An analysis of faith professions inside the Oval Office
Published Jan 31, 2008In a charged environment where primary presidential hopefuls such as Mitt Romney, a Mormon, and Mike Huckabee, an ordained Baptist minister, acknowledged their religious beliefs while at the same time made it plain that for them church and state are sacred but separate entities, Randall Balmer’s book, “God in the White House”—an examination of the U.S. presidents’ responses and reactions to religion from 1960 until 2004—is a timely release.
For those who intend to read this book, here’s a suggestion—begin with the 50 pages that make up the appendix and read the seven speeches from JFK, LBJ, Ford, Carter, Reagan, Clinton and George W. Bush. The challenge will be to sort through the spin of a good speechwriter and search for a sense of heartfelt sincerity on the part of the men who delivered the words. The section is pivotal, providing authentic historical context and stimulating the reader’s interest at the same time.
Referring to himself as “an evangelical Christian,” Balmer is a prolific writer and far from a novice on the topic; he is professor of American religious history at New York’s Columbia University.
Balmer, a regular contributor to numerous Christian and secular publications, sets out to “trace the transition” between 1960, when John F. Kennedy made an obviously convincing plea for voters to disregard his faith affiliation, to 2004, when candidates for the highest office in the country were called upon by voters to “fully disclose their religious views.”
The author makes it clear that his writings are neither intended as a “comprehensive history” nor are they directed toward a political science perspective. Instead he launches a president-by-president examination of how personal faith and organized religious groups intersected, sometimes collided, inside the Oval Office over four decades. In the preface, Balmer theorizes that “voices of faith” should be involved in the political process, but “faith loses its prophetic voice” if aligned too closely with a particular movement or party.
Many authors might be tempted to race to deadline, seeking to hitchhike on this subject as the months close in toward the November elections. But the reader will find a winner in this text—it is organized, well written, carefully researched and meticulously documented. The sign of a seasoned academic, Balmer remains just on the fringe of the discourse, mostly refraining from personal asides and resisting opinion and judgment.
The development of the “Religious Right” and its powerful influence in Washington, D.C., the number of professed “born again” Christians who sat behind the desk in the Oval Office, those presidents who considered themselves evangelicals and those who were mostly indifferent to religious affiliation are detailed in this book. The influential religious leader most welcomed and embraced by the majority of these presidents and their families was the Rev. Billy Graham, according to the author’s research.
Balmer draws an interesting parallel between Jimmy Carter and George W. Bush, writing that both men seized the opportunity to be portrayed as “redemptive” to a population morally wounded by the negative effects of their predecessors—Richard Nixon and Bill Clinton.
Rhetoric aside, the revelations that flowed from the presidents’ speeches printed in the appendix are at best a glimpse, a hint of the direction in which their moral compasses were pointed. However, Balmer cautions: “… a candidate’s faith (or lack of same)” is a legitimate concern for voters and “an insight into his (or her) character, but it should be only one of many considerations.” He continues, warning that faith is at risk of being “prostituted” when used “in pursuit of political power.”
This book would make for thoughtful and healthy discussion in a high school or university classroom setting or between family members.
E-mail
|
Print
|