Keep up with everything happening in The Commons by signing up for the Chronicle’s Philanthropy Today newsletter or our weekly Commons LinkedIn newsletter. This is the second in a two-part Commons series exploring philanthropy, faith, and religion. See the first part.
In November, 77 million Americans voted to elect a leader whose first days in office confirm strong authoritarian leanings. And many of the new president’s supporters will cheer the concentration of power in the White House through efforts to weaken checks and balances, silence dissent, and erode institutions. Other Trump voters, however, feel uneasy about his divisiveness, promises of retribution, and disregard for civic norms. These Americans could be mobilized to help protect democracy — if philanthropy supports organizations that it often reflexively rejects as partners.
After decades of work with racially, ideologically, and theologically diverse religious communities, we believe this moment illustrates an urgent need — and an incredible opportunity — to build a pro-democracy movement with a tent big enough for us all. To do that, funders and other pro-democracy organizations must invest in and partner with conservative groups with conservative pro-democracy initiatives that can reach very conservative audiences. Odd as it may seem, many of these potential allies are religious leaders or religious and faith-based organizations.
People of faith have played key roles in our most powerful societal changes. They influenced both the birth and the abolition of slavery. Christian and Jewish religious progressives served in the vanguard of the civil rights movement, while conservative Catholics helped dismantle eugenics. The religious right’s venture into politics has helped fuel culture wars, yet its adherents also are mainstays of services for the poor and some of the world’s largest global aid organizations, like World Vision and Compassion International.
Religious organizations and their affiliates have been at the center of both our divisions and our healing. The same can be said for their role in both the undermining and protection of our democracy.
Since the 2024 election, authoritarian forces have been emboldened, particularly among a group of mostly young white men who have become more brazen and open about their racist and Christian-supremacist attitudes. Yet there is a much larger group of people of faith, many of whom voted for President Trump out of concerns about illegal immigration, inflation, or fear of widespread secularization, but who support a robust democracy and recognize the importance of a pluralistic society.
Some religious conservatives are already trying to bridge ideological divisions and other fissures within their churches and beyond. Among them: the Colossian Forum, a nearly 15-year-old group begun by a Mennonite pastor in Grand Rapids, Mich. The After Party — whose architects include conservative New York Times columnist David French and prominent evangelical leader Russell Moore — encourages people of faith to engage in politics without turning disagreements into holy war. And Mormon Women for Ethical Government works to increase constructive engagement around democratic principles and nonpartisan policy engagement.
These groups and others like them are uniquely positioned to speak with faith-minded people — both in the pews and in high office — and potentially change minds and hearts. They are acting on the hopes of Americans across the ideological spectrum who genuinely want to promote democracy over politics and are willing to step up.
Awkward Relationship With Religion
Thanks to hyper-polarization, however, such organizations struggle for support. Many foundations have long had an awkward relationship with religion. Nineteenth- and 20th-century philanthropy held it at arm’s length for a variety of reasons. Some grant makers believed religious groups were not as professional as secular organizations. It became common for funders to avoid granting even to faith-inspired organizations. This dissociation suggests that the field of philanthropy views itself as secular, despite the more than 25 percent of all private grant makers who are faith-inspired funders and who support their denominations specifically on ecumenical issues and modestly on interfaith work.
At least some of the funding community’s hesitancy stems from values differences, real and perceived. Funders may not want to associate with religious communities or traditions that have opposed the rights of the LGBTQ community or reproductive rights. Many progressive organizations have policies that reject faith-based partners out of hand or that require that partners have policies that support gender and sexual orientation equality.
Part of the challenge is also that democracy funders themselves are ideologically siloed. Partnerships and potential solutions rarely involve a broad ideological spectrum of groups. These silos further divide Americans rather than promote policy change.
There are, of course, genuine reasons for funders to seek like-minded partners. But this is a moment of crisis for democracy as a whole, and it demands new, extraordinary effort. If funders rule out working with religious conservatives on strengthening democracy, they are going to miss a vital opportunity for profound impact. Progressives may disagree with a particular group’s stance on a given social issue, but it is such stances that make them trusted messengers in conservative circles on pro-democracy efforts. Over time, opportunities will emerge for these groups to make considerable progress within their communities.
The two of us know it is possible to work productively across religious and ideological lines of difference and with very conservative communities of faith. Diana has engaged with a key group of influential conservative evangelical pastors of large congregations as they sought to confront historical racism. Through this process, these pastors also have considered their role outside the church and how they might support democratic processes and institutions. Allison worked across religious and ideological lines at the Aspen Institute Religion & Society Program to help people of all faiths support one another’s rights of conscience. We know that working together while respecting our differences is key to moving forward.
Work to combat climate change illustrates the power of cross-ideological partners. Climate change denialism, conservative religion, and conservative politics are tightly intertwined. That means the best messengers to theologically conservative voters are theologically conservative people and organizations that believe climate change is caused by humans and is killing people through pollution and extreme weather. To them, it’s a pro-life issue worth fighting for.
Rev. Mitch Hescox, former president of the Evangelical Environmental Network, believes that only about 10 percent of evangelicals would need to change their views to ensure politicians listen and enact substantial policy change. And the only successful messengers to theologically and politically conservative voters are other trusted, genuine conservatives.
Recommendations
How can funders shift to work with more ideologically and religiously diverse partners without sacrificing their values? We have four recommendations.
Realign priorities for the crisis we face. Ask yourself seriously: In these extraordinary times, how can we build the most effective coalitions to protect democracy? This may mean working in parallel with organizations that do not share the same positions on important other issues, but is preserving our democracy not first among issues? Also, creating such coalitions now does not mean abandoning other priorities.
Recognize the value and availability of faith-based and/or conservative pro-democracy partners. In 2023, Philanthropy for Active Civic Engagement completed a four-year project to examine why faith-based grantees can be effective partners to pro-democracy philanthropy. It produced an immense and helpful evidence base. Also, recent research demonstrates that faith-inspired nonprofits doing “secular” work on such issues as homelessness and climate change are as professional as their secular counterparts. Together, these faith-inspired nonprofits and houses of worship make up 35 to 40 percent of the nonprofit sector.
Hire staff or consultants to guide you. Find people who are genuinely conservative pro-democracy strategists or who are highly respected in conservative faith communities.
Collaborate with and seek guidance from ecumenical funders who know their communities. And reach out to conservative funders to partner with you and encourage them as funders of ecumenical work also to support democracy initiatives. One useful approach: Begin with short bridges, as john a. powell of the Othering and Belonging Institute puts it, and establish connections on small pieces of common ground.
The Commons is financed in part with philanthropic support from the Arthur M. Blank Family Foundation, Einhorn Collaborative, the Freedom Together Foundation (formerly the JPB Foundation), and the Walton Family Foundation. None of our supporters have any control over or input into story selection, reporting, or editing, and they do not review articles before publication. See more about the Chronicle, the grants, how our foundation-supported journalism works, and our gift-acceptance policy.
