Cross Purposes: Christianity's Broken Bargain with Democracy

by Jonathan Rauch

Why the crisis of Christianity has become a crisis for democracy
 
What happens to American democracy if Christianity is no longer able, or no longer willing, to perform the functions on which our constitutional order depends? In this provocative book, the award-winning journalist Jonathan Rauch—a lifelong atheist—reckons candidly with both the shortcomings of secularism and the corrosion of Christianity.
 
Thin Christianity, as Rauch calls the mainline church, has been unable to inspire and retain believers. Worse, a Church of Fear has distorted white evangelicalism in ways that violate the tenets of both Jesus and James Madison. What to do? For answers, Rauch looks to a new generation of religious thinkers, as well as to the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, which has placed the Constitution at the heart of its spiritual teachings.
 
In this timely critique Rauch addresses secular Americans who think Christianity can be abandoned, and Christian Americans who blame secular culture for their grievances. The two must work together, he argues, to confront our present crisis. He calls on Christians to recommit to the teachings of their faith that align with Madison, not MAGA, and to understand that liberal democracy, far from being oppressive, is uniquely protective of religious freedom. At the same time, he calls on secular liberals to understand that healthy religious institutions are crucial to the survival of the liberal state.

Genres: Religion, Politics, Nonfiction, Christianity, History, Philosophy, Christian

160 pages, Kindle Edition

Published January 28, 2025

Reviews

[Gary Gunderson · Rating 5 out of 5]

the book for our times

Brilliant, original, thoughtful, inspiring. Rauch brings a scholars precision and pilgrims soul, helping Christian’s and patriotic liberals be themselves. Grateful.

[Ben Duffield · Rating 4 out of 5]

I attended a talk given by Jonathan Rauch on campus and was just stunned. His comments on Latter-day Saint civic theology obviously made me feel pretty good -- but ultimately this just gave me a lot of hope that the things that scare me most in politics today are solvable. Fascinating read from an atheist homosexual Jew who cares deeply about the fate of Christianity in America.
My one point of skepticism with this is that it feels like a non-Christian is trying to tell Christians what facets of their faith matter most. I can imagine a variety of legitimate responses to his critiques of evangelical political theology -- I just so happen to agree with Rauch, so I was OK with it. He also did a good job of hedging frequently with "I know I'm not a Christian, so I'm not trying to tell Christians what they should or shouldn't believe". It did feel a bit like he was saying "I'm not a Christian, but I am going to define Christianity from the outside", which I don't totally agree with. Again, I agreed with his conclusion and it rings true to me, so that colors my feelings positively towards the book.

[Michael Rawson · Rating 5 out of 5]

Lovely read. Heard him speak at BYU last week and liked his message. Five stars for clearly illuminating and expounding on what seems to be the biggest issue facing American Christianity and American politics today. Interesting thesis that Christianity and American Democracy are interrelated and in some sense codependent. I thought the section on Christianity’s adoption of and unification with right wing politics was particularly poignant. Will return to that section.

Thought he did a good job at talking about how Christianity, by embracing pluralism, can illuminate its strengths. Love the idea that Christian religion should be peculiar and distinct!

I was particularly captivated by his discussion of civic theology, and quite touched by the care that he took to accurately understand and represent the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. This kind of accurate and respectful treatment from an outsider can be hard to come across. I especially liked that he clearly stated his real disagreements with the Church on some matters, but emphasized that those real disagreements made the LDS Church’s commitment to Madisonian pluralism that much more impressive.

I think there are real lessons to learn from this book, and I plan to return to several sections.

Bravo Jonathan Rauch

[George · Rating 5 out of 5]

Insightful, brave, and generous. Hearing him speak recently and reading this book have been important and formative in my thinking during this very challenging time.

[Samuel Handley · Rating 5 out of 5]

A very important read at a critical time in US history.

[Gordon Larsen · Rating 5 out of 5]

Jonathan Rauch is a thoughtful and thought-provoking scholar, and I enjoyed Cross Purposes as much as I enjoyed The Constitution of Knowledge. I'm impressed by Jon's humility and curiosity. He has a knack for seeing the good even in organizations or institutions that he criticizes.

He makes a strong case that American democracy and Christianity support each other but that Christianity isn't holding up its end of the bargain, largely discarding Christian behavior in the public square in favor of politics. Democracy is suffering as a result. He says the one exception to the trend is The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, which goes against the grain a bit by focusing on Christian love in the public sphere and what Rauch describes as a "civic theology" that emphasizes the importance of negotiation and accommodation with those with whom we disagree on matters of public policy. He discusses at length the ministry of President Dallin H. Oaks— his conference addresses, his 2021 lecture at the University of Virginia, and Rauch's own interviews with President Oaks.

It's a great read.

[Barry · Rating 4 out of 5]

Although not a Christian himself, Rauch believes that the Christian church is very important to the overall health and wellbeing of our republic, and that both the country and the church would be better off if the church were to be more, well, Christian.

While Christians are often quick to blame the church’s deficiencies on society’s increasing secularism, many of these problems are not coming from the outside, but instead with how Christians tend to respond to perceived threats and loss of influence. Too often this pressure produces a culture-war mentality, but Rauch cautions that this defensive stance contributes to our noxious climate of political polarization. He makes a number of interesting critiques and suggestions.

What I found most fascinating was his chapter about what can be learned from the Mormons (LDS). Rauch details how the LDS church has responded specifically to LGBT issues and gay marriage. Perhaps because Mormonism developed as a persecuted minority (as opposed to Christians living in a culture after 1500-plus years of Christendom), the LDS church more highly values the freedom of thought over political coercion. According to Rauch, they are thus more willing to make political compromises with those who hold opposing viewpoints in order to preserve the freedom of choice for each side, rather than fight for political domination. I found this pretty interesting food for thought.

Here’s the likely more helpful ChatGPT review/critique:

https://chatgpt.com/s/t_68e727c479fc8...

[Brad Peterson · Rating 4 out of 5]

I don't agree with all he says, but his prescription for how religious and secular individuals can bridge the divisive chasm between the current liberal and conservative factions makes a lot of sense. Notwithstanding that he is an atheist, homosexual and is Jewish, he points to recent progress by the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints as a formula for living in a pluralistic society.

[Erik Fronberg · Rating 5 out of 5]

In a reprimand of the many conservative Americans who have turned their Christianity into a political tool to pursue populism and ethnic nationalism, Rauch distills the Christian faith to three basic principles irreconcilable with the MAGA movement: do not fear, imitate Jesus, and forgive others. He explores how these ideals have been, and continue to be, essential bulwarks to Madisonian democracy. As a Latter-day Saint, I was interested in Rauch (a homosexual Jewish atheist as he frequently reminds the reader) using my faith community as a positive example of the 'civic theology' he hopes other groups can emulate. I felt he was respectful and accurate in his description of my religion. The book, recently published, doesn't touch on the reelection of Donald Trump which has a chilling effect on the hopeful note Rauch tries to end on.

[Pete · Rating 3 out of 5]

This one was a slog for me because I almost drowned in a sea of words and convoluted sentences. Little islands of lucidity appeared on the horizon here and there - but then faded quickly away when I tried to navigate closer.

I think the guy was maybe trying to point out that many evangelical Christians today are also MAGA republicans - and he’s having trouble understanding how they can reconcile the unreconcilable. Welcome to the club, pal.

After I skipped to the end, I think I’m right in observing that it concluded on a hopeful and optimistic note. Shake hands and part in love - maybe tomorrow will be a better day.

[Mary Stewart · Rating 5 out of 5]

Read this book.

[Justin Nipko · Rating 4 out of 5]

No one summarizes my exact political conclusions and corresponding stances like Jonathan Rauch. He and I seem to be perfectly aligned.

I settled on 4 stars because I think Rauch missed the ultra-conservative underbelly of the LDS church. It doesn’t change his overall argument since church leadership has made a notable pro-pluralism turn in recent years, but he failed to recognize the illiberal problems that exist within church membership. LDS leaders are fighting many of the same headwinds that evangelical pastors face in the age of Trump (whether they publicly acknowledge it or not), and the book completely fails to recognize this.

Otherwise, this is a well-researched, well-articulated book about the symbiotic relationship between Christianity and liberalism. Highly recommend.

[Meredith Gardner · Rating 4 out of 5]

A quick read that makes a compelling case for pluralism in democracy. While they are often in tension, our society needs both liberal secularism and morally sound religious institutions.

[Angie · Rating 5 out of 5]

Two things I really like about this book: 1. It's concise and not overly long. 2. It's by an atheist who makes a well-reasoned argument that Christianity has been a beneficial, stabilizing force on democracy in the past and could be again. This book is especially for anyone who has been utterly baffled by Christianity's role in the public square in the age of Trump. I also heartily recommend his earlier book, "The Constitution of Knowledge."

[Emily · Rating 4 out of 5]

4.5 stars. This is a thought-provoking book on the relationship between Christianity and American democracy, written by a Jewish Atheist. His premise is that the success of our democracy is dependent upon Christianity holding up the moral end of the bargain. Unfortunately, as people are leaving religion (without a comparable positive replacement), as well as evangelical’s unification with extreme right-wing politics (allowing divisive politics to trump Christian behavior), we are experiencing the detrimental effects on our democracy. I thought it was very open-minded and generous to hold up the civic theology of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints as a way to balance Constitutional and Christian values. (As a personal aside, being part of a religion that is so widely criticized and targeted, and with Rauch’s understandably specific criticism against our theology, I respect his ability to recognize and share the good he sees). President Dallin H. Oaks stated that finding this balance “requires patience, negotiation, and mutual accommodation.” I also liked Rauch’s suggestion that Christianity needs to be a peculiar, set-apart people. Interesting ideas to think about, and thoughtfully delivered.

Lots of notes and quotes:

Focus of book:
Thin Christianity: Faith’s Crisis, Democracy’s Peril-Christianity and democracy are dangerously out of alignment
Sharp Christianity: The Church of Fear-“Flight 93” evangelicalism betrays the church and the Constitution
Thick Christianity: The Gospel of Compromise-There are many ways to reconcile Jesus with James Madison

-Trump inverted what were once understood as core Christian values; won more than 80% evangelical vote; Trying to understand evangelical support of Trump?; Maga seems to betray their Christian faith (fear not, love and follow Christ, and forgive)

-His Christian friend’s gentleness, kindness, grace—whose genuine goodness helped him see what a good Christian should be. “I didn’t convert. I didn’t change my mind. You were the portal, though, to a change of heart. Once I had seen what Christianity could be, it became a subject of curiosity for me, instead of contempt—something I had to know more about.” p. 4
-“My view of spirituality evolved, too. I came to see that people who believe in God have an ability I lack. They receive frequencies l can't detect, which give their worlds a dimensionality, a layer of meaning, that my world lacks. This does not make their view— your view--better or truer than mine. But I am not defensive about likening my atheism to color blindness, because faith is a part of the human experience in which I do not share.” p.4

-“That said, it has become pretty evident that secularism has not been able to fill what has been called the "God-shaped hole” in American life. Because the quest for spirituality and meaning is deeply human, it is insistent. We need commitments to something larger than ourselves, communities rooted in more than transactional gains, truths which transcend time and place, and missions worth sacrificing for; and if we do not find them in institutionalized religion, we will look elsewhere. In her 2020 book Strange Rites: New Religions for a Godless World, Tara Isabella Burton catalogs some of the secular movements which have arisen as vehicles for spiritual fervor: wellness culture, occultism, wicca, radical social justice ("woke-ness"), the New Age, techno-utopianism, the alt-right, and more. Q-Anon, MAGA's cultic cousin, comes complete with its own prophet, eschatology, and redemptive mission—all twisted into a grimacing, politicized caricature of religion.” P 16

-“Organized religious participation correlates with greater happiness and well-being, longer life, stronger immune systems and lower blood pressure, lower crime and drug use, and greater civic engagement. Most people cannot reap the same benefits at home. ‘It is the communal forms of religious participation, rather than merely private practices, that most powerfully affect health,’ notes Tyler J. VanderWeele of Harvard's School of Public Health. Other research suggests that the decline of religious participation may be an important factor in the alarming rise in the United States of deaths of despair. It turns out that Nietzsche was right: love religion or hate it, its communal functions are very hard to replace. Where he went wrong was in assuming that self-actualization and self-elevation could substitute for religion, even among elites.” P 17

-Thomas Jefferson said he considered “ethics, as well as religion, as supplements to law in the government of man.” P. 19

-The Founders generally believed “that religion—Christianity, for all intents and purposes—was important for stabilizing republican government, because it teaches virtue and thereby makes Americans more governable.” P.20

-“My claim is not just that secular liberalism and religious faith are instrumentally interdependent but that each is intrinsically reliant on the other to build a morally and epistemically complete and coherent account of the world.” P. 21

-“Politics becomes our religion in many cases, and that harms our community and our souls.” P. 36

-“A central cause of today’s misalignment, which I call Sharp Christianity: a divisive, fearful, partisan, and un-Christlike version of Christianity with dangerously illiberal implications.” P. 40

-“Republicans cannot win nationally without white evangelicals’ support…In the 1970s, only 40 percent of white weekly churchgoing evangelicals identified as Republicans; in the most recent data, that number has risen to an all-time high of 70 percent.” p. 56

-“Could party loyalty elbow Jesus aside? Could evangelical Christianity become, for many who affiliate with it, primarily a political rather than religious identity?” p. 57 “At this point, ‘evangelical’ is a political uniform; it’s code for politically conservative.” P.58

-“Before Trump's emergence, the evangelical world had insisted that character matters-even though presidents aren't preachers. In a 2016 poll headlined "Backing Trump, White Evangelicals Flip-Flop on Importance of Candidate Character," the Public Religion Research Institute (in collaboration with Religion News Service and the Brookings Institution) noted that in 2011, when Barack Obama was president, only 30 percent of white evangelicals said that "an elected official who commits an immoral act in their personal life can still behave ethically and fulfill their duties in their public and professional life." Five years later, when Donald Trump led the Republican presidential ticket, 72 percent of white evangelicals gave personal immorality a pass. Among American religious groups, white evangelicals had switched from being the least accepting of personal immorality among public officials to being the most accepting. Something had changed, and it probably was not the Gospel.” p. 64

-The ‘Church of Fear’ is as toxic to democracy as it is to Christianity. P. 75

-“Finding balance requires patience, negotiation, and mutual accommodation." It requires active political interaction. Which requires, in turn, a particular civic mindset. We now see the theological underpinnings for Oaks's dictum: We should not expect or seek total dominance for our own positions. If I impose my will politically to limit your agency, I have deprived you of a pathway toward godliness; and so I have sinned.” P 116

-“I am arguing that American liberals-and, still more important, American Christians-should pay attention to what the church has laid before us: a civic theology which aligns scriptural and constitutional values, not merely as a matter of expediency but as an intrinsic element of God's plan.” P 117

-“Mark Labberton, then the seminary's president, explained that Christianity is a religion of exile, not dominion. Christianity is intended to be peculiar, not ordinary; countercultural, not consumerist. ‘The church would be more faithful, more distinctly Christ's people, if we actually understood that we don't live in the promised land; we live in exile,’ he said.” P 135

-“I treasure feeling like an outsider, although the exilic mindset is admittedly an acquired taste. If you offered to let me rerun my life as a heterosexual white Protestant who saw my values reflected all around me and never needed to think about being persecuted or stigmatized, I would reject the deal. Injustice is only visible from society's margin, and doing what I can to contend against it has been my life's greatest privilege. I can testify that the exilic life, while sometimes frustrating or challenging or dangerous, is a blessing, not a curse; a source of redemption more than oppression; a call to humility and compassion.” P 135-136

-Epilogue letter to his Christian friend, Mark - “Even in extremis, your faith seemed undiminished. I think that was the moment when, in all my life, I most acutely felt my own shallowness and spiritual poverty. I cannot understand why, if there is a God, he sends such terrible scourges to afflict his most devoted servants. But seeing your lack of anger, I tried to shelve my own. I saw how your trust in God gave you courage and grace amid an unbearable ordeal. That was, to me, a more powerful witness on behalf of the Christian faith than any words or argument could have borne.” P 139

[Aaron Hayworth · Rating 2 out of 5]

This could have been a substack and I would have still been disappointed with the lack of effort.

[John · Rating 3 out of 5]

(3.5 stars)

Tl;dr version of this review: A good critique of evangelicalism and their messed up entanglement with Republican politics and culture from an outsider (and I mean way outside...). As I say with every book in this genre, the people who most need to read this book are those least likely to do so.

Onward...

Jonathan Rauch speaks from an outsiders perspective on evangelicalism and its too close entanglement with Republican politics, and by outsider, I mean way outside. He is a homosexual and Jewish, but surprisingly, quite balanced and careful in his critique. I ended up coming away from the book impressed with him. He sounds like a good guy to sit down and have a beer with and just pick his (extraordinary) brain.

Mr. Rauch's critique of evangelicalism is careful, clear, and for the most part, I agree with him. He writes: "There are plenty of doctrinal passageways with which evangelicals can take to [get to] pluralism. In recent years evangelical illiberalism has been driven not by the dictates of Scripture, but by ignoring many of those dictates." If you don't believe this statement, go to TikTok and read the comments page of anyone (inside or outside) evangelicalism who criticizes evangelicals lack of compassion and too close attachment to right wing politics.

Or this really damning point: "We secular atheists rely on Christianity to maintain a positive cultural balance of trade. We need it to export more moral values and spiritual authority to the surrounding culture than it imports. If, instead, the church is in cultural deficit, if it becomes a net importer of values from the secular world, then it becomes morally derivative instead of morally formative. Rather than shaping secular values, it merely reflects them." Anyone who has been watching events carefully will know that evangelicalism is reflecting secular values these days, rather than shaping them. To shape them by the heavy hand of the law as Christian nationalists would argue, is neither biblical nor prudent in a pluralistic society in my view.

The one great weakness of the book is that Mr. Rauch takes a long chapter to argue that evangelicalism should be shaped by Mormonism, not by their beliefs per se, but more by their approach to culture. Now, Mr. Rauch is smart enough to know that most evangelicals would not say that Mormonism is another branch of Christianity, and the problem with arguing from the way Mormons do things (including an interesting diversion into Mormons and their view of Adam and Eve's sin—if you're evangelical you'll not agree) is that you're immediately going to lose your target audience. I'm not sure why Mr. Rauch thought this was a good idea, it may be an interesting argument, but you're not going to convince evangelicals with "here is the way Mormons do it."

There is a lot here and I'm grateful to Mr. Rauch for his careful, thoughtful, and really kind critique of evangelicalism and politics and culture. Like I said before, it's too bad that those who most need to absorb this book are also those least likely to do so.

[Tyna Orren · Rating 4 out of 5]

Jonathan Rauch, wants American Christians to do something about American democracy’s current ailments, ailments he believes are rooted in a broken bargain between American Christians and the moral foundations of both American democracy and Christian faith.

In Cross-Purposes, Rauch argues that, although democratic ideals and Christian teachings are interdependent and mutually supportive, the fibers that have held them together are fraying. One cause, he contends, is that too many American Christians have shrunk away from Christianity’s core values. The mainstream Protestant denominations have drifted into what Rauch calls “Thin Christianity.” Of greater concern, many evangelicals have fallen victim to “Sharp Christianity”—a mindset that believes Christianity is under attack, and that resolves, in un-Christlike fashion, not to turn the other cheek.

As a cure, Rauch calls for the creation (or re-creation) in America of an energetic “civic theology.” This involves, first, tearing down a wall that Rauch believes exists between many Christians’ personal and civic lives. He urges pastors to teach the virtues of humility and love not only within the home and in neighborhoods and churches, but also in the larger political sphere.

As an example of a successful venture in civic theology, Rauch describes actions by the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints in effecting the “Utah Compromise” of 2015. In that year, the Church, collaborating with citizen advocacy groups, brought about the enactment of Utah’s Senate Bill 296. SB 296 amended Utah’s 1960’s-era anti-discrimination laws in employment and housing by adding LGBTQ persons to those protected. Even though the LDS Church regards homosexuality as sinful and does not admit homosexuals as members, it supported SB 296, recognizing that LGBTQ persons are entitled to the ordinary rights of civil life.

Crucially, SB 296 was a compromise. While recognizing the civil rights of LGBTQ Utahns, it accommodated Mormons’ religious freedoms by exempting church-affiliated institutions from many of its requirements. The Utah Compromise embodies the principle that no one in America’s culturally diverse society can or should expect total dominance for their positions.

Cross-Purposes also describes other initiatives toward creating and applying a civic theology. These include The After Party, the Center for Christianity & Public Life, and the One America Movement, three non-profits dedicated to improving Christian political engagement. All these initiatives recognize that truly Christian political engagement includes “the hard work of engaging across differences.”

Cross-Purposes comes at a well-chosen moment. Political viciousness—violence, even--is at a fever pitch, but at the same time, there are signs that Americans are turning toward faith as an answer. In this environment, Rauch’s news and insights about movements toward making American Christianity Christ-like again are well worth reading and taking to heart.

[Patsy · Rating 5 out of 5]

I rarely give a five-star rating. I give this one because of how my mind has gone back again and again to the ideas in this book, and shared them with others.

In this book, Jonathan Rauch identifies the importance of Christianity in maintaining our free, democratic, constitutional society, and in doing so acknowledges his own journey from believing Christianity to be destructive to society, waning in strength and good riddance to it anyway, to realizing the important role it has played in our country. He describes various forms of Christianity, and offers advice to help believers maintain a strong, influential Christianity.

Rauch posits three main types of Christianity. Thin Christianity dilutes its beliefs in order to retain believers, but defeats its purpose in this process. Sharp Christianity characterizes a church of fear, which also is self-defeating. His third type, which he calls Thick Christianity is a robust, accepting, resilient version that has the power to inspire Christians and lead out in community.

Important points:

As people leave Christian denominations, they have the potential to form an ex-Christian nation, but that is not the same as a non-Christian nation. People and communities retain the muscle memory of Christianity, but even that will fade over time.

Secular movements have their benefits, and should not be condemned. But it turns out that none of them is capable of replacing the moral codes, durable communities, and ability to transmit values as organized religion does.

American Founders opposed the admixture of religion with government, but also knew that republicanism would rely in part on religious underpinnings. John Adams warned that We have no government that can contend with human passions unbridled by morality and religion.

French observer of American Democracy Alexis de Tocqueville saw that the tendency of democracy to foster the pursuit of physical pleasure and materialism would require the influence of religious beliefs to draw attention to the realities beyond the material world to temper baser desires.

The interdependence [polarity?] of secular liberalism and religious faith can be used to build a morally complete and coherent account of the world. The author identifies four existential questions, each of which he handily begins with the letter M.
Mortality. How can life have meaning if all it leads to, ultimately, is death?
Morality. What is the ultimate basis for belief in, and understanding of, right and wrong?
Murder. Why is the world so full of suffering, injustice, and violence?
Miracles. How can we explain the world without recourse to magic – thus reliably, systematically, and adjudicably?
He claims that secular thinking can make progress toward the first two, but one requires religion to get us to a satisfactory understanding of mortality and morality.
He also claims that religion falls short in the last two, and secular thinking is required for really substantial answers.
[As a lifelong believer, I take issue with his conclusions. But I do accept the importance of living by faith and also by secular knowledge. I also appreciate his discussion of these in this book.]
Related quote from NY Times columnist David Brooks: “If you’re asking politics to solve your sense of moral purpose and character and meaning, you’re asking more of politics than it can bear.”

Hyper-individualism and “me first” ideology has degraded important connections of contemporary society: to one’s family, to major secular institutions, to the land of our birth, to the shared sense of the sacred. Interestingly, pursuing individual autonomy leads to more centralized power of the state, which undermines individual autonomy. A self-defeating conundrum. Despite our pursuit of liberalism for other countries, we need to acknowledge its negative tendencies, and realize that liberalism requires outside sources of support and stability.

The republic could not endure without a virtuous citizenry. But, in liberal societies, it is required of each individual to provide its own sense of virtue and live up to it. It doesn’t just happen.
Quote from author: “Although I am neither a Christian nor a progressive, I would love to see a revival of mainline Christianity. Its values and aspirations strike me as noble. Also, as Joseph Bottum and others have argued, the collapse of the ecumenical churches has displaced religious zeal into politics, which is not designed to provide purpose in life and breaks when it tries. I am not saying ecumenical Christianity can make a comeback, or will; but it is far from dead, and hope springs eternal.”

Since 1976, the term Evangelical has increasingly connoted the white religious Republican base. What began as a marriage of convenience, has evolved into codependency. Rather than religious belief religion informing political points of view, partisanship has driven religious identification. This is a result of what Rauch calls Sharp Christianity, denoting a religion of fear.

Early in his book, he identifies some of the sources of fear, such as infringement of religious liberty, and encroachment of worldly ideas into the mainstream. He refutes these ideas, and I think his arguments are valid. He concludes with the point that absolutely nothing about secular liberalism requited white evangelicals to embrace the likes of Donald Trump. To which, I added this marginal note (which I erased before returning the book to the library😊) “Yet, they did. He doesn’t acknowledge or understand the fear of losing our children to the wokeist influences.” Later in the book, he does address this subject, which I appreciated.

Influence of Donald Trump on evangelicals. In 2011 when Barack Obama was president, only 30% of white evangelicals said that an elected official who is immoral in their personal life can still behave ethically in their public and professional life. Only five years later, when Donald Trump led the Republican presidential ticket, 72% of white evangelicals gave personal immorality a pass. That’s impressive!

I was very impressed by Jonathan Rauch’s attitude toward Christians. He doesn’t characterize their objection to homosexuality as hateful and bigoted. He says “They may be wrong, but they aren’t mean.” That, too, is impressive for a Jewish gay atheist to say, especially as he has been criticized for all of those things by Christians. This kind of open mindedness is aspirational to me, and much needed.
Three points of Christianity to strengthen and to focus upon:
Don’t be afraid.
Imitate Jesus.
Forgive each other.
So insightfully concise and also central to Christian doctrine.

Very concerned about Christian nationalism, he notes “Christian nationalism often influences Americans’ opinions and behavior in the exact opposite direction than traditional religious commitment does.”

Liberalism requires us to share power and sometimes relinquish it. This is an idea recently adopted by the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter day Saints and exhibited in addresses given by President Dallin H. Oaks.
The virtues of Thick Christianity, which I like to think of as resilient Christianity, are being pursued by the actions of Latter day Saints.
I believe much of Jonathan Rauch’s motivation to delve deeply into ideas he could just as easily have dismissed came from the actions of friends and acquaintances who practiced and internalized Thick Christianity. This is aspirational for me.
I have tried to characterize the main points of this book but realize I may have gone astray in the accuracy of my language. Rather than quibble with what I have written, which I have done mainly to help me remember the main points of the book for myself, I would encourage you to read the book. It’s short and really insightful.

[Diane · Rating 5 out of 5]

Such an intriguing proposition. I was enthralled the entire time with his argument. The author quotes the results of a Wall Street Journal survey, "as the percentages of Americans saying religion is very important to them has declined, so have the percentages of those characterizing patriotism, community involvement, and having children as very important. What value tested by the pollsters ROSE in importance of the period? Just one: Making money."

The "God-shaped hole" Rauch speaks to clearly exists in America. "Secular moments have their benefits but none are capable of replacing what religions have: anchored moral codes, durable communities maintained, as well as transmitting values."

Some "research suggests that the decline of religious participation may be an important factor in the alarming rise in the US of deaths of despair."

This was a fascinating point, this "deaths of despair". I see it daily in my social media feed and from the guests on various podcasts.

"The Founders did not believe that only the religious (or only Christians) can be good citizens in a republic..." Christianity and democracy need to be well aligned. Neither can thrive if they are at cross purposes. That destroys hope and perpetuates the "deaths of despair". Could party loyalty elbow Jesus aside?

Don't be afraid. "We've lost the culture; they're coming for us; we've got to defend the right to live as obedient, faithful Christians". We shouldn't be focusing on this world, but the next. Though fear is natural, faith is supernatural. Redemption in the next world overshadows the fear of this world.

"Secular liberalism and Christianity have separate purposes. They do not need to ally (and should not) but they do need to align, at least well enough so that democracy's wheels don't come off."

I loved the quote of Dallin H. Oaks, "We should not expect or seek total dominance for our own positions." The history of my faith as a member of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints demonstrates "I have been willing to die for a "Mormon" and am just as ready to die in defending the rights of a Presbyterian, a Baptist, or a good man of any other denomination; for the same principle which would trample upon the rights of the Latter-day Saints would trample upon the rights of the Roman Catholic, or of any other denomination who may be unpopular."

"Be aware of the past, be informed by it, but do not be defined or aggrieved by it."

Regarding agency, Rauch highlights the way I and members of my faith view The Fall of Adam and Eve. "Some Christians condemn Eve for her act, concluding that she are her daughters are somehow flawed by it. Not the Latter-day Saints! Informed by revelation, we celebrate Eve's act and honor her wisdom and courage in the great episode called the Fall." God gave humans the capacity for moral awareness and choice, and in seizing the opportunity instead of rejecting it, we became more like God. There is no "original sin". We don't inherit sinfulness. We have choices to make. And we learn goodness by confronting the choices in the world and choosing well. May we choose well to keep our democracy.

The final quote by Rusty Bowers is encouraging, "We choose to have hope to make faith work."

[Douglas · Rating 4 out of 5]

Jonathan Rauch’s new book is thought-provoking exploration of the complex relationship between religion and secularism in American society. He offers an insightful analysis of the cultural, religious, and ideological divides that put "believers" and "non-believers" at odds, but he also offers an optimistic vision for achieveing mutual undertanding and ... acceptance?

Rauch has written previously on such topics as free speech, liberalism, and social philosophy, and here he approaches his subject with attentive fairness. Rather than truncating the discussion to a battle between faith and reason, he focuses on the need to discern shared values and common concerns that may actually bridge religious and secular worldviews. His arguments are nuanced—his prose engaging—but his tone is respectful toward all perspectives.

A central theme is the tension between religious conviction and the pluralistic ideals of liberal democracy. He examines how religious groups and secular thinkers have historically clashed over issues like LGBTQ+ rights, education, and public policy, yet he avoids inflammatory rhetoric. Instead, he focuses on the underlying principles—human dignity, moral responsibility, freedom of conscience—that animate both sides of these debates. He argues that these conflicts need not be zero-sum but can instead lead to a richer, more inclusive public discourse.

What makes this book particularly compelling is its practical approach. Rauch does not merely analyze the problem; he also provides thoughtful solutions. He advocates for what he calls "mutual disarmament," encouraging both religious and secular communities to engage in good-faith dialogue rather than retreating into ideological silos. His insights into how societies can balance religious liberty with secular governance are particularly relevant in today’s politically charged climate.

If you're interested in the intersection of religion, secularism, and public life, Rauch has demonstrated why dialogue, understanding, and cooperation is both timely but necessary. Reading this book will challenge you to think more deeply and compassionately about the beliefs and values that shape our world. and that's a good thing!
⭐️⭐️⭐️⭐️⭐️

[Courtney Burns · Rating 5 out of 5]

4.5 stars Very interesting to read the book of an atheistic, Jewish, gay man on how he thinks Christianity, though now broken, is what is most needed to preserve our democracy. It is even more interesting to have him site my church, The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, as an example of a Christian church doing it right--and I think he did a very fine job of discussing my church's theology. The aspects from my own theology that I enjoyed being drawn out were President Oak's dictum that "we should not expect or seek total dominance for our own positions." Instead, the rights of those who disagree with us should be as primary to us as seeking our own rights and positions. Additionally, I found the siting of the necessity of pursuing politics and civics with "patience, negotiation, and mutual accommodation" (and celebrating the resultant creativity that such an approach creates) over requiring the pursuit of purity of doctrine to be such a beautiful and rewarding approach.

A couple of notes I want to keep for myself:

"Taking those questions on board, Latter-day Saint theology breaks with the doctrine of original sin. God warned that eating the fruit of knowledge would have grave consequences but deliberately provided the option. Eve's choice to accept those consequences was part of God's plan and therefore not sinful or wicked, but courageous." (p113-114) I thought this was one of the best summaries I have encountered.

"Note the phrase 'balanced legally and negotiated politically.' In a diverse society, a sustainable and just balance will not be found abstractly or doctinally or legalistically, nor will it be found if only one side has a vote. Finding balance requires 'patience, negotiation, and mutual accommodation.' It requires active political interaction. Which requires, in turn, a particular civic mindset. We now see the theological underpinnings for Oak's dictum: We should not expect or seek total dominance for our own positions. If I impose my will politically to limit your agency, I have deprived you of a pathway toward godliness; and so I have sinned." (p 116) The writings of agency were nicely done in this section.

[J.D. · Rating 5 out of 5]

This is a book that every American Christian--and every American terrified of Christian nationalism destroying democracy (like me)--needs to read. In this book, author Jonathan Rauch--a homosexual, atheist, Jew of all people--argues that for a healthy democracy, America needs a balance of both Christianity and liberalism. He makes the following points:

1) American Christianity has "thinned" or secularized leaving the country without the meaning and moral grounding it is meant to provide.

2) Christianity's crisis is democracy's crisis, despite what religion haters think. According to Rauch, Christianity is a load-bearing wall and its failures places stress on democratic institutions.

3) Christianity's decline is not the result of secularism, but caused by Christians themselves as they have created a wall between the values they champion in their personal lives vs. the values they express in politics. They have been seduced by an un-Christlike Church of Fear (A.K.A. MAGA).

4) The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints provides a great example of Christianity trying to align core Christian principles with core liberal principles, strengthening both. Latter-day Saint emphasis in the doctrine of agency--along with the belief that the principles of the Constitution were divinely inspired--allows for the possibility of compromise, such as when the LDS church supported laws protecting LGBTQ people from discrimination in housing and employment in Utah, as well as the Respect For Marriage Act.

Of these points, it is the fourth that I probably don't completely agree with (ironic, since I am a Latter-day Saint). I think the leadership of the Church is definitely trying to bridge these principals, but I don't think its members are doing the same--and largely embrace the Church of Fear and MAGA as much as evangelicals do. Official LDS church teachings and doctrine seem to always be at odds with LDS cultural doctrine, which drives me insane to no end.

That said, this a fantastic book and absolutely THE best book I've read regarding the role of religion in politics, government, and society. Definite recommend!

[Ruth Hyde · Rating 4 out of 5]

3.75 stars. I found this book really thought provoking. Rauch is a talented journalist who has done extensive research. The book structure is well designed and makes his argument easy to follow, and his prose is compelling and enjoyable to read. I do think his argument could use a little more academic rigor to help further flesh it out and deepen it. I don’t think he properly distinguished between Christianity and broader religions, though maybe he would argue that he really was just trying to focus his argument. I also think he tends toward espousing American Exceptionalism without properly explaining why he supports this idea. Some might argue with me that he shouldn’t have to explain it, the book itself is an argument meant to strengthen American democracy. I would argue however that better explaining and supporting his beliefs about the unique success of American Democracy could lend further support for his argument. Maybe he had a page limit and what I’m suggesting is simply not feasible—I was just really compelled by what he had to say (even parts I wasn’t sure I totally agreed with), and I really wanted to get into the nitty gritty theoretical parts of his argument. More broadly, there were times I wanted Roach to provide a closer analysis of certain phenomena he was describing, but as he is not a theologian nor a political scientist I understand why he couldn’t quite go where I wanted. Still, I was impressed with what he had to say, and much of it rang true to me. I appreciated the care Rauch held for Christians as a self proclaimed atheist, especially his own careful understanding for the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints. This was a fascinating read. This book left me feeling more hopeful than I expected to at the end, and I was even quite touched with the epilogue. I won’t be surprised if I find myself recommending it to friends and family to read.

[Lisa · Rating 5 out of 5]

A highly insightful, timely look at the intersection of Christianity and Democracy. Though the subtitle may be initially off-putting to some Christian readers who might take issue with the idea of Christianity failing at something, I find the author’s position as firmly outside of Christianity (he states this many times in the book: he is an atheist, Jewish, married gay man of a secular, liberal political bent) gives him a refreshing perspective on what various types of Christian churches are doing well or poorly—and he does call out both.

His critiques of Christianity are largely critiques of white, conservative, evangelical Christianity. He argues it has become too thin (watered down doctrines that blend into the prevailing culture rather than standing apart and demanding anything of its adherents), and too sharp (combative and partisan) to properly support democracy and classical liberalism.

However, he does believe there are solutions—particularly in a thicker, stronger, kinder version of Christianity. One that uses doctrine to support the same behavior and beliefs across one’s personal and civic life. He gives examples in particular from the LDS church (perhaps I’m biased as a member of the LDS church, but I thought his thoughts there were excellent) and discusses how the things he observes on the LDS church might transfer to people and churches of other denominations.

I think if every Christian and church leader or pastor read this book and took it at its word, America would be improved for the better.

[Agatha Nolen · Rating 5 out of 5]

I was struggling until 1/3 into the book, when I finally got the premise. Jonathan is a homosexual atheist raised Jewish and speaks to both Christian Nationalism and Secular Liberalism. I didn't agree with everything he wrote, but he does make a case that we can get out of the religious and political polarization in the U.S., but only if we want to. Declining church attendance and a move away from basic Christian principles (e.g., taking care of the poor, welcoming the stranger, considering ourselves as foreigners in a land that belongs to no one and no institution) has caused a fracture in the underpinning of society. So the Christian nationalists (who Rauch says is a political group, not a religious one) has squared off with the secular liberalists who become extremists in their own right. He says that the biggest problem in society today is the lack of spiritual formation. Our churches embody taking care of our family and immediate community but we have lost the bigger picture of how we have responsibilities to God to take care of all of creation including all people and all things (e.g., nature). We have to put down our weapons and start speaking to each other as the exiles that we are.

[Joey · Rating 4 out of 5]

Engaging, fair, maybe a little too short. "Cross Purposes" would probably still hold up well if Rauch expanded his arguments and doubled the length of the book. As is, the sensation here is that Rauch is getting an outline down on paper, sketching out the bare bones of his thoughts without elucidating too much. For some readers, this may actually be preferable. But I like a little more meat on the bones.

I appreciated that Rauch avoided pointing out all the ways Christians are failing democracy while giving moralistic, sanctimonious liberals a pass. He rightly concedes that both white evangelicals and overzealous liberals share similar shortcomings: they simply can't with compromise, and their totalism is killing us. Still, this is a book about Christianity's broken bargain with democracy, and that fraying relationship takes center stage here. Rauch holds up the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints (Mormons) as a model of civic theology that evangelicals ought to seek to emulate. That seems reasonable; though the Mormon church is far from perfect, Rauch's point is not that Christians or liberals should adopt LDS doctrine. It is that the Mormons' civic theology is a possible way forward for evangelical Christians who have confused politics for religion.

[Brian · Rating 5 out of 5]

Interesting read. I appreciated the ability to address and tackle the various sides of an argument - there wasn’t need to win but - simply a curious exploration of how can we make better this country we are living in.

Though there are many things I may disagree with, I whole heartedly agreed with the premise: we, as a pluralistic America, can and must agree on common belief that all people deserve to feel safe and to reach their fullest potential by following agreed upon civic values that are also Christian values like forbearance, civility, and compromise.

In the end, this time in history does call for us individually and collectively to undergo a spiritual formation, which Carl Jung, agregues years ago. If we don’t address our shadows, the shadow side will always make its way out in unhealthy ways, which is what we are seeing now.

The question is how do we get people to be reflective of both their individual internal workings and the systems/communities with which they interact? How do we move people toward love, compassion, and empathy towards the poor and minorities (ie - become more Christlike) and away from domination and power?

[Ryan George · Rating 4 out of 5]

I typed paragraphs of quotes from Jonathan Rauch into my journal from a book filled with dog ears and highlighter marks. Describing himself as “an atheist, homosexual Jew,” Rauch contends that the health of the United States could be improved by church-attending citizens embracing the words and example of Jesus, in particular “the confident tranquility of Jesus.” He critiques both the current post-liberal “church of fear” and the secularists who want to avoid any Christian influence on social institutions. He asks, “Can we blame the secular world for losing confidence in Christianity when so many Christians have lost confidence in Christianity?” Rauch dives into an interesting part of Mormon theology that has enabled more civic pluralism as something evangelicals should adopt. He quotes from many moderate and moderating voices that I regularly absorb and calls Christians to embrace what originally made following Jesus peculiar. “Christianity is a religion of exile, not dominion. Christianity is intended to be peculiar, not ordinary; countercultural, not consumerist.”

[Matt Bennett · Rating 5 out of 5]

I found this short book incredibly thought-provoking and engaging. Rauch, a self-described "gay, Jewish atheist," who had written pieces cheering the decline of the American church in the early aughts, has done a 180 and now believes that the right kind of Christianity is vital to restore national unity of purpose and morality.

He characterizes the waning religiosity of most Christians, at least the ones who still regard themselves that way, as "thin Christianity," which isn't grounded in enough of the moral teachings of the gospels to guide civic behavior. And the right-wing hijacking of the faith he calls "sharp Christianity," which is taking us backwards. Instead, he yearns for a return of "thick Christianity," which teaches right from wrong, a moral code, etc. He points to the Mormons of exemplars of that, and it's hard to argue: Mormons are super nice.

Anyway, if you care about America's civic and cultural life, this is well worth your time, whatever your faith.