Modernity’s core political concepts are secularized Christian concepts

Evidence

The Is/Ought dichotomization is representative of the conflict between the instrumentalist manifestations of reason and, to a great extent, the instrumentalist manifestations of the remnants of the Christian legacy of morality and virtue. This is precisely why the philosopher E. M. Anscombe rightly made the grave charge against Kant’s notion of duty that it is nothing but a Christian intrusion wearing an Enlightenment garb of reason. What Anscombe argued in philosophy, Carl Schmitt had famously argued in politics, that all central political concepts of modernity are essentially secularized forms of Christian concepts. — Wael Hallaq, Restating Orientalism, 184

Categorization

• XREF: Connects to the Darwin-Dennett-Coyne discussions of how secular ethics retains religious scaffolding, and to Milbank’s Radical Orthodoxy claim that secular reason is theology in disguise. — connects to: Theology and philosophy together produced the modern subject concept.; Secularism is not a neutral doctrine but a modern construct redefining religion and politics — Nadim N. Rouhana and Nadera Shalhoub-Kevorkian, When Politics Are Sacralized:…, 295
• SEED: Angle: tracing the genealogy of a ‘neutral’ modern concept (say, universal human rights or secularism) back to its specifically Christian theological premise — applying Schmitt’s and Anscombe’s method to a concept nobody thinks is theological.