Divine Discourse, Earthly Politics: The Dual Use of Sunni Theology in Political Narratives

This study examines the intricate relationship between religious movements and political dynamics in Turkey, focusing on how Sunni theological discourse is paradoxically used to both endorse and challenge President Erdoğan's leadership. By employing political discourse analysis (PDA), the study scrutinizes official statements from religious communities, social media posts, and leadership speeches to uncover how religious discourse operates as a strategic tool in shaping political allegiances.

Religion provides a broad repertoire of justifications that actors can selectively draw upon to support divergent political positions. Some religious communities emphasize obedience to authority (ulu-l emr) and political stability, reinforcing Erdoğan’s leadership as divinely sanctioned, while others invoke religious principles of justice and anti-corruption to critique his governance. This dual-use capacity of religious narratives reflects broader patterns in religious-political linkages, where theological concepts become instruments of political persuasion and mobilization.

The study draws on social scientific theories of religious mobilization, cue-taking, and moral framing. It integrates insights from literature on religious organizations as strategic actors that align with political parties for mutual benefit, and from the earlier works on the nature of religious cues—instrumental (secular regimes failed to deliver), spiritual (promise of salvation), and informational (signals of credible commitment). Through this lens, the research examines how Turkish religious movements leverage theological justification in their political messaging.

Empirically, the study employs qualitative document analysis and discourse analysis, systematically examining public statements, sermons, and social media posts from key religious movements. The dataset includes materials from pro-AKP groups such as the Ismailağa, Menzil, and Nurcu movements, as well as opposition-aligned religious groups like the Süleymancı movement, Furkan Movement, and Yeni Asya-Kutlular group. The research focuses on the strategic use of religious discourse by these groups, identifying how different actors frame their political messages through theological reasoning.

The analysis categorizes religious discourses into two primary groups. The first group, supporting Erdoğan, portrays him as the defender of oppressed Muslims, the leader uniting the Islamic world (Ittihad-ı İslam), and the rightful ruler fighting against secular forces. The second group, opposing Erdoğan, frames him as a hypocrite failing to uphold justice, as morally corrupt, or as an oppressor violating Islamic principles. The study highlights how religious texts, prophetic traditions, and theological concepts are selectively invoked to justify both support and opposition.

A central aspect of this research is how religious leaders act as brokers in this process, using theological discourse as a mechanism for political mobilization. Their statements, amplified through sermons, social media, and public speeches, serve as cues that guide electoral behavior within religious constituencies. The study also explores how the flexibility of religious texts enables the adaptation of theological arguments to shifting political contexts, making religion a powerful yet malleable tool for political justification.

The findings have broader implications beyond Turkish electoral politics. They contribute to understanding how religious narratives function as adaptable instruments in political struggles and how theology can be instrumentalized for political gain. The research situates its analysis within the broader field of religion and social sciences, offering a methodological and theoretical framework applicable to other contexts where religious discourse intersects with political competition.