Abstract
In the 1980s and 1990s, Democrats faced a challenging dilemma. They felt their record and stands relating to poverty, human rights, civil rights, and various moral issues were in line with the thinking of many Americans. Yet they remained fairly silent on matters of religion, while Republicans, led by the likes of the Reverend Jerry Falwell and Pat Robertson, had become very vocal, well organized, and assertive. This probably hurt Democrats politically in a nation populated largely by Christians.
Electoral defeats at the hands of Ronald Reagan, the Bushes, and Newt Gingrich seemingly helped spur Democrats into action, thanks in part to Reverend Jim Wallis, founder of the Christian activist organization Sojourners and author of a best-selling book, God’s Politics. Wallis argued that religion, with its calls for social justice, was relevant to politics, so pols should not hide their faith under a barrel.
This thin volume by David Weiss, who teaches at Montana State–Billings, contains essays by sixteen scholars, most of them rhetoricians, focusing largely on what Democratic politicians have had to say about religion during their campaigns and terms in office. Chapters on Thomas Jefferson’s seminal ideas about freedom of religion and separation of church and state—and about the efforts of Falwell and Robertson, as well as “religious extremists” such as the Reverends Johns Hagee on the right and Jeremiah Wright on the left—are followed by sections on past presidents and presidential hopefuls, Barack Obama, and two noteworthy state-level candidates, Governor Tim Kaine of Virginia and Representative Keith Ellison of Minnesota. The latter was the first Muslim elected to Congress.
Obama merits three chapters, each dealing with textual analysis of a particular speech. In 2006, he gave the keynote address at a “Call to Renewal” conference organized by Wallis. In his widely heralded keynote speech at the 2004 Democratic National Convention, Obama expressed four basic charges to politicians by philosopher Cornel West. These were discernment (of the present in light of the past), empathy (with others not specifically in agreement with or related to oneself), tracking hypocrisy (differences between proclaimed principles and actual deeds), and hope (believing we can make a difference). Also, the president-to-be stressed inclusiveness as an ideal.
Finally, in a 2009 commencement address at Notre Dame University, the president invoked the idea of church as a crossroads for diverse people. And he endorsed Wallis’s idea of conservative radicalism. Unfortunately, he said, Republicans and Democrats had tended to oppose each other uncompromisingly on basic principles— for example, the right of the mother to control her body versus right to life of the unborn fetus. Wallis had called for pragmatic solutions based on agreement about an underlying point: that abortion is basically bad and should be minimized. Poverty leads many women to feel compelled to seek abortions, and reducing poverty should reduce this need while still allowing a woman’s right to choose.
Tim Kaine’s 2005 victory in the Virginia gubernatorial race reflected an insightful approach to campaigning, according to Penn State University doctoral student Sara Ann Mehltretter. A Catholic, Kaine needed to win votes from a fair number of evangelical Protestants. He did so in part by discussing on the stump his experience as a missionary in Honduras, emphasizing his role in serving people, something of paramount importance to Catholics. But he also talked eloquently about his born-again personal experience in gaining and deepening his faith, a central element in evangelical religious teaching and practice.
Two factors apparently have contributed to Republican success in red states, most in “God’s Country,” the heartland of America. One was Democratic and liberal reticence to talk about religion, stemming from emphasis on separation of church and state, an idea championed by Thomas Jefferson as he helped write the U.S. Constitution. Two Catholic presidential candidates felt compelled to emphasize this separation to defuse fears they would follow the Vatican’s dictates while in the White House. John F. Kennedy famously made the point strongly and effectively in 1960 to a gathering of Protestant ministers in Houston. In 2004, John Kerry emphasized separation of church and state in his campaign leading up to Super Tuesday, when he clinched the nomination. Kerry then shifted gears, painting himself as a devout person shaped by his faith, respectful of but in disagreement with the Catholic Church on such issues as abortion, contraception, and gay rights.
A second factor was the difficult task of reconciling sincere and deep religious faith with emphasis on reason—a liberal focus—in discerning what’s right, important, and true. Al Gore struggled with this. A Southern Baptist, he wavered in his faith as a young man, and although he claimed to have “returned to the fold,” Gore became known primarily for emphasizing secular, rational developments such as the Internet and global warming. In 2000, he showed a rational perspective in asserting that George W. Bush’s self-proclaimed deep faith was really dogmatic adherence to ideology.
John Edwards’s campaign was a bit reminiscent of Kaine’s. The North Carolina senator spoke often of his deep faith, of his applying it in ways supportive of the social gospel as a successful attorney representing the poor, and of his commitment to social justice. Of course, his 2008 campaign crashed and burned amid $400 haircuts, his large mansion, and his affair with Rielle Hunter.
Weiss’s book offers a useful summary of an underreported topic. As with many books of readings, lack of consistency from chapter to chapter is a problem, and there is a rather confusing and unsatisfying intermingling of historical and textual analysis. A focus on framing could have added theoretical clarity and comparability across chapters. In particular, this reviewer would like to see significant attention to linguist George Lakoff’s contention that modern U.S. politics represents a battle between competing metaphors.
As the nation decides the presidency again, the issue of religion and faith takes on new dimensions in the 2012 campaign, as fringe elements on the right still decry Obama’s “Muslimism,” and voters across the spectrum wonder about Mitt Romney’s Mormon faith. How religion plays on the campaign trail, in governance, and in policy making is an important topic for Democrats and Republicans alike.