When I use words like "refreshing" and "thought-provoking" to describe this conversation with Amy Sullivan and next week's with Rod Dreher, I'm also divulging the longing that preceded the creation of these programs. I've so badly needed different and deeper public conversation about the presidential race and some of the larger ruminations it stirs.
SOF via Radio:
» Find your station
SOF OnDemand:
» Listen Now (RA)
» Download (mp3)
» Podcast
SOF via E-mail:
» Sign up for the newsletter
» Find your station
SOF OnDemand:
» Listen Now (RA)
» Download (mp3)
» Podcast
SOF via E-mail:
» Sign up for the newsletter
I've been watching both Amy Sullivan and Rod Dreher for years, and am happy that I waited until now to grab them both. When I first became aware of them, they were young up-and-coming journalists. They are still young, relatively speaking, but their journalism and wisdom have matured. We need wisdom — not just information, not just analysis — at this moment in American life, and in this election season. Yet politics in the raw tends to skew rather than serve the critical questions an election brings to the surface of our common life. We name what is most important, paradoxically, when we are least able to come together to address it.
Last week, as the first presidential debate in Mississippi loomed, I wrote in our blog about a trip I made to Ole Miss in August, where I was brought to ponder the legacy of race in America that Oxford, Mississippi and its campus embody. Whoever won or lost when Barack Obama and John McCain met there on September 26, the fact that they debated in that place represents a larger cultural triumph that we've scarcely drawn breath to notice.
Religion, similarly, has been thrown into relief variously as an issue/problem/factor in this election, but with little even-handed reflection and less sense of perspective. I for one have been fascinated from the first by a presidential campaign that has reversed some of the pat generalizations about religion and politics of recent years. Most basically, there is this: we have a Democratic candidate who is very comfortable speaking about his Christian faith, and a Republican who is not.
Amy Sullivan grew up, as she tells it, surrounded by people who were liberal because of their faith. Her parents kept pictures of Jesus and Bobby Kennedy side by side in their home. As the Religious Right got most of the press for the last few decades, Amy Sullivan never stopped following the lesser-told story of the Left's response to the Religious Right. And she never lost her historical perspective.
So Howard Dean's "favorite book of the New Testament" may still be Job, and Al Gore and John Kerry were famously reticent about their faith and relatively ill at ease with religious energies and issues. But the only two Democrats to win the White House in the last three decades, lest we forget, were Bible-quoting born-again Christians, comfortable with devout, diverse religiosity.
Sullivan has some informative and provocative thoughts about how and why the Democratic party lost sight of that tradition and may now be recovering it. And you'll hear other voices to illustrate her observations: Bill Clinton palpably at home in a Pentecostal church in 1993; Barack Obama at an Evangelical church in 2007; Obama's lengthy (and largely unreported) reflection on the morality of abortion at Rick Warren's Saddleback Church this past August; and Leah Daughtry, CEO of the Democratic National Convention in Denver, pronouncing at that gathering: "Over the past few years, many have had much to say about our efforts to 'bring faith' to the Democratic Party. With all due respect to the commentators and my friends in the media, we didn't need to bring faith to the party. Faith was already here."
Daughtry should know. She served in the Department of Labor in the Clinton administration, but she is also a part-time minister of a Pentecostal church. In another of those little-covered stories which Amy Sullivan describes with fascinating detail and perspective, this year's Democratic convention featured first-time-ever invocations and benedictions by diverse faith leaders every day; an interfaith caucus that met for discussion through the week; and a robust reflection on abortion that welcomed pro-life Democrats to the table.
And so it turns out that on the liberal side of U.S. political life, religious people and energies are diverse and complex — as diverse and complex, predictably, as this aspect of life in American culture and the U.S. population as a whole. Next week, with Rod Dreher, we'll shine our light on the Right, for some similarly revealing complexity and diversity below the surface. Stay tuned.
I Recommend Reading:
The Party Faithful — How and Why Democrats are Closing the God Gap
by Amy Sullivan
Amy Sullivan's book did not get nearly the praise it deserves. After a very personal opening section — which may have misled reviewers — it yields to a lively and erudite telling of the history and evolving present of the "religious left," with insight and attention few others have even attempted to bring to this story.



Comments: 13
In the current Mpls St Paul Catholic Spirit there is an article from a nun who's advocating higher taxes. That's nice, someone who doesn't pay taxes wanting people who do pay taxes to be forced in to paying more.
It is encouraging to me that those in the Democratic party of faith are becoming more active. There are certainly enough that a seat in the platform committee is a must.
It is discouraging to me that persons of faith are, in some circles, told that they are not "adequately Christian/Muslim/Jewish" if they do not vote for a particular candidate or party. Religious leaders should teach and challenge the conscience and let the conscience lead the vote.
A real Christian feeds the hungry and helps those in need, in other words, answers prayers.
Most of this started about the time of Newt Gindrich and his contract on America, and was enhanced by the efforts of Jerry Falwell and his anointed group.
Meanwhile, the main line churches have had devout faith and made choices in politics based on the political realities, not religion. But that did not render their faith evil or ineffective.
Carol makes and excellent point, that lacking organization is not the same as lacking faith, and that many people have great faith although their support for churches is nil!
Rude D., has an excellent and more accurate concept of just what faith is.
Your comment is typical of the feelings and attitude that actually divide the people of faith in this nation and is an effort to denigrate a certain class of people of faith. I believe that this divides rather than supports, denigrates rather than elevates and dissipate that which is worthy and good in our society.
Seeing that the elderly, infirm and handicapped are not left to starve is the responsibility of all of us. Not just those within visible sight of the needy and not just by those with hearts big enough to share. All of us.
When the left or right "tax" they tax themselves just the same as the opposite wing persons of faith! It is easy to say let private charities do it but we both know that private charities can never be fully effective in identifying and serving those who most need it. That private concept does shield us from exposure to the multitudes who may, at some time in their life, need a helping hand, relieving us from the responsibility because we cannot personally see that need.
If you wish to talk about waste, fraud, misdirection of funds and such things, we probably agree on those. But any citizen who makes enough to pay taxes should not be so tight as to complain about sharing a small portion to relieve suffering and need in our society. However, I have big problems with fraud on the part of recipients or providers, and both are rampant. For that matter, anything for which government provides funding is subject to so many thefts it is abominable. Look at Medicare and the false claims submitted by doctors, those who are supposed to be a better class citizen than us common folks!
Great article. I agree with Carol. Although I am very involved with my church and it's operations I am more interested in the faith of a candidate than his religion.