As many presidents before him, President Obama called upon Americans to unite around our higher angels and lay aside partisan bickering for the greater good of the common good in his recent State of the Union address.

Before he could leave the house chambers, critics already were in full voice denouncing the President for his own contribution to our national schism. Charges of “class warfare,” along with claims of partisan loyalty, filled the airways even as the President’s voice echoed within the hall that houses our highest national aspiration: E Pluribus Unum — out of the many, one.

Obviously, the nature of politics demands a certain amount of “us versus them.” But the polarization we see these days is something else. There is a hard edge to this division that will not allow for compromise.

We are faced with a divide wider than the Grand Canyon. The character of politics has become increasingly negative. Attack ads are the mainstay. We may not know what our candidates stand for, but we will know every piece of dirt that can be unearthed by their opposition — sometimes from within their own party.

Political contests too often are cast as battles for the very soul of the nation. Candidates present themselves as the last and only hope voters have of saving our republic from the hands of the enemy — the opposing party. Unfortunately, one of the sources of this sense of ultimacy in political contests comes from the infusion of religion into the mix.

Even when both candidates are professing believers, only one is the truly ordained candidate. The two may say the same words about Jesus, the Bible, church, prayer and tithing. But when they start talking about tax cuts, homosexuality, social justice or war, one emerges as a real person of faith while the other is a mere pretender.

When a political contest is cast as part of the struggle for God’s will, when candidates are demonized and held as having no legitimacy because of their faith, the space where compromise might happen disappears. After all, who is willing to compromise their faith?

If we grant that President Obama spoke out a partisan hope that he will be re-elected, must we not also grant that the same is true for all those who seek the office?

We must be willing to embrace that the desire for unity — for a consensus that leaves no citizen behind — is worthy of our founding and faith visions, whatever form that might take.

If we can accept these notions, we might be able to raise our political contests out of the arena of ultimate religious concern and return to the business of mundane human responsibility and accountability — where they function best and for all.

James L. Evans can be reached at faithmatters@mindspring.com.