Political Theology

Boy, Oh Boy!! Did Rick Santorum step into it with both feet last week with some of his comments about the President's theology, contraception and pre-natal testing or what? It looked sort of like a manic episode triggered by his elation at the prospect of being the leader in the national polling for the Republican nomination. I kind of understand that. I have done the same thing when I should have been a bit more circumspect and not let my tongue wag at both ends. The difference is I wasn't running for President with everyone in the world listening. The thing is that it exposes for everyone to see the philosophy guiding Mr. Santorum and it is foolish to think that philosophy won't continue to influence him.

I don't think it would be any secret to infer that a lot of the Christian Right do not consider the President to be true to the faith. It is just that it is not politically acceptable to directly challenge a person's affirmation of faith in the public arena unless you are ready to fill the bus up and go home. Having been a member of a conservative faith community most of my life I kind of understand what Mr. Santorum meant when he drifted off into matters of theology. In many people's mind he could have been referring to a theology in which the creation is worshiped rather than the Creator. I don't think that a significant number of people will make that distinction so he is much better off trying to find a way to say he didn't say that. Well, maybe he did say that but he didn't mean it. Truth be told, he did.

Mr. Santorum then made the rounds of the talk shows to tell how he said that but didn't mean it that way. It was a tough sell and I don't think too many people bought the story. However, not too many interviewers will call out “liar, liar, pants on fire” to a guy who may end up occupying the White House and who may carry a grudge.

All of this should come as no surprise to anyone who has followed this man or who is familiar with the doctrine of the Catholic Church which leads us to another of Mr. Santorum's revealing statements, this time concerning contraception. Of course, the Church does not recognize any kind of artificial birth control to be in accordance with dogma and says that it is sinful. He went on to attack the precept of having pre-natal testing made available as a part of the Affordable Care Act due to be in full force by 2014. You may recall the incident where Cardinal Dolan (recently Bishop Dolan) went on a tear stating that for the government to require a church supported entity to provide contraceptive coverage is a violation of the First Amendment concerning Freedom of Religion. Personally, I think that is a stretch since this Church has all sorts of secular activities it collects revenue from that are subject to taxation. If the activities meet that criteria for taxation then it seems to me it is no longer strictly a religious organization. In addition, the requirement was not to use contraception but to provide coverage for those who wished to use it. Mr. Santorum then took off on the use of pre-natal testing asserting that the main purpose of such testing is to provide abortions. All of these positions are philosophically and religiously understandable whether one agrees or not but that does not make them suitable subjects for domestic policy.

And the thicket just gets thornier. Recent news has Franklin Graham, son of Billy Graham, casting some doubt on the validity of President Obama's faith. Then he went so far as to assert that Mitt Romney is in trouble also since most Christians will not accept the Mormon church as part of the Christian tradition. That leaves Mr. Santorum and Mr. Gingrich the only two of the major candidates with an approved Christian practice. I'm not certain that Mr. Paul would meet the litmus test for genuine adherence to faith practices. He converted to Baptist from Lutheran which does not automatically disqualify him. If he is the same kind of Baptist as he is a Republican we may find some common ground there as well as politically. How thorny is that thicket and who are the Christian mullahs that we would allow to approve or disapprove of proper Christian practice? Mr. Santorum and Mr. Gingrich would not have a problem with that question since the Pope is supreme in interpretation of all things spiritual. John Kennedy addressed that problem 50 years ago and here we are looking at it again.

My take is that we should leave theology and religious piety at the door of the campaign bus. As individuals we can use that as an item to be considered but it is just too thorny to be a part of political debate. The imagination just runs wild with possible scenarios on the debate stage. I won't go there.