the poster boyof unconstrained markets andindividualism in the US –argued that it restrictions onthem. Smith might not be in
the public interest to allow
individuals and private groups
to pursue profit freely, andthat state should impose restrictions on them. Smith clearly “affirmed the pursuit ofindividual interests only in the context of a network of social relations.”

Rupp referred to the idea of denying individuality found in Buddhism, and suggested
that it gives some insight into why glorifying individualism is inadequate. As Rupp putit, “To construe the self as an individual entity is to fail to appreciate the co-dependenceof all reality.”

The idea can also be found in other religious traditions such as Judaism, Islam, andConfucianism, in which individuals are seen as making up a part of the community as awhole. Rupp also pointed that that while some religions seem to glorify the individual,they actually subordinate “the self to a more encompassing normative structure.” For07

examples, the affirmation that “atman is Brahman” in Hinduism does not actuallyemphasize the individuality of a person, but shows that the individual is an integral
part of the whole. The ancient Greek idea of the “soul,” adopted by some Christians,seems to be an affirmation of the individual, but it also emphasizes the necessity to“love, enjoy, and worship the divine reality for which it is destined.”

Rupp underlined the implications of unconstrained individualism and an unregulated
free-market economy. He feels that this combination would further increase the gap
between rich and poor, and emphasize private interests over public good. The burden
on poor individuals, those least able to bear that burden, would increase but more
importantly, the positive role that communities play in society would be destroyed.
However, on a more positive note, he believes that greater global integration could also
lead to more inclusive sense of community.

Rupp admits that this goal of an inclusive global community may remain simply autopian ideal, but as such, itcould influence society byincreasing the role of thecommunity, and byconstraining individualismthat does not benefit society
as a whole.

Rupp believes that a more08

inclusive community can only be realized when the world adopts a variety of publicpolicy initiatives. In America, this would entail structural change that would shift thefocus to programs that address the gap between the rich and poor. On a global scale,this would entail introducing trade agreements that benefit the poorest countries, andincreasing aid targeted at those needy communities looking for a way up. Rupp statedthat globalization should be inclusive, with the focus on the public good, governments,and community, not on private interests, markets, and individuals.

Rupp is certain that this goal of inclusive community does not require cultural orreligious homogeneity, which means that the world does not necessarily need to accept
the ideas of Western secularism. Many large societies have developed “socialinstitutions and cultural mores that support an inclusive community,” and the existenceof such societies in Western Europe and Southeast Asia suggests that pluralism requires
stable secularity where diversity can be freely expressed. However, a completely neutral
environment is not necessarily a requirement, as can be seen in the historical religious
dominance in those same regions, with Christianity in Europe and Hinduism in India.
China and Japan are also examples of societies in which different traditions now
co-exist peacefully.

These examples are important because they stand against the provincialism that
presumes only Western secular traditions can allow for a variety of communities toflourish. The mix of “consumer society and mass culture” that the West has produced“invites vigorous criticism” and is often “little more than a social system minus its
ethical and normative grounding.”

09

Rupp clarified his point in detail by saying that, “…such passive accommodation to thehedonism and materialism of secular culture cries out for a reconnection to the roots ofmore particular communities. Such ‘more particular’ communities may be grounded ina substantial range of traditions: religious, ethnic, cultural, educational, political, andeven vocational. In each case the communities affirm external norms that guide theirshared practices. This pattern is most readily recognizable in religious communities,
especially if they represent a minority tradition within a larger society, but it is also
evident in other voluntary associations.”

Rupp concluded his lecture with a statement of hope regarding the above-mentioned“particular communities.”“What such particular communities have in common is more or less self-conscious
resistance to accepting the conventional patterns of the prevailing culture as adequate totheir own deepest convictions. But positively, such a community holds out the promiseof a richer, fuller social system, because it affirmatively incorporates community within
it. A society so ordered would be a worthy achievement of globalization and could
rightly claim to be an inclusive community.”

Following his lecture, Rupp answered a number of questions from his engaged
audience, clarifying his points and expanding on other ideas. Finally, Junko Hibiya
concluded the session, and to a round of applause, thanked Rupp for his stimulating
lecture.

10