I am about to raise my glass, cautiously, soberly, to a few Evangelical Christian leaders. Let me stress that I am not an Evangelical Christian. I am not born again. I have no personal relation with Jesus Christ. I certainly don’t believe that the Bible is inerrant and infallible in its original autographs (what original autographs?). I do recall, however, that one of my finest graduate students once told me that he knew, he just knew, that one day I would come to Christ. I did not, and do not, share his assessment. But I was sort of touched by that.
Anyhow, of late I have been studying the Mitt Romney candidacy, a candidacy that has set laborers in the Faith and Politics Industry (which I discussed in my inaugural post) astir. There are so many angles, that one hardly knows where to begin. Poll after poll indicates that a rather sizeable percentage of Americans have reservations about voting for a Mormon president. It is a pervasive prejudice, one that transcends political fault lines. You can find it among the Religious Left, as Al Sharpton’s recent remarks in his chat with Christopher Hitchens revealed. You can find it among nonbelievers who have convinced themselves that the LDS Church is not a religion, but a cult (though why that distinction should irk a generation of atheists and agnostics who think that any form of religious belief is a sure sign of advanced mental deficiency is beyond me).
And you can certainly find it among politically conservative Protestants. For many, Romney is not even regarded as a Christian. The reasons for the tensions between Evangelicals and Mormons are not difficult to discern. Theologically, they disagree about everything from the nature of God to the size of the scriptural canon. Historically, the persecution of Mormons in the 19th century did not do much to foster an open ecumenical dialogue between the faiths. And given that both groups are inveterate, globe-trotting missionaries, they are quite literally competing for souls.
It was with this in mind that one would surmise that the Evangelical and Fundamentalist demagogues would not spare Romney their characteristic fulminations—give him a little taste of what John McCain got in South Carolina, 2000. A few exceptions notwithstanding, this has not come to pass. In May Pat Robertson invited Mitt Romney to lecture the graduating class at his Regent University. The late Jerry Falwell remarked: “If he’s pro-life, pro-family, I don’t think he’ll have any problem getting the support of Evangelical Christians.” “I have a deep disagreement with Romney’s theology,” said Southern Baptist leader Frank Page, “but I won’t rule him out . . . he’s the closest to the Southern Baptists in his social and moral beliefs.” “It’s not a deal killer,” said Richard Land referring to Romney’s religion, “if he proves that he’s the most viable social conservative candidate.”
I fully acknowledge that the opinions mentioned in the previous paragraph may be a form of politically correct ecumenical banter that no one actually believes. It could be a cunning strategy of dissimulation—praise Romney for now, stall for time, and find somebody, anybody, more agreeable to Conservative Christian sensibilities than the strange trinity of Catholic Giuliani, Maverick McCain and the Mormon from Massachusetts.
But if we’re going to be fair--and is that not the point?—the possibility should at least be acknowledged that the response by Conservative Christian leaders might demonstrate a few laudable civic virtues. It might indicate that they are willing to look beyond religious qualifications and focus on (their) issues (If elected Romney seems inclined to support overturning Roe v. Wade and a Federal Marriage Amendment). It also raises one really strange possibility: if a pro-Life, anti-Gay marriage, nonbeliever were to become a viable presidential candidate (!) they would support her too!
What the rank-and-file of Conservative Christians (as opposed to their leaders) really think about placing a Mormon in the White House is something we will learn about in January. For now, let us entertain the possibility that as conscientious citizens they will not let creedal considerations obscure their political judgment.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>