Interested by this? Share it on social media. Join our monthly e-newsletter to keep up to date with our latest research and events. And check out our Friends Programme to find out how you can help our work.

Now Barack Obama is safely re-installed in 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue, the number crunching can begin. Seasoned, and not so seasoned, observers of the religious politics of the US are already suggesting that something has changed. They’ll be talk of the decline of the values voter, of the end of the religious right, and of the rise of a secular (i.e., non-religious) America. 

In this new interpretation of the religious politics of the US, as on so many other issues, those at opposite ends of the theo-political spectrum end up agreeing with each other. Damien Thompson thinks that Obama’s church going was just a pragmatic concession to murky Chicago politics. Richard Dawkins hopes that now that he doesn’t have to worry about re-election, he’ll come out of the closet as a fellow non-religionist.

Who knows? Maybe they’re right. If they are, Americans would do well to work out a way of creating a more honest political culture, where people can speak genuinely about what they believe and the part that plays in their politics without the risk of ludicrous over-reaction. Honesty, as they say, could be the best policy. And if they did, they’d have one over us. Ed Miliband and Nick Clegg can confidently ‘own’ their respective agnosticism or atheism without much huffing and puffing from the religious (I’m ok with it, as long as they don’t take it too seriously) but we’re still waiting for the day when politicians can speak about having a religious faith without some secular knicker-twisting.

As it happens, the demise of the US’s so-called religious politics is already being greatly exaggerated. True, pressing economic concerns will take centre stage for politicians, just as they have for voters. But since Christians in the US might have something to say on those issue issues as well as the neuralgic debates on abortion or same sex marriage, we can hardly suggest that this equates to some kind of 'secularisation' of their political culture. 

Meanwhile, (a substantial part of) the American public will still want a President that ‘does God’. It’s not particularly sophisticated. It’s not theologically rigorous. It might look a little odd from this side of the pond, but who are we to sneer? As New York Times columnist David Brooks once observed (disparagingly of Democratic candidate John Kerry), “Their President doesn't have to be a saint, but he does have to be a pilgrim. He does have to be engaged, as they are, in a personal voyage toward God.” 

Paul Bickley is Director of Political Programme at Theos | @mrbickley

Image by Daniel Borman from flickr.com available under this Creative Commons Licence.