RSS Feed MenuMy column for CNN.com expands on the discussion of this issue here last week.
The next wave of social conservatism is presenting itself as a particularly Christian cause, with Christian defined in a way that would exclude not only Mitt Romney, but also the man who created Tiny Tim and Ebenezer Scrooge. (Charles Dickens was a Unitarian, not a Trinitarian.) For that matter, neither George Washington, nor John Adams, nor Thomas Jefferson, nor Abraham Lincoln was a believer in the Trinitarian God of the Manhattan Declaration.
Now here’s the question. If this is a time when Christians must act as Christians together with other Christians — and if Mormons do not qualify — how can such Christians accept a Mormon like Mitt Romney as their political leader?
Evangelical leaders in 2008 tried to sell the idea that a man could be religiously repugnant yet politically acceptable. The influential Charles Colson famously cited the reputed remark of Martin Luther: Better to be governed by a wise Turk than a foolish Christian.
Yet just as Gallup predicted at the beginning of the 2008 cycle, the pro-Romney sympathies of some evangelical leaders did not translate into pro-Romney primary votes. Romney not only failed to win a single southern state in the Republican primaries, but he did not even finish second anywhere south of the Mason-Dixon line.
joemarier // Nov 30, 2009 at 3:31 pm
I might as well point out the Charles Colson whom you cite was one of the drafters of the Manhattan Declaration. Which indicates that the Manhattan Declaration is not, in fact, the acid test for social conservatism that you and Jonathan Rauch believe it to be. It’s about one specific issue; conscience rights.
Carney // Nov 30, 2009 at 3:41 pm
I still say Frum is making too much of this statement, stirring up trouble, even. If mainstream Christians wish to speak as one on an important issue or set of issues, that does not preclude working together with the Mormons, or small-c conservative Jews, etc., nor has it.
DFL // Nov 30, 2009 at 4:28 pm
Although the Mormon Mitt Romney will lose votes just because of his religion, most candidates for office lose votes when their cultural values or religion are explored by voters. Does anyone seriously think that Barney Frank(homosexual, non-practicing Jew) could, as a presidential candidate, win the electoral votes of even a dozen states? Could atheist Cong. Pete Stark of Oakland win a congressional district in most areas of the country? Was George W. Bush penalized by certain Americans as early as 2000 for his outspoken Christianity and his Texas drawl? Could a Muslim win election in many parts of the country? No. No. Yes. And no.
Mitt Romney has the mien and attitude of a man who might make a successful president. Yet he has proved himself to be a shameless chameleon who has been opportunistic in many of his policy changes. That is what is most likely to defeat him in 2012, not his religion.
Carney // Nov 30, 2009 at 5:13 pm
While Frum does have a point about Romney’s poor showing in the South, I think if he had been the governor of a Mountain West state and had always run and governed as a conservative, the deep suspicion of him in the South might not have been as intense. But that combined with his slick hair (yes, image matters) and Mormonism was too much. It’s important to understand that evangelical Protestants have been a major target of Mormon proselytization, and Mormons have sought to downplay if not disguise their major differences with mainstream Christianity (such as not only being non-Trinitarian but even being non-monotheistic) in order to ease conversion resistance, in ways that strike many as less than fully candid and forthcoming – the more difficult to accept and radical stuff gets gently introduced later after one is immersed in a new social circle. The suspicion this causes in the evangelical community is similar to the suspicion mainstream Jews feel toward Jews for Jesus.
Carney // Nov 30, 2009 at 5:17 pm
Again, I say this as a Romney supporter (and donor) in the 2008 cycle. Romney is clearly a sensible, competent, squeaky-clean, articulate, stable leader with a truly stellar track record of successful executive leadership and turning around disastrously insolvent institutions. As for his move to the right, well, that pleased me, being a conservative. What did his critics want, for him to be stubbornly liberal? They would have denounced that as arrogant. Reagan, Bush Sr., and many others converted to being pro-life from being “pro-choice” earlier in their careers.
Chekote // Nov 30, 2009 at 8:59 pm
Oh please! In an attempt to win the Iowa Caucus Mitt completely transformed himself into a cultural warrior and in the process lost the very qualities that made him attractive” competent, informed, excecutive type, urbane. This is what happens when you cater to the home schooling crowd in Iowa.
Carney // Nov 30, 2009 at 10:38 pm
Actually, Chekote, Romney exemplifies how one can be a competent executive while also being a voice for families and sane, decent, normal values at a time of accelerating decay, decline, and fraying of the social fabric, at the instigation of government, big media, and other major institutions which have been captured by the Left.
advocatusdiaboli // Dec 1, 2009 at 12:48 am
He’s got more than religion problem (and I am with Thomas Jefferson on the separation) . He’s got a greedy capitalist problem regarding his behavior running Bain Capital (and cheating people of their pensions for $40M and then using those savings to try for over $400 M in loans) and it will come to light if he runs. Can’t our party find some decent people who actually live our values instead of talking out both sides of their mouths? Sheesh, you cannot make this stuff up. Is this the best we can find in our ranks?
frjohnwhiteford // Dec 1, 2009 at 7:31 am
This statement was not a statement from the GOP… it was a statement from socially conservative Christians… not all of whom are known to vote Republican. They define the term Christian as those who believe in the Christian doctrine of the Trinity. Mormons do not share that doctrine Neither do Jews or Muslims. The signers of this declaration are more than happy to work with Mormons, Jews, and Muslims on matters that we can agree upon — and given the choice between a socially liberal democrat and a socially conservative Mormon, most of them would vote for the Mormon in a heartbeat. But as a religious declaration, they have every right to decide how the document would be framed and who would be on the podium at their press conference.
You are also quite wrong when you assert that George Washington and Abraham Lincoln did not believe in the Trinity. In the case of George Washington, he was a lifelong Anglican, and there is no evidence to suggest that he denied such an essential Anglican doctrine. Abraham Lincoln was a skeptic in his younger days, but he became a very fervent Christian, attended a Presbyterian Church, and there is no reason to believe that he denied such an essential Presbyterian doctrine.
sinz54 // Dec 1, 2009 at 9:54 am
frjohnwhiteford: The signers of this declaration are more than happy to work with Mormons, Jews, and Muslims on matters that we can agree upon — and given the choice between a socially liberal democrat and a socially conservative Mormon, most of them would vote for the Mormon in a heartbeat.
What if they were given a choice between Mitt Romney, a socially conservative Mormon with intelligence, tremendous business acumen, and clear policies on national and international issues, versus Sarah Palin, a socially conservative Protestant without a clear understanding of national issues and only one term as governor after which she quit?
Before the general election, we have to get thru the GOP primaries.
Wanna bet that the signers of this Declaration would vote for Sarah Palin over Mitt Romney in a heartbeat?
Carney // Dec 1, 2009 at 11:23 am
sinz54, Romney had “only” one term as governor, after which he quit.
But Palin did not even have that – she quit partway through her first term, and thus did not quit “after” it, as you stated.
Also, Romney not only served out his full term, he also has extensive experience being a highly successful executive in the business and nonprofit world.