Dear <<Salutation>> <<Last Name>>:

During her public speeches, Sarah Palin often espouses an ideology known as “American exceptionalism” — the idea that the United States has a special mission in the world that represents, what Palin calls, a “perfect ideal.” However, following this idea in a different direction, Palin casts suspicion on people she deems to be outside “the ideal”; and such people are not deserving of apologetic treatment.

During her Oct. 2, 2008 debate with Joe Biden, Palin said she shared “that world view that says that America is a nation of exceptionalism. ... We are a beacon of hope and that we are unapologetic here. We are not perfect as a nation. But together, we represent a perfect ideal.” (See more of Palin's speech here.)

American exceptionalism is to be distinguished from a related national ethos known as civil religion – the view that America does indeed have a unique mission, overseen by God, but is not beyond criticism.

“American civil religion is a form of devotion, outlook and commitment that deeply and widely binds the citizens of the nation together with ideas they possess and express about the sacred nature, the sacred ideals, the sacred character, and sacred meanings of their country,” according to Rowland A. Sherrill, the late Professor of Religious Studies at Indiana University-Purdue University, Indianapolis. (See further definition of civil religion here.)

But, deriving from this philosophy the belief that America has “God on its side” – and therefore whatever America does must be good – is a serious misinterpretation of civil religion, according to Robert Bellah, Professor Emeritus of Sociology at the University of California, Berkeley. “Inevitably, civil religion was understood by many people to mean the idolatrous worship of the state,” Bellah said. Contrary to this view, “American civil religion is not the worship of the American nation but an understanding of the American experience in the light of ultimate and universal reality.” (See more of Bellah's comments here.)

In this light, although Palin occasionally appropriates the language of civil religion – such as the reference to a “city on a hill” – placing this in the context of an exceptionalist ideology contradicts the spirit of civil religion, as it is defined by Sherrill and Bellah. Indeed, Palin's use of this language to lambaste her political opponents can cross the line of basic civility:

“We see America as the greatest force for good in this world. Our opponent though, is someone who sees America, it seems, as being so imperfect that he’s palling around with terrorists who would target their own country,” Palin said at an Oct. 4, 2008 campaign rally.

The underlying message here is not a transcendent vision of America, but the division of America into opposing camps: believers and un-believers; real Americans and un-Americans; us and them. Such divisive rhetoric reduces politics to its most primitive, tribal impulse, “You're not one of us.”

Read more about civil religion in The University of Massachusetts Press book, Religious Liberty in America: The First Amendment in Historical and Contemporary Perspective by Bruce T. Murray. The book includes a chapter on civil religion – tracing this phenomena from colonial times right up to the 2008 presidential election campaign.

Religious Liberty in America is available at numerous university libraries, and it may be purchased from the University of Massachusetts Press.

*|MERGE8|*