Candidates' Faith & Values

First of all, I have to say that I agree with those who have complained that this presidential election cycle has talked more about religion than any other--almost as if we were electing a national pastor rather than a U.S. president. I say that not as a "secularist," but as a Christian with 2 theology degrees who has been a pastor, an academic theologian and philosopher, and an organizer for a faith-based peacemaking organization--and as the spouse of a Baptist minister.

There is nothing wrong with a candidate for elected office talking about her or his faith as part of explaining their motivations--or in answering concerns the public might have about how particular religious convictions might affect one's ability to govern: A Quaker or Mennonite candidate would have to answer concerns that they might not be able to be commander-in-chief of the armed forces; an Orthodox Jewish candidate might legitimately be asked whether they could fulfill their duties if an emergency happened on the Sabbath. More than this may threaten to violate the Constitution's ban in Article 6 on religious tests for public office.

And, contrary to some assertions, the intense focus on candidates' religious convictions this election cycle was started by the Democrats--seeking to counter the conservative myth that Democrats are hostile (or, at best, indifferent) to religion and to persons of deep religious conviction. That myth did need to be countered--and done so in a way that showed that one can have deep faith convictions and still be a strong defender of church-state separation and of religious liberty for all (including the liberty to have no religious convictions or to be atheistic or agnostic). So, for what it's worth, here is the link to a great series on the presidential candidates' faith and values done by the good folks at the Christian Science Monitor. (Whatever one thinks of the Church of Christ, Scientist, they certainly put out a first class newspaper!)

But although finding out about candidates' views as a means of understanding their motivations and their approach to vital issues of public policy (many of which really are moral issues) is legitimate, some overtones in this election cycle seem at least mean spirited, if not downright theocratic. Mitt Romney's speech on religion meant to reassure evangelicals concerned about Mormonism ended up sounding like a put down to people of other faiths or no particular faith. Mike Huckabee's billing of himself as a "Christian leader" combined with little digs about Romney's Mormonism ("Don't they believe Jesus and Satan are brothers?") are, at least, nasty and possibly indicate a lowering of the wall of church-state separation should he be elected. Then there are the constant conservative attacks on Hillary Clinton that refuse to believe her oft-repeated expressions of personal faith (as a United Methodist) or the smear campaign that claims Barack Obama is a "closet Muslim" and some form of Manchurian candidate! (If he were Muslim, that would not disqualify him for office. But he was raised in a secular household and, as he has often attested, is an adult convert to Christianity who is an active member of Trinity United Church of Christ in Chicago--whose pastor, Jeremiah Wright, I have heard preach.)

The only redeeming note in this nasty mess is that, AT LEAST, we have come a long way since Gov. Al Smith (D-NY) lost his 1928 race for the White House because he was Catholic or since John F. Kennedy (D-MA) had to give a speech reassuring a gathering of Protestant ministers in Houston, TX in 1960 that he believed in church-state separation and religious liberty and that the pope would not rule the U.S. from afar! This year we have numerous Catholic candidates: 1 Republican (Rudy Guiliani (R-NY), and 4 Democrats (Rep. Dennis Kucinich (D-OH), Sens. Joe Biden (D-DL) & Chris Dodd (D-CT), & Gov. Bill Richardson (D-NM) ). No one, thank God, has even brought up their faith as a possible obstacle to the White House.

In our increasingly pluralistic society, however, we need far more tolerance for others' faith--and to recognize that the ban on religious tests for public office serves the common good. Citizenship in this nation is not measured by which faith or how much faith one has. That point seems lost on many in this election cycle.