Kryachkov 2!indd

95
Английский язык для магистратуры
F
aith T
oday
6.
Hanson posits that political–religious responses depend on three factors: the level of in-
teraction, ranging from local to global; the nature of the religious tradition; and regional or 
national cultures of political–religious interaction. The paradigm is at the heart of a series 
of regional studies covering most of the globe (but not sub-Saharan Africa). These studies 
are full of pertinent observations, such as the fact that, in Europe, the weakening of insti-
tutional religion makes the xenophobic use of ethnic-based religion more likely, and that 
Islamic 
jihad
presently occurs in the global communication system rather than in the politi-
cal, economic, or military systems.
7
But Hanson is not a neutral observer. He is a political scientist who stresses Catholic con-
ceptions of the “global common good”. The final chapter makes international political–re-
ligious policy recommendations to “serve world peace, justice and order”. For instance, he 
rightly stresses the increasingly non-Western character of Christianity and the rising percent-
age of world population belonging to Christianity and Islam, making those two religions in-
dispensable for North–South mediation. But his final “global religious–political rules” are a 
mixed bag. Some of the “nine rules” are very specific and seem to arise from Iraq; others are 
overly optimistic regarding a common inter-religious basis for fighting violence, defending 
religious freedom, and creating a global religious alliance against unilateralist nation-states 
(despite his own affirmation that neither “generic religion” nor “spirituality lite” will suffice).
8
One might also carp at Hanson’s idea that the world’s future has already arrived in Sili-
con Valley; and that global culture industries are making widespread religious conversion 
improbable, since people “lose the ability to stand in the presence of the Sacred”. The chap-
ter on Latin America (excluding the parts on the Philippines and “world Christianity”) is far 
shorter than on other regions and contains several factual errors. Together with the omis-
sion of sub-Saharan Africa, the weakness of the Latin American section means that Christi-
anity in the global south (now the heartland of the Christian world) is not very well served.
9.
Nonetheless, Hanson does bring great breadth of expertise to bear on this complex 
topic, and this book does lend insight, particularly with respect to the effects of globaliza-
tion on the religion-politics nexus. The book’s larger effort to articulate a new “post-Cold 
War paradigm” for understanding international affairs may not be convincing, but its more 
substantive theme is intriguing and hopeful: namely, that religions can play an enduring 
positive role in promoting human dignity and reconciliation. Especially for college stu-
dents, who along with scholars and diplomats are identified by Hanson as the intended 
audience, reading this volume will not only be educational, it will also be challenging, as 
it “combines conventional liberal and conservative approaches to international affairs by 
advocating religious pluralism integrated into all four global systems as an alternative to 
the current compartmentalized, secular Western policy”. 
Review as a whole
1. 
What do you think is the main aim of the review? 
2. What paragraphs make the review different from a summary? 
3. Which of these adjectives do you think best describe the style of the review: positive, lavish, 
superfluous, succinct, malicious, judgmental, neutral, categorical, favourable, in-depth….
Structure
1. 
Analyze the structure of the review. Identify the intro, the body, and the conclusion.
2. What information does each part contain?

---