Barriers to Covenantal Pluralism in Bangladeshi Public Opinion

Abstract

In this paper, we explore Bangladeshi popular support for “covenantal pluralism,” a philosophy developed by the Covenantal Pluralism Initiative at the Templeton Religion Trust. We use a novel dataset derived from a 2017 nationally representative survey of Bangladeshi respondents which included numerous survey items germane to this study. Unfortunately, while Bangladesh may most certainly benefit from such a concept, we find little empirical evidence of popular support for its key conditions and propositions. We also find little evidence that any Bangladeshi government would pursue such a concept legally because it would undermine key sources of legitimacy which are necessary to secure the current government’s access to power and opportunities for graft.

Keywords:

• Bangladesh
• covenantal pluralism
• public opinion
• religious freedom
• Islam

Acknowledgements

This article is part of this journal’s Covenantal Pluralism Series, a project generously supported via a grant to the Institute for Global Engagement from the Templeton Religion Trust. The authors would also like to thank Ali Riaz, who collaborated on the survey development and fielding. The authors also thank RESOLVE under whose auspices this survey was fielded and the United States Agency for International Development which funded RESOLVE’s effort. The authors thank Dennis Hoover for his helpful comments and suggestions for improving this article.

Notes

1 Some orthodox Muslims are adamant that Ahmadis are not Muslim because they do not respect the ordinal finality of the prophethood. Some even argue that any Ahmadi self-identifying as Muslim is committing blasphemy (see Kabir 2016).

2 Note that this survey also included a question about evangelism “Here is a statement: ‘Muslims have a duty to try and convert others to Islam.’ Please tell me if you completely agree with it, mostly agree with it, mostly disagree with it, or completely disagree with it”). It also included a question about whether Islam is the one true faith (“Now I’m going to read you two statements. Please tell me whether the FIRST statement or the SECOND statement comes closer to your own views—even if neither is exactly right: ‘Islam is the one, true faith leading to eternal life in heaven’; ‘Many religions can lead to eternal life in heaven’.”) A huge majority (86.67 percent) completely or mostly agreed with a Muslim duty to evangelize, and likewise most respondents (75.72 percent) believe Islam is the one true faith. The philosophy of covenantal pluralism as defined by the Templeton Religion Trust stipulates that making exclusive truth claims and engaging in evangelism (if conducted ethically) are not necessarily incompatible with full commitment to covenantal pluralist norms. It is only when theological/worldview exclusivism gets linked up with socio-political exclusivism, discrimination, and persecution that covenantal pluralism is obviously violated. Given the overall pattern of findings in this survey, it appears likely that these sorts of socio-political linkages are in fact commonplace in Bangladesh today.

Additional information

Notes on contributors

C. Christine Fair

C. Christine Fair is a Professor in the Security Studies Program within Georgetown University’s Edmund A. Walsh School of Foreign Service. Her books include In Their Own Words: Understanding the Lashkar-e-Tayyaba (Oxford University Press, 2019) and Fighting to the End: The Pakistan Army’s Way of War (Oxford University Press, 2014). She speaks and reads Hindi, Urdu, and Punjabi. For a current list of publications, please see her personal website at www.christinefair.net.

Parina Patel

Parina Patel is an Associate Teaching Professor within Georgetown University’s Edmund A. Walsh School of Foreign Service. Her most recent publications include “Rational Islamists: Islamism and Regime Preferences in Bangladesh,” Democratization (2020); “Explaining Some Muslims’ Support for Islamist Political Violence: State- and Individual-Level Factors,” Political Science Quarterly (2019); “Cracking the Code: An Empirical Analysis of Consumer Bankruptcy Outcomes;” Minnesota Law Review (2017); and “Correct Voting Across Thirty-Three Democracies: A Preliminary Analysis,” British Journal of Political Science (2014).