The topic of immigration is at the center of contemporary politics and, from a scholarly perspective, existing studies have documented that attitudes towards immigration have brought about changes in both partisanship and voting behavior. However, many scholars have missed or misconstrued the role of religion in this transformation, particularly evangelical Protestant Christianity. This book examines the historical and contemporary relationships between religion and immigration politics, with a particularly in-depth analysis of the fault lines within evangelicalism-divisions not only between whites and non-whites, but also the increasingly consequential disconnect between elites and laity within white evangelicalism. The book's empirical analysis relies on original interviews with Christian leaders, data from original church surveys conducted by the authors, and secondary analysis of several national public opinion surveys. It concludes with suggestions for bridging the elite/laity and racial divides. Ruth M. Melkonian-Hoover: (Ph.D., Emory University) is Chair and Professor of Political Science at Gordon College, Massachusetts. She has contributed chapters to Faith in a Pluralist Age (2018) and Is the Good Book Good Enough? (2011). She has published in a wide range of journals including Social Science Quarterly, The Review of Faith & International Affairs, Latin American Perspectives, Political Research Quarterly, Comment, and Capital Commentary. Lyman A. Kellstedt: (Ph.D., University of Illinois) is Professor of Political Science (emeritus) at Wheaton College, Illinois. He has authored or coauthored numerous articles, book chapters, and books in religion and politics, including Religion and the Culture Wars (1996), The Bully Pulpit (1997), and The Oxford Handbook of Religion and American Politics (2009).

The role that race and religion play in American presidential elections is attracting national attention like never before. The 2008 presidential candidates reached out to an unprecedented number of racial and religious voting constituencies including African Americans, Latinos, Muslims, Mainline Protestants, Catholics, Evangelicals, Jews, women, the non-religious, and more. Religion, Race, and the American Presidency focuses on the roles of these racial and religious groups in presidential elections over the last forty years, and in elections since 2000 in particular. Drawing upon survey data, interviews, and case studies of recent presidents, the contributors examine the complicated relationships between American presidents and key racial and religious groups. The paperback edition features a new capstone chapter on the 2008 elections. Contributions by Brian Robert Calfano, David G. Dalin, Paul A. Djupe, Gaston Espinosa, John C. Green, Melissa V. Harris-Lacewell, Lyman A. Kellstedt, So Young Kim, David C. Leege, Laura R. Olson, Corwin Smidt, Katherine E. Stenger, and Adam L. Warber.

This text addresses whether and how religion and religious institutions affect American politics. For some time, analysts have argued that the conflicts of the New Deal era rendered cultural differences trivial and placed economic interests at the top of the political agenda. The authors and their collaborators - John C. Green, James L. Guth, Ted G. Jelen, Corwin E. Smidt, Kenneth D. Wald, Michael R. Welch, and Clyde Wilcox - disagree. They find that religious worldviews are still insinuated in American political institutions, and religious institutions still are points of reference. The book profits from the new religiosity measures employed in the 1990 National Election Studies. Part 1 discusses the study of religion in the context of politics. Part II examines religion as a source of group orientation. Part III takes up religious practices and their political ramifications. Part IV does the same for doctrinal and worldview considerations. Part V explores the sources of religious socialisation. In conclusion, Part VI reviews the research on religion and political behaviour and looks ahead to where work should proceed.

This text addresses whether and how religion and religious institutions affect American politics. For some time, analysts have argued that the conflicts of the New Deal era rendered cultural differences trivial and placed economic interests at the top of the political agenda. The authors and their collaborators - John C. Green, James L. Guth, Ted G. Jelen, Corwin E. Smidt, Kenneth D. Wald, Michael R. Welch, and Clyde Wilcox - disagree. They find that religious worldviews are still insinuated in American political institutions, and religious institutions still are points of reference. The book profits from the new religiosity measures employed in the 1990 National Election Studies. Part 1 discusses the study of religion in the context of politics. Part II examines religion as a source of group orientation. Part III takes up religious practices and their political ramifications. Part IV does the same for doctrinal and worldview considerations. Part V explores the sources of religious socialisation. In conclusion, Part VI reviews the research on religion and political behaviour and looks ahead to where work should proceed.

The topic of immigration is at the center of contemporary politics and, from a scholarly perspective, existing studies have documented that attitudes towards immigration have brought about changes in both partisanship and voting behavior. However, many scholars have missed or misconstrued the role of religion in this transformation, particularly evangelical Protestant Christianity. This book examines the historical and contemporary relationships between religion and immigration politics, with a particularly in-depth analysis of the fault lines within evangelicalism-divisions not only between whites and non-whites, but also the increasingly consequential disconnect between elites and laity within white evangelicalism. The book's empirical analysis relies on original interviews with Christian leaders, data from original church surveys conducted by the authors, and secondary analysis of several national public opinion surveys. It concludes with suggestions for bridging the elite/laity and racial divides. Ruth M. Melkonian-Hoover: (Ph.D., Emory University) is Chair and Professor of Political Science at Gordon College, Massachusetts. She has contributed chapters to Faith in a Pluralist Age (2018) and Is the Good Book Good Enough? (2011). She has published in a wide range of journals including Social Science Quarterly, The Review of Faith & International Affairs, Latin American Perspectives, Political Research Quarterly, Comment, and Capital Commentary. Lyman A. Kellstedt: (Ph.D., University of Illinois) is Professor of Political Science (emeritus) at Wheaton College, Illinois. He has authored or coauthored numerous articles, book chapters, and books in religion and politics, including Religion and the Culture Wars (1996), The Bully Pulpit (1997), and The Oxford Handbook of Religion and American Politics (2009).

When Democrats lost control of Congress in 1994, the Religious Right claimed a major role in their defeat and House Speaker Newt Gingrich credited the "organized Christian vote" with the Republican victory. Ministers from many political persuasions have long been active in American politics, but in the 1980s and 1990s it has seemed impossible to find any political controversy that did not involve the clergy -- often on both sides of the issue.

In this first major study of clergy and politics in more than twenty years, five social scientists tell how and why the theological orthodoxy and modernism that divides American Protestants into two camps increasingly correlates with today's political climate. Drawing on two decades of extensive survey research conducted with thousands of ministers nationwide, they explore the political attitudes and behavior of the clergy in eight mainline and evangelical Protestant denominations -- including Southern Baptist, Assemblies of God, United Methodist, and Presbyterian.

In addressing the nature and extent of clerical participation, The Bully Pulpit asks the following questions: How do different groups of ministers see their role in politics? What kinds of activities do they approve or disapprove? How active are contemporary Protestant clergy in politics? What factors account for the level and kinds of participation? It also questions whether analyses of clerical activism made in the 1960s and 1970s can be said to apply to Protestants today.

The authors' findings reveal that traditionalists who seek moral reform tend to make pronouncements in religious settings, while modernists interested in social justice are more active in a wide range ofpolitical activities. They also indicate that the "New Breed" liberals are just as active as the Religious Right, citing the long heritage of mainline Protestant politics that continues in the tradition of activist ministers of the 1960s and 1970s. Their book offers an unbiased measure of political activism among both conservative and liberal clergymen at the end of the century and helps us understand the current state of the relationship between church and state in America.