Abstract

The paper emerges from the debate between Carl Schmitt and Erik Peterson about the possibility of political theology. It begins by showing that Carl Schmitt uses the concept of political theology as the defense of an alliance between Church and State. Peterson’s rejection of its possibility lies in his refusal of the relation between Church and Total State, as proposed by the movement of German Christians in the context of Hitler’s Germany. It argues that this rejection is the origin of Peterson’s attempt to conceive pure theology as theology free from politics, and of his criticism of Eusebius of Caesarea’s imperial political theology. The concept of economic theology in Giorgio Agamben appears as the attempt to conceive not a theology free of politics, but a theological foundation for politics against political-theological politics, based on sovereignty and authority. Finally, Schmitt’s late answer to Peterson shows that his conception of political theology is directed toward a politics based on rationality and the rejection of fanaticism.