FROM OLD TO NEW POLITICAL THEOLOGY: A COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS OF THE IDEAS OF CARL SCHMITT AND CARL RASCHKE

Abstract

Introduction. Contemporary political philosophy increasingly demonstrates that secular political institutions continue to reproduce theological structures in transformed forms. In the context of the crisis of liberal democracy, the erosion of traditional institutions, and the return of religious narratives into the public sphere, political theology once again becomes an important analytical framework for understanding sovereignty, power, and global conflict. The aim and tasks. The purpose of the article is to investigate the transformation of political theology from Carl Schmitt’s classical state-centered model to Karl Raschke’s postmodern and critical reinterpretation. The objectives of the study are to analyze Schmitt’s concept of the secularization of theological categories, to examine Raschke’s “new political theology” in the context of neoliberalism and postmodernity, and to compare their interpretations of sovereignty, political conflict, and the crisis of liberal order. Research methods. The methodological basis of the research combines comparative, hermeneutic, and structural approaches. The comparative method is used to identify conceptual similarities and differences between Schmitt’s and Raschke’s models of political theology. Hermeneutic analysis is applied to the interpretation of primary philosophical and theological texts, while the structural approach allows the reconstruction of the transformation of political-theological concepts in different historical contexts. Research results. The article demonstrates that Carl Schmitt interprets political theology as a system of secularized theological concepts legitimizing state sovereignty and legal order. His theory is grounded in the concepts of the sovereign decision, the state of exception, and the “friend-enemy” distinction. Karl Raschke, by contrast, reformulates political theology within the framework of postmodern critical theory and cultural semiotics. He shifts attention from institutional sovereignty toward dispersed forms of power, crisis of representation, identity conflicts, neoliberal governance, and the return of the sacred through transnational ideological movements. The study establishes that Schmitt’s model remains closely connected with the logic of the nation-state and conservative legal order, whereas Raschke’s approach reflects the fragmented and networked realities of the contemporary global world. Discussion. The comparative analysis reveals both continuity and rupture between “old” and “new” political theology. While Schmitt conceptualizes political order through centralized sovereignty and exceptional decision-making, Raschke emphasizes the instability of contemporary political identities and the transformation of political conflict under neoliberalism and postmodernity. Conclusions. It is concluded that political theology has not disappeared under conditions of secularization but has undergone substantial transformation.