Continuing in the "how religion contributes" (or not) to our public life in America vein, Andrew Sullivan quotes on his blog for the Atlantic a conversation between Peter Steinfels and Gary Dorrien, the Reinhold Niebuhr professor of social ethics at Union Theological Seminary in New York City:

Q. What insights of Niebuhr’s are most pertinent for the nation’s public life today?

A. His sense that elements of self-interest and pride lurk even in the best of human actions. His recognition that a special synergy of selfishness operates in collectivities like nations. His critique of Americans’ belief in their country’s innocence and exceptionalism — the idea that we are a redeemer nation going abroad never to conquer, only to liberate.

I've confessed to being fascinated by Niebuhr's ideas before; my ears prick up when he's trotted out in favor of one cause or another. But I was once again intrigued to read Niebuhr invoked as a corrective balance to what might be termed neoconservative idealism (or "justice through strength"), rather than the more traditional sort of idealism ("justice through peace").

Niebuhr's ideas are remarkable -- in our political context -- because 1) They are a moderating force while coming from a deeply-felt religious perspective (these seem at odds when we think about how religion and political moderation are presented these days); and 2) They threaten so many, on the right and the left. Always a good sign.