Religion and Politics

RELIGION AND POLITICS

Consider these two quotes: (1) “the government of the United States is not, in any sense, founded on Christian religion” (1797 U.S. Treaty with Tripoli authored by T. Jefferson) and (2) “Our government makes no sense unless it is founded in a deeply felt religious faith, and I don’t care what it is.”(Dwight D. Eisenhower). Which quote is accurate regarding our nation? Can both be true? Do the quotes contradict each other? Today, in our country, there is a debate about whether we are a “Christian nation” or not. The historical record, like the bible can be quoted and parsed to fit any persuasion or agenda.

Intolerant Beginnings (Johnstone 2007:289-290).

The norm throughout the colonies was a full intermingling between religion and the state. Nine of 13 colonies officially recognized some type of religious ideology. Each colony was a distinct church state characterized by enforced participation and tithing. Dissenting views were dealt with harshly (consider Ann Hutchinson and Roger Williams).

Constitutional Compromise (Johnstone 2007:290-295)

The colonial theocratic fiefdoms and Britain’s church-state relationship were not far removed from the collective memory of early Americans. Added to this was the deistic tendencies of many elites in both Europe and America. The compromise was the First Amendment of the U.S. Constitution which is “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof.” Folded into this fundamental statement is the ideal of diffusing power where no one particular faith dominated. This ideal also contributed to the rise of denominationalism.

Any claim at understanding the constitutional framer’s intent regarding the First Amendment and the role of religion in society should be carefully scrutinized. There are some facts to consider that help shape our understanding. First, many of the Founders were Deists. That is, they were products of the Enlightenment tradition that valued science/rationality as a way to deal with societal issues. Another fact is that not many citizens were formal members of churches (compared to greater levels of adherence today). Despite this, religion has always been present in U.S.

Increase of Religious Adherence

The challenge that the frontier posed was dealt with in two ways: (1) faith from the top down (Presbyterian) or (2) Faith from the bottom up (Baptist/Methodist). The Presbyterian model is of organized religions within established eastern communities. This model tends to be hierarchical and less mobile than the Baptist model. New faiths that tapped into the laity are classified as Faiths from the Bottom Up or the Baptist model. Methodist and Circuit Riders as well as Baptists and their lay preachers are typical of this approach. Refer to Johnstone (2007:295-299).

Relationship of Religion and Politics

Pure theocracies are rare. Examples of theocracies are the Papal States and Tibet. Mixed Theocracy are where the state is subordinate to church. Where there is a total congruency between the church and state identity are known as total identification models. Erastianism is where there is a state church, i.e., Church of England. The American ideal is partial separation where we continue to assess character of and boundaries of the relationship between church and state. Some states espouse total separation between religion and the state. The closest example of this is France’s laique. This form, like theocracies, is rare to nonexistent. The final point on the church-state continuum is total conflict, which tends to be temporary state of affairs, is exemplified by totalitarianism. The state controls and creates religion such as was the case for the Soviet Union.

The Influence of Religion on Politics

Group support of religious leader’s involvement and unity in group about that involvement is by no means a settled issue. Consider religion and voting behavior.  The basic pattern in the United States indicates a fluctuation in support, depending on the issue, over time. For instance, Americans vary about voting for presidential candidates outside their faith (RELIGOUS OTHER from GSS).  Protestant respondents show a wide range of variation on this question. How about legislation centered on morality issues such as alcohol usage and birth control? Abortion? Or religion in public places? As you may have already heard (even in our own class), people are not unanimous in support on these issues.

Voting for the RELIGIOUS OTHER as president

“Politicians in smoke-filled rooms may debate the wisdom of running a Protestant, a Catholic, or a Jew for some particular office-but everyone knows that the avowed agnostic or atheist is not even the running.”–Peter Berger (1961)

Does this quote still ring true? GSS data from 1991 and 1999 indicate a higher percentage of respondents disagreeing/strongly disagreeing that nonbelievers are unfit to hold public office than respondents who agree/strongly agree. However, there has been a percentage decline between the two years for disagreeing/strongly disagreeing respondents.

Legislation of Morality

When I moved to Arkansas in the late 1970s, I quickly became aware of Blue Laws. These laws may have varied on what individuals were prevented to do on Sundays, but they were omnipresent. Often the laws presented conflicting values between individualism (freedom) and communalism (structure). Moving past Blue Laws to legislators infusing their ideas of morality into the day-to-day lives of Americans was recently highlighted by the Terry Schiavo case.

Another issue about legislating morality is efficacy. How effective a particular morality law is depends on the political moment. There is also a risk of hypocrisy.  Consider anti-gay legislation. Will this wedge issue continue to be a vote getter for the Religious Right?

Catholic Attitudes about Homosexuality, GSS

Protestant Attitudes about Homosexuality, GSS

According to GSS data, there is greater support for gay issues for both Protestants and Catholics who are loosely affiliated with either party. Catholics tend to be more tolerant towards homosexuality than Protestants. Based on GSS data from 1973 to 2004, Kersen forecasts increasing public support for same sex relationships in American society. Political parties and religious groups will have to adjust to this reality in the coming years. A more general trend that politicians will sort out is the trend towards increased non-affiliation in religious and political arenas.

Another area of morality legislation briefly mentioned above is prohibition. When I taught at University of North Alabama in the town of Florence which is Lauderdale County, for much of area’s history, the county remained dry (not so for the town). The story is much different for its neighbor to the south, Colbert County. Interestingly, there was a north/south difference in wet/dry counties in Alabama. Does the story differ for Mississippi?

In South Alabama, Gallic and Latin strains predominated and the people naturally took a different view toward drinking than did the much stricter Anglo-Saxons who had settled the northern section of the state.-Birmingham Age Herald March 13, 1937 (reprinted in Sellers, 1943:259).

Both Prohibitionists and Wets used religious rhetoric to further their case. Consider this quote from a “Wet” minister:

You all recollect that the patriarch Noah planted a vineyard, and made wine, and drank thereof, and was drunk. But does the record say that God came down and made any sort of prohibition law to stop Noah from drinking? No! On the contrary, we find that God put a curse upon them that laughed at Noah. (Sheffield Baptist Minister quoted in Alabama Christian Advocate, October 15, 1942)

An even more contentious mix exists between religion and politics about reproduction, specifically abortion. One of the first laws was in 1821, that considered the “Time of Quickening  to be four to five months.” Most of us, however, are somewhat familiar with the 1973 decision called Roe versus Wade. Again, conflicting values swirl on this issue around the role of the state and the individual. Public opinion on abortion is situational, meaning that respondent support/nonsupport depends on the situation posed by the interviewer. In a recent ABC poll, over 57 percent support a woman’s right to choose at some level.

Religion in Public in the Public Square

Support for Public School School Prayer

GSS findings show those respondents with weak political affiliation show greatest support for court rulings on separation between religion and politics. There is not much difference between strongly Democrat or Republicans respondents on level of support for ban on religion in public schools. In other words, respondents typically dislike judicial prohibitions placed on religion in public places. Kersen projects continued decline in public support for legislation/court rulings for separation of church and state.

CIVIL RELIGION

Early on, I briefly provided you some information about the intersection of U.S. history and religious ideology. Rouseau, a major figure in Enlightenment thought, considered civil religion as an agent of social control. Within sociology, Durkheim noted that religion was an agent of integration and cohesiveness. Robert Bellah, a more recent sociologist, considers civil religion a baseline religion in U.S. Another sociologist, James Coleman, argued that the U.S., civil religion is seen as “God’s agent, connecting individual to community” and helps foster a “community of righteousness.”

America’s civil religion was used as a counterpoint to the godless communist. This “framing” typifies the Eisenhower Era of  1950s America. It is this era, when in 1954 “One Nation Under God” was added to the Pledge of Allegiance. Two years later, “In God We Trust” was made official on our currency. It is also this era, that many Americans refer to, when suggesting we go back to the “Good Ole Days.” Remember, however, nostalgia is dangerous because when we journey down that path, we tend to overlook a lot of problems that existed (racism, sexism, handicaps, etc.).

Most recently, we have witnessed the melding of civil religion within the presidency of G.W. Bush. Early in his administration, Bush asserted to a gathering of ministers that he was on a “special mission from God.” Was he emphasizing a “theological manifest destiny?”

Some things to keep in mind about this turn of events, from a social science perspective is that political rhetoric as a measure of a society’s religious ideology. For instance, when we review the language of Tea Party activists there is a lot of double-coding going on with such phrases as “We want our country back.” Or the use of President Obama’s middle name to suggest a Muslim origin. Or that he is the anti-Christ.

Another facet to consider in our discussion is understanding what are our “American Identity” is and what role does religion play in shaping it? Zelinsky (1992), argues that there are four characteristics that make us American. They are 1) An intense, almost anarchistic individualism (e.g. the Frontier Myth, The Protestant Ethic, and Success Ethic). 2) Emphasis on mobility and change or in other words, “America is Process.” 3) A mechanistic view of the world. Americans, according to Zelinsky, view the world as a simple machine with inputs, processes, and outputs. 4) Many Americans believe in some notion of messianic perfectionism or that God has a special mission for us, i.e., Manifest Destiny, Spreading the Civil Religion of Democracy.

Religion and Politics in 3^rd World

Growing up as Catholic, I was aware of Catholic Liberation Theology. This was a stance of “Liberating the Oppressed.” Those Catholics who subscribed to liberation theology believed that the Catholic Church should focus on social justice issues such as poverty and exploitation. As this orientation has progressed over the years, it has become primarily a Latin American phenomena. As a note, you may have recalled, recently, how Glen Beck suggested that social justice was code for socialism. He was roundly criticized by progressive religious leaders who suggested that he read the little red words in the New Testament.

The Islamist Movement is another international trend. Adherents believe that Islam transcends national identity. Radical Islamists believe that revolution and violence are viable tools for world Islam.

END QUOTE

…political views drawn from an apocalyptic vision-once dismissed as extremist and delusional-have not merely swept mass culture but have shaped the political discourse all the way to Jerusalem and the White House. -Craig Unger in 2005 Vanity Fair

EXTRAORDINARY GROUPS: JEHOVAH’S WITNESSES

SOURCES

Allen, Brooke. 2006. Moral Minority: Our Skeptical Founding Fathers. Chicago: Ivan R. Dee.

Bailey, Thomas Jefferson. 1917. Prohibition in Mississippi; or, Anti-Liquor Legislation from Territorial Days, with Its Results in the Counties. Jackson, Miss: Printed for the author by Hederman bros.

Beth, Loren P. 1958. The American Theory of Church and State. Gainesville: University of Florida Press.

Phillips, Kevin. 2006. American Theocracy: The Peril and Politics of Radical Religion, Oil, and Borrowed Money in the 21st Century. New York: Viking.

Sellers, James Barron. 1943. The Prohibition Movement in Alabama, 1702 to 1943. Chapel Hill: The University of North Carolina press.

Stark, Rodney. 1997. The Rise of Christianity: How the Obscure, Marginal Jesus Movement Became the Dominant Religious Force in the Western World in a Few Centuries. 1st ed. San Francisco, Calif.: HarperSanFrancisco.

Unger, Craig. 2005. “American Rapture.” Vanity Fair, December.

Wilentz, Sean. 2010. “Confounding Fathers: The Tea Party’s Cold War Roots.” The New Yorker. Obtained at http://www.newyorker.com/reporting/2010/10/18/101018fa_fact_wilentz on October 12, 2010.

Zelinsky, Wilbur. 1992. The Cultural Geography of the United States. A rev. ed. Englewood Cliffs, N.J: Prentice Hall.