We should not pretend that this is a new issue. Al Smith and John F. Kennedy were subjected to the religious test in the past century because they were Catholics. Voters questioned whether the country could bear a non-Protestant. The issue harped upon today is "Who is the most like what-Protestants-used-to-be?" Mercifully, that premise really doesn’t seem to affect Democrats: however, it is crucial to many right-wing Republicans. Moreover, it seems centered only on Mike Huckabee and Mitt Romney. Catholic Rudy Giuliani is apparently presumed to be non-religious by the Evangelical measuring stick, as is Episcopalian (almost Catholic?) John McCain.

I admire elements of faith conviction in both Southern Baptists (Huckabee) and the Latter-day Saints (Romney), but I think they have too shallow a theology for my tastes. I worry for the country if the president has no theological way to reconcile the words of the Bible with the science of Evolution, or who views his campaign success as a miracle akin to the multiplication of loaves and fishes. Also, I could never envision myself embracing a faith with the wooly theology of the Book of Mormon that rewrites the teachings of Jesus in the jargon of 19th century backwater America.

We have had presidents famous for their faithfulness to marriage – John and Abigail Adams come to mind – but there have been far more presidents who were philanderers and adulterers. We even know the name of Grover Cleveland’s love child, Baby Ruth. George Washington may never have told a lie, but after him the truth began to suffer abominably from its treatment in the White House. We had a president who confessed to lust (Jimmy Carter) and one who refused to admit his homosexual orientation (James Buchanan). Greed and graft pursued all of them, and three come to power by coup d’état in the Electoral College. War was begun on intentional lies on several occasions, and once on account of a dream (McKinley).

Despite the long list of behaviors that could be questioned by a religious sensitivity, some of these presidents were heroes and patriots. I reconcile the contradictions between personal conduct and public performance by focusing on the worldview of the president that informs decisions, despite moral stumbling. In short, what interests me is not religion, but spirituality. How does the candidate incorporate into politics a vision of what we should become and what should be our aspirations as a nation? Ironically, often this has little to do with the failures of personal morality. Ronald Reagan, for instance, was famous for womanizing before hitching up (a euphemism) with Nancy, and once president made it a policy not to attend church on Sundays. Yet he imparted that rosy spirituality that made it “morning in America.” (It was not appealing to me, but it helps register the point.) Lincoln's "charity towards all and malice towards none" seems to flow from his ambiguity about the Protestant denominations of his day and I agree with that sentiment as an admirable expression of Lincoln's spirituality.

I also believe that the issue of spirituality transcends the narrowing definition of religion foisted on us by a headline seeking media that considers the intra-evangelical squabbles the only measure of faith. Rudy Giuliani confesses to his sinfulness reflecting a Catholic belief in the sacrament of confession. Joe Biden, Bill Richardson and Chris Dodd reflect the social justice teaching of the papal encyclicals in their approaches. Similarly, the sense of Methodist duty is discernible in the spirituality of both Hillary Clinton and John Edwards. I think Barack Obama’s spirituality reflects the character of a non-religious seeker who found inspiration in a religious community of commitment to social change, while Dennis Kucinich seems to image a movement in the other direction away from organized religion. I remain open to being convinced otherwise, but my problem with Huckabee and Romney is that their theologies are so controlled by a literal understanding of text that there is little room for spontaneous spirituality.

In sum, I put less stock in formal religious profession than I do in spirituality (or the lack of it) when I evaluate a presidential candidate. People who have a measure of spirituality in their own lives are already attuned and will need no convincing to pay attention to this quality when deciding how to vote. That’s what faith should do.