God's Name In Vain [Paperback]

Stephen Carter (Author)

Book Description

Publication Date: October 25, 2001

Stephen Carter argues that American politics is unimaginable without America's religious voice. Using contemporary and historical examples, from abolitionist sermons to presidential candidates' confessions, he illustrates ways in which religion and politics do and do not mesh well and ways in which spiritual perspectives might make vital contributions to our national debates. He also warns us of the importance of setting out some sensible limits, so that religious institutions do not allow themselves to be seduced by the lure of temporal power, and offers strong examples of principled and prophetic religious activism for those who choose their God before their country.

Editorial Reviews

Amazon.com Review

God's Name in Vain: The Wrongs and Rights of Religion in Politics is a timely work of cultural history by Stephen L. Carter, a professor at Yale Law School and the author of The Culture of Disbelief. The book presents two interrelated arguments: "First, that there is nothing wrong, and much right, with the robust participation of the nation's many religious voices in debates over matters of public moment. Second, that religions--although not democracy--will almost always lose their best, most spiritual selves when they choose to be involved in the partisan, electoral side of politics." In making these arguments, God's Name in Vain cites historical anecdotes ranging from the Abolitionist movement to the Christian Coalition. Carter's writing is rhetorically powerful, his historical knowledge is estimable, and his spiritual and political convictions are passionate. But Carter's real crusade in God's Name in Vain is not intellectual, theological, or political. It is moral. He writes in the book's Introduction: "[M]orality, in religious terms, is nothing but the actual practice of one's religious faith. Religion is what we profess and morality is what it moves us to do. Politics needs morality, which means that politics needs religion." The idea is interesting, and it is popular, but it is a fallacy. Even Carter's most devout readers may be disappointed that his elegant ideology is blind to the reality of secular morality. --Michael Joseph Gross --This text refers to an out of print or unavailable edition of this title.

From Publishers Weekly

Religion can't be kept out of public life. Yale Law School's Carter, building on the argument he made in The Culture of Disbelief, says the only people who want religious people to abandon religion when they enter the public square are people who think religion isn't very important. Indeed, Carter contends, religious discourse very often enriches public debate. Drawing on such historians as Charles Marsh and Nathan Hatch, Carter argues that religion has long motivated social change in America, noting that Christianity undergirded the civil rights movement and crusades such as abolitionism, labor and temperance. But if religion is often good for politics, he says, it's sometimes been "disastrous" for people's religiosity. Black preachers, for example, have had to soften their "prophetic ministry" in order to play in the corridors of power. Carter not only mines the past, he also takes on contemporary policy issues such as school choice, suggesting that religious people should rally around a platform that elevates "parental interest above the interest of the state." Contra Amy Gutman (Democratic Education), Carter believes that religious parents should be able to raise religious children, and that children should not be coerced into a public school system hostile to their beliefs. These subtle arguments are cast in the elegant prose Carter fans have come to expect. His is a sane, fresh voice in the too-often stale debate about religion and public life. (Oct.) Forecast: Carter's The Culture of Disbelief altered America's debate on religion's role in public life, and there is no reason that this outstanding, thoughtful title shouldn't do the same particularly since its release is timed so perfectly with the presidential election.
Copyright 2000 Reed Business Information, Inc. --This text refers to an out of print or unavailable edition of this title.

See all Editorial Reviews

Product Details

• Paperback: 264 pages
• Publisher: Basic Books; Reprint edition (October 25, 2001)
• Language: English
• ISBN-10: 0465008879
• ISBN-13: 978-0465008872
• Product Dimensions: 6 x 0.7 x 9 inches
• Shipping Weight: 11.2 ounces (View shipping rates and policies)
• Average Customer Review: 3.9 out of 5 stars  See all reviews (11 customer reviews)
• Amazon Best Sellers Rank: #1,026,531 in Books (See Top 100 in Books)

More About the Author

Discover books, learn about writers, read author blogs, and more.

Most Helpful Customer Reviews

4 of 4 people found the following review helpful

4.0 out of 5 stars OK but very pre-9/11 June 4, 2007

By Michael Lewyn VINE™ VOICE

Format:Paperback

Carter focuses on two issues:

1. To what extent should religion speak about political issues? Carter favors a broad reach for religion; because religion by definition covers every conceivable moral issue, there is no logical reason why political issues should be outside its reach. (And his excellent discussion of the religious element in the abolitionist movement shows that both religious involvement in American politics AND secularist criticism of same are nothing new). However, I wonder whether Carter's book would have been written differently since the rise of radical terrorist Islam.

2. Exactly how partisan should religion be? Carter argues that those who argue in the name of religion should be forever outsiders, lest they become coopted (and thus less radical and less truly religious) by being folded into a political coalition and thus making their allies' views more important than their own spiritual demands. Accordingly, religious leaders should try to avoid endorsing candidates (though Carter opposes legal restrictions on their right to do so). Carter uses an interesting Biblical example of how religious leaders should behave: rather than calling for new rulers in Israel, the prophets called on the existing kings to repent. (Of course, there are exceptions to this rule that Carter does not mention, e.g. Samuel anoiting King David).

I found the latter discussion more interesting than the former. I wish Carter was a bit more attentive to the dangers of overpowerful religion, and that he was a bit stingier with generalities about "American culture." Liberal secularists are part of American culture- but so are conservatives who are happy to hear the latest pronouncements of James Dobson or other religious conservatives.

Carter also devotes some space to legal issues, discussing the paradox of First Amendment religion doctrine: the purpose of the Free Exercise and Establishment Clauses was in part to protect religion from the state- yet the clauses force the state to decide which religions it protects and accommodates, thus giving the state power over religion! This conundrum, however, has no perfect answer.

4.0 out of 5 stars Interesting book December 28, 2012

By Storeboy

Format:Kindle Edition|Amazon Verified Purchase

I needed another perspective in the religio-political debate. Stephen Carter is a bright, thinking,schilarly man even if I don't agree with some of his points of view.

4.0 out of 5 stars A voice worth listening to, but one which needs to be personally evaluated March 2, 2010

By Neal C. Reynolds VINE™ VOICE

Format:Paperback

This is the first non-fiction I've read by Stephen L. Carter, and im quite impressed with his ability to present his two major arguments and then amplify and thoroughly discuss them. I didn't find this compoletely persuasive, but there is a whole lot to chew on in his treatise. Read this with an open mind and I believe you will find the author one to respect and to listen to, but not to necessarily agree with all the way down the line. Morality is the key word throughout the book, and this is basically a study in morality, not theology, law, or politics.