Comments on: Returning To The Sources http://larison.org/2007/02/18/returning-to-the-sources/ n. the principle of good order "Observe the strange inversion of all order and sense! Dignity debased; how vilely is the function of a consul prostituted!" ~The Craftsman Sun, 01 Aug 2010 07:21:48 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.0.4 by: Grumpy Old Man http://larison.org/2007/02/18/returning-to-the-sources/#comment-5603 Mon, 19 Feb 2007 08:05:33 +0000 http://larison.org/2007/02/18/returning-to-the-sources/#comment-5603 With the exception of JFK, our Presidents in the last 60 years have been professing Protestants of one sort or another. I wonder whether any of them in fact went much beyond ceremonial or civic religion in terms of any actual influence of theology or faith on their political practice. I suspect that the practical effects of Romney's civic religion as a Mormon wouldn't much different from the Protestantism of a McCain or the Catholicism of a Giuliani. Nothing in his career suggests otherwise. Would a Mormon opportunist like Romney be any worse than a Methodist one like Hillary? A deeply pious candidate whose politics were rooted in his theological/liturgical life, far from being an expression of cultural continuity, might offer quite a radical departure from 20th Century politics. Would a serious Orthodox President proclaim that the best response to a 9/11 would be to go out and shop? Because Presidents so often don't do what they promise as candidates (FDR was going to balance the budget and keep us out of war, Bush 43 said "nation-building" was to be avoided) many look to what they can see of the candidates' character and record rather than to the ephemeral policy nostrums their consultants come up with. So far Romney looks to me like a decent administrator with not many fixed principles, far from the worst of a bad lot, but not the best, either. That said, I agree that the civic religion does have at least ceremonial importance. The traditions of the country are mostly Protestant, with some exotic admixtures. As a default position, we expect our President to be a married white Protestant male with a General American or mild Southern accent, just religious enough to reassure the public, but not religious enough to frighten the horses. Will a practitioner of the very American religion of Mormonism who meets the other criteria come as close as JFK (Catholic) or Reagan (divorced)? The polls Daniel likes to quote say no, but I think it's early days and the jury's still out. With the exception of JFK, our Presidents in the last 60 years have been professing Protestants of one sort or another. I wonder whether any of them in fact went much beyond ceremonial or civic religion in terms of any actual influence of theology or faith on their political practice. I suspect that the practical effects of Romney’s civic religion as a Mormon wouldn’t much different from the Protestantism of a McCain or the Catholicism of a Giuliani. Nothing in his career suggests otherwise. Would a Mormon opportunist like Romney be any worse than a Methodist one like Hillary?

A deeply pious candidate whose politics were rooted in his theological/liturgical life, far from being an expression of cultural continuity, might offer quite a radical departure from 20th Century politics. Would a serious Orthodox President proclaim that the best response to a 9/11 would be to go out and shop?

Because Presidents so often don’t do what they promise as candidates (FDR was going to balance the budget and keep us out of war, Bush 43 said “nation-building” was to be avoided) many look to what they can see of the candidates’ character and record rather than to the ephemeral policy nostrums their consultants come up with.

So far Romney looks to me like a decent administrator with not many fixed principles, far from the worst of a bad lot, but not the best, either.

That said, I agree that the civic religion does have at least ceremonial importance. The traditions of the country are mostly Protestant, with some exotic admixtures. As a default position, we expect our President to be a married white Protestant male with a General American or mild Southern accent, just religious enough to reassure the public, but not religious enough to frighten the horses. Will a practitioner of the very American religion of Mormonism who meets the other criteria come as close as JFK (Catholic) or Reagan (divorced)? The polls Daniel likes to quote say no, but I think it’s early days and the jury’s still out.

]]>