georgetownFaith_614x75.gif
Jacques Berlinerblau

The God Vote

Jacques Berlinerblau

Jacques Berlinerblau is associate Professor and Director of the Program for Jewish Civilization at the Edmund A. Walsh School of Foreign Service at Georgetown University. Many years ago he received a doctorate in ancient Near Eastern Languages and Literature from New York University. Soon after, for reasons that he himself has never fully understood, he completed another doctorate in theoretical sociology from the New School for Social Research. Feeling sufficiently credentialed to write about and research any topic under the sun, his areas of interest include the Bible, its composition, its interpretation, and in particular the way that it has been dragooned into modern political discourse. To this end his new book is called "Thumpin' It: The Use and Abuse of the Bible in Today's Presidential Politics" (Westminster John Knox), described by First Things as "laugh-out-loud funny as well as astute." He also has published "The Secular Bible: Why Nonbelievers Must Take Religion Seriously" (Cambridge:2005). An earlier book, "Heresy in the University: The Black Athena Controversy and the Responsibilities of American Intellectuals" (Rutgers: 1999) probed the manner in which institutions of higher education handle scholarly dissent. He has written extensively in scholarly journals on the subject of heretics, intellectuals, secularism, and Jewish civilization. This confluence of interests accounts, to a great degree, for his fascination with modern Jewish-American literature. A life-long New Yorker, he has recently moved to Washington D.C. with his family and is beguiled by the strange traffic lights that count down the seconds until they finally change colors. Close.

The God Vote

Jacques Berlinerblau

Jacques Berlinerblau is program director and associate professor of Jewish Civilization at the Edmund A. Walsh School of Foreign Service at Georgetown University. He is the author of the new book "Thumpin’ It: The Use and Abuse of the Bible in Today’s Presidential Politics" and "The Secular Bible: Why Nonbelievers Must Take Religion Seriously." The God Vote is a critical look at the religious rhetoric, activity and theology behind the 2008 presidential campaign. Full bio »

The God Vote | Georgetown/On Faith Archives | On Faith Archives | Berkley Center for Religion, Peace, and World Affairs | Georgetown


The Biggest (Democratic) Losers

In my last post, I asked Democrats to identify the GOP presidential aspirant who had the greatest chance of being crushed like a vulgar mosquito by either Clinton or Obama or Edwards on Election Day.

Now it is your turn, esteemed Republican voter. Who is your cherished McGovern? Your beloved Mondale? Your hard-to-top Dukakis? Your oh-so-kind Kerry?

Who do you want to see grinning unsuspectingly, drenched in a cascade of balloons and confetti, arm draped around a running mate, swaying a-rhythmically to music piped in over the massive sound system (Led Zeppelin's "Fool in the Rain," perhaps?) at the Democratic National Convention in Denver this August?

My contribution to this discussion about the biggest potential loser consists of risk-assessing the candidates’ Faith and Values liabilities. And let me stress that for the first time in recent memory the Democrats have far fewer of these than their GOP counterparts

As I will note next week one of the biggest political stories of 2007 was that the Democrats finally “got” religion. Getting religion meant keeping northeastern Liberals with ambivalent or cryptic relations to their faith off the slate. Getting religion meant equipping each front-runner with a credible “narrative of belief.” Getting religion meant keeping any idea or person that smacked of extreme secularism at a distance of five hundred yards from the candidates (and, presumably, the Pepsi Center in Denver on August 25-28).

With his solid Baptist past and Methodist present, John Edwards will be hard to tar as a cultured despiser of religion. Were he to win his party’s nomination he will continue to speak about poverty while adducing his scriptural prooftexts. So-called values voters may not appreciate his liberal politics. Others may sneer at his massive wealth. Yet his faith commitments will be hard to doubt, misrepresent, Swift Boat, and so forth.

The same can be said about Barack Obama--the most likely of all the presidential contenders to be offered a professorship at a theological seminary later in life. Were he to represent his party he would conceivably rethink and redefine its understanding of the proper relation between Church and State for years to come—a project that he already embarked upon in his The Audacity of Hope.

There are, of course, youthful indiscretions to be reckoned with as well as a problematic spiritual mentor. But the Senator from Illinois has no major faith-based vulnerabilities to speak of. Like Edwards, he could conceivably sluice off millions of Evangelical votes in a national election.

That Hillary Clinton has glaring “negatives” in the eyes of many voters is undeniable. But these no longer center predominantly on religious issues. She has inoculated herself expertly against the charge, often heard in the 1990s, that she is some sort of radical, godless feminist. Even prior to her 2000 senate run in New York, Clinton had seeded her biography with fact-checkable references to early Church experiences, life-long Bible study, a spiritual mentor, and a penchant for daily prayer.

If she were to win the nomination we might see a contest between two very determined constituencies. Coming out for Hillary (or any Democrat, actually) will be a massive anti-Christian Right block (who I have elsewhere dubbed devalued voters). Opposing them will be the large, loud (and, quite frankly, occasionally scary) anti-Hillary brigades. This cohort wants (or thinks it wants) a piece of the former First Lady and it is most likely Hillary that they wish to see rejoicing in Denver.

*****
Readers, researchers and pundits: Let me direct your attention to Faith 2008, a new database featuring the candidates' statements on religion. It comes to you via Georgetown University’s Berkley Center for Religion, Peace and World Affairs and is the brainchild of its director, Dr. Tom Banchoff. The site is a treasure trove of information on the candidates and their public statements on religion. I expect that it will soon become an indispensable tool for those of us surveying the intersection of faith and politics. Please check it out at faith2008.org

Reader Response -- Latest Featured Comment

» John Adams | I first would identify myself as Conservative and Christian. I feel that all of America is losing because Christians have abbrogated thei...
MORE FEATURED COMMENTS | ALL COMMENTS (44)

Post a comment

Top Local Global

On Faith is an interactive conversation on religion moderated by Newsweek Editor Jon Meacham and Sally Quinn of The Washington Post. It is produced jointly by Newsweek and washingtonpost.com, as is PostGlobal, a conversation on international affairs. Please send your comments, questions and suggestions for On Faith to David Waters, its producer.
> > > > > > > > > >