From Billy Graham to Sarah Palin: Evangelicals and the Betrayal of American Conservatism [Hardcover]

D. G. Hart (Author)

Book Description

Publication Date: July 7, 2011

From Billy Graham to Sarah Palin provides an iconoclastic new history of the entrance of evangelical Christians into national American politics. Examining the key players of the “Religious Right” — Billy Graham, Jerry Falwell, Chuck Colson, James Dobson, Pat Robertson, and many others — D. G. Hart argues that evangelicalism is (and always has been) a bad fit with classic political conservatism.

Hart shows how the uneasy alliance of these unlikely political bedfellows has contributed directly to the fragmentation of today’s conservative movement. He contends that the ongoing burden of reconciling the progressive moral idealism of religious conservatives with the sober realism of political conservatives increasingly threatens this precarious partnership. Moreover, Hart suggests that evangelicals are unlikely to remain politically conservative in the long term unless they stop looking to big government to solve societal woes at home and abroad and at last embrace classic small-government conservatism for its own sake.

Editorial Reviews

Review

"Modern evangelicalism, because of its many parts and persuasions, has been said to resemble a mosaic or even a kaleidoscope. In this timely book D. G. Hart gives a thorough overview of this mosaic, looking closely at contemporary evangelicals' political engagement in recent history. While much of evangelicalism has been seen as politically conservative, Hart makes an intriguing case that it has been so in an insufficient fashion. Evangelicals need to become more Augustinian in their theology, he argues, and begin attending as much to the Federalist Papers as they do to the Scriptures. "This book offers an important challenge to evangelical leaders, pastors, and activists alike: focus on the 'permanent things,' remember your pilgrim citizenship, and never forget that the ultimate purposes of history are not determined by politics. This is not to diminish appropriate political concerns but to only put them in proper perspective. Buy a copy of this book for your pastor and also give one to your favorite Christian political activist. By doing so you will raise the level of theological, and political, conversation in the church."
—Michael Cromartie
Vice President, Ethics and Public Policy Center

"Maximally enlightening political-religious argumentation."
—Booklist

About the Author

D. G. Hart is the author or editor of more than twenty books on American religion, including A Secular Faith: Why Christianity Favors the Separation of Church and State and Deconstructing Evangelicalism: Conservative Protestantism in the Age of Billy Graham. A former director of the Institute for the Study of American Evangelicalism at Wheaton College, he is currently visiting professor of history at Hillsdale College.

Product Details

• Hardcover: 252 pages
• Publisher: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Company (July 7, 2011)
• Language: English
• ISBN-10: 080286628X
• ISBN-13: 978-0802866288
• Product Dimensions: 6 x 1 x 9 inches
• Shipping Weight: 1.2 pounds (View shipping rates and policies)
• Average Customer Review: 3.0 out of 5 stars  See all reviews (4 customer reviews)
• Amazon Best Sellers Rank: #674,048 in Books (See Top 100 in Books)

More About the Author

D. G. Hart lives in Michigan with his wife, Ann, and their two cats, Isabelle and Cordelia, where he teaches history at Hillsdale College. Hart used to be an East-Coast snob (though he still roots for the Phillies) but while living in a small mid-western town he has learned that life exists outside the Northeast Corridor. He is currently completing a global history of Calvinism and plans to write books on H. L. Mencken and American religion, and on Roman Catholicism and American conservatism.

Most Helpful Customer Reviews

19 of 25 people found the following review helpful

4.0 out of 5 stars textbook like - for serious readers October 2, 2011

By Joan N.

Format:Hardcover

For over the last twenty five years evangelicals (a form of Protestantism distinct from mainline or liberal denominations) were known to be politically conservative and politically passive.
The rallying voices of the last twenty five years (Robertson, Dobson, Falwell, etc.) are aging and dying. A transition is underway. Tensions are surfacing between evangelicals and the Right. Evangelical baby boomers are drifting to the left. Rick Warren is given as an example. There is an evangelicalism discomfort with conservatism. 9)
With this introduction, Hart gives a historical account of evangelical politics since WW II. Evangelicals saw the Bible as a better guide to the affairs of the U. S. than the constitution or the tenets of federalism. The evangelical intelligentsia is moving to the political left and they are the ones teaching in Christian colleges, writing books, and training future pastors.
Born again Protestants claim to be conservative but their assumptions and aims are at odds with conservatism. If evangelicals want to be classically conservative, they need to reconsider the way faith relates to politics. "This reconsideration will involve the recovery of an older Augustinian view of the relationship between the City of God and the City of Man, in which the ultimate purposes of history are not located in the rise and fall of empires or republics but in the church of Jesus Christ." 17-18 "Rather than looking at the American nation as the divinely instituted polity to make straight the way of the Lord," they must see the relatively unimportance of the nation-state for such ends. 18 "If evangelicals can come to the realization that the United States is the far more superior the less it is a religious juggernaut or a military hyperpower, they may actually become truly conservative." 18)
Fundamentalists emerged in the early 1900s as distinct from the established denominations. It was regarded as anti-intellectual. Some Protestants saw a way out of this by forming a new group, coined evangelicals (1942, National Association of Evangelicals). This group was somewhere between theological liberals and fundamentalists (who had become somewhat militant). The new Evangelicals wanted to Christianize the social order. They assumed America was a Christian (Protestant) nation and Christians should do all in their power to preserve that heritage. They generally remained politically silent, concentrating on soul-winning. The health of the nation depended upon the spirituality of its individuals.
As the twentieth century unfolded, evangelicals concentrated on opposing new ideas like Darwinism and Marxism, and concentrated on personal evangelism, rather than advancing social justice. Evangelicals began to call for a smaller government with fewer social services. For some, "...conservatism was simply a function of middle-class interests, individualism and personal liberty, indifference to the poor, and opposition to the welfare state." 54-55 Evangelicals began to promote the providential role of America in history, that God had a unique plan for America, a covenant relationship with God similar to that with Israel. 68 Peter Marshall's claim, in The Light and the Glory, was "that the United States had been established by providential control and had entered into a national covenant in which the country would enjoy God's blessings if faithful and suffer curses if disobedient." 72)
Francis Schaeffer emerged in the mid 1960s with the message that "political problems were essentially religious and moral problems," and, "political and cultural disorder is nothing less than a manifestation of spiritual malaise." 76-77 Schaeffer wrote of the necessity of recovering the nation's Christian basis and the dangers of secular humanism. "The founding of the United States was the embodiment of Reformation politics." 78 Other evangelical historians countered by writing that the founding and early history of the nation did not fulfill the criteria for a "Christian nation."
Mainstream media and academics were hostile to the fundamentalists becoming politically active. Richard Neuhaus suggested that was because of the presumption the more advanced a society became, the less influential religion would be. That was proving not to be the case. 94-95)
Jimmy Carter was the fist president elected who openly identified himself as "born again." His politics, however, did not satisfy many Protestant leaders. Carter did not have the right answers at a breakfast for prominent evangelical preachers and afterward they decided to active in politics and wake up Christians. 97 Falwell formed the Moral Majority in 1979. He wrote on the biblical value placed on free enterprise, criticized the money spent on welfare programs, and communist threat. 100-102)
But this influence was short lived as the Moral Majority was shut down in 1985, as was the work of LaHaye, the American Coalition. By 1986 polls showed widely held negative views of Falwell and the Religious Right. 115 Leadership passed to Pat Robertson. He ran for president and had some decent early showings until Bush gained control.
Hart continues his historical review with the influences of Ralph Reed and Marvin Olasky.

Hart spends quite some time on the difficulties of evangelicals being politically conservative. If evangelicals truly want to be conservative, he gives several concepts that must be considered. First is the source of American greatness (is it from its religious identity or its political order). Acknowledge that "liberty for all" means legal protection and status for groups non Christian and even opposed to Christianity. Acknowledge that political solutions do not solve cultural and character problems. Those are a few - he has more.

It would seem that there is a need for a different understanding than Christians thinking they can make a better world through politics. Change in culture generally does not come through politics.
Nonetheless, Hart suggests, "Evangelicals should kick the tires of conservatism and give it a test drive." 226)

Hart himself is not always objective. When reviewing the work of Randall Balmer (an egalitarian), Hart writes, "Despite the New Testament's clear instruction about male ordination..." 165 That is an intimidating statement! The instruction on ordination is by no means "clear" as many denominations and authors have differing views on women and ministry attest. This is a reminder that one must always read with discrimination and not be intimidated by statements such as this one of Hart's.

Hart's book reads like a college textbook. It is not easy reading. And don't let the mention of Palin in the title influence you. She's not mentioned. If you seriously want to know the history and relationship of evangelicalism and conservatism, this is the book for you.

7 of 9 people found the following review helpful

5.0 out of 5 stars The other reviewers are part of the political base which D.G. Hart critiques, hence their aversion to it May 7, 2012

By R. Setliff

Format:Hardcover

~From Billy Graham to Sarah Palin: Evangelicals and the Betrayal of American Conservatism~ is a critique of a popular sub-sect of the American Republican Party coalition. Hart proffered the notion of an ingrained tension between the progressive moral idealism of the religious right in contrast to the realism of political conservatives. Hart cautions that this coalition is uneasy. Evangelicals, (generally adherents of a theological persuasion known as dispensationalism,) hold to an end times paranoia of an impending World War Three in the Middle East. They have been tireless supporters of Zionism, the State of Israel, a large military-industrial complex, and an activist foreign policy. Political conservatives such as Robert Taft, Pat Buchanan, and Ron Paul have lamented this reality, insisting that activist foreign policy leads to activist domestic policy.

This tome picks up where Hart's The Lost Soul of American Protestantism left off. In that earlier tome, Hart defined the difference between evangelicalism and confessionalism. Evangelicalism grew up on pietistic soil that emphasized revivalism, personal religious experience (i.e., "testimony" of conversion), and an emotional embrace of spirituality. (Confessionalism as the name suggests stresses creedal affirmation.) Pietists in the Whig Party of the nineteenth century had a proclivity for baptizing their political platforms as the only one a good Christian should choose, and inevitably demonized their political foes (ignoring the fact that must were professed Christians.) Evangelicals early in the twentieth century had a proclivity for crusades against boogeymen to slay, be it alcoholism as manifest in the temperance movement, or the Kaiser in Germany as manifest in their support for the Great War. This was the fertile soil, in which evangelicalism, came to fruition in the twentieth century.

Hart argues that millenarian nature of pietists nurtured a political culture that romanticizes political crusades, be it battles for morality or battles against enemies abroad. If one thinks Hart's analysis is misplaced. Consider the following. When Christian Coalition Chair Ralph Reed penned Active Faith: How Christians Are Changing the Face of American Politics he extolled, egalitarianism, Franklin Roosevelt, and concepts of social justice as being near to the values of the 'religious right.' Whereas the Old Right stood athwart the New Deal, Reed embraced it happily counting Progressive FDR as a fellow Christian. When Michael Huckabee, a former Arkansas governor and seminary-trained pastor announced his candidacy for the American presidency in 2008, his political base included much of the residual elements of the Moral Majority. Yet Huckabee's track record as governor was one of Big Government, exorbitant increases in expenditure and taxation, expansion of social welfare services, and the political pardon of capital crime offenders. Huckabee's policies did NOT sit well with political conservatives that stressed a night-watchmen state of law-and-order and fiscal restraint.

The right-wing Social Gospel goes yet further. Evangelicals enthusiastically championed George W. Bush's campaign and presidency in 2000 and 2004, in spite of the fact that spending during his administration outpaced the growth of government under Lyndon Baines Johnson's Great Society in the 1960s, a total of 104 percent. His evangelical supporters were fond of Bush's so called 'Faith'-based charity program, which provided federal funds to private religious organizations. Meanwhile political conservatives and libertarians cried foul and lamented its unconstitutionality under the First and Tenth Amendments, and its effect of corrupting recipients, and subordinating them to the state. Evangelical universities like Liberty and Regent, founded by Falwell and Robertson respectively, are large beneficiaries of the federal student loan program while politically conservative schools like Hillsdale spurn federal aid. It seems evangelicals lamented federal education expenditure up until the point they were allowed to get their hands in the cookie jar.

Unlike political conservatives, religious conservatives are bothered less by the erosion of civil liberties manifest in anti-terrorism legislation than the prospect of gay marriage. The progressive moral idealism of evangelicals tends to define their political philosophy, and it comes at the expense of constitutional and fiscal scruples, and leads them to favor activist government, both at home and abroad. Political conservatives naturally lament of this reality.

Hart forecasts that evangelicals are unlikely to adhere to political conservatism in the long-run, as they continue to look to big government to solve societal issues, domestically and internationally. Though Aristotle once spoke of a revolution within forms where one thing takes the place of another. So I am willing to bet that regardless of their transformation, evangelicals will continually style themselves as conservatives. Though Hart's implication that the tension between religious and political conservatives may lead to the break-up of the Republican Party coalition is feasible. In a decade or two, it is possible a Tertium Quid ("third-something") coalition may coalesce into a new party consisting of libertarians and political conservatives, absent the religious right. Their success may depend on courting disaffected center-left politicos that find common ground on the desire for a less activist foreign policy and smaller military. The effect would be to fracture the Republican Party coalition and marginalize the religious Right.

Finally, even if you do not agree in total with the analysis, in whole or part, D.G. Hart's book deserves consideration. His prose is tight, crisp, and his argument holds to a persuasive quality. Hart writes as a political conservative and a confessional Protestant. So what if he is "biased" as religious conservatives claim. I came out of the pietistic background in the Bible Belt, and I think much of his critique is spot on. Religious conservative in tune with the Moral Majority could benefit by reading this needed book, mindful of Burke's adage, "He that wrestles with us, sharpens our skills and strengthens our nerves. Our antagonist is our helper."

15 of 27 people found the following review helpful

2.0 out of 5 stars A pretty weak argument December 23, 2011

By deskjockey

Format:Hardcover

I doubt that Mr Hart will be flattered by the comparison, but this book reminds me of Thomas Frank's "What's the Matter with Kansas?" In each case, the underlying (and arrogant) assumption is that social conservatives are too ignorant to act in their own self-interest, either by failing to embrace economic populism (Frank) or classical Burkean conservatism (Hart). Of course, it is possible that evangelicals are politically at sea, and even (in the misleadingly provocative title of this book) "betraying American Conservatism", but Hart doesn't deliver much in the way of evidence to make his case.

Perhaps the most glaring weakness of this book is its anachronistic characterization of the evangelical community. Despite the availability of numerous studies and polls which have assayed the political priorities of evangelical voters in the past half-dozen election cycles, Hart does not even attempt to use this data to support his thesis. Rather, he invokes a handful of quotes from 1970's-era political personalities (Senator Mark Hatfield, Jerry Falwell) and modern day left-wing progressives (Jim Wallis, Tony Campolo) as the benchmarks of evangelical political thought, while ignoring the fact that the contemporary evangelical community is overwhelmingly suburban, well-educated, civically engaged, and politically and theologically sophisticated. As a result, the purported conflict between evangelicals and conservatives is reduced to a handful of peripheral issues (school prayer, teaching creationism), while glossing over the overwhelmingly broad consensus they share on the important ones - strong national defense, limited government, and the inherent dignity of human life.

Ironically, while this book was intended to persuade evangelicals to embrace a more secular approach to politics, it also invites us to ponder the viability of classical conservatism. Hart argues that evangelicals would be better off if they kept their religious interests separate from their political ones. Unfortunately, in the aftermath of a half-century-long assault on the traditional foundations of our culture, it is increasingly hard to maintain even a small private place for religion. If anything, this book confirms the folly of trying to separate social conservatism from economic conservatism.