iPhone app iPad app Android phone app Android tablet app More

Featuring fresh takes and real-time analysis from HuffPost's signature lineup of contributors
Randall Balmer

GET UPDATES FROM Randall Balmer
 

Romney and the Republicans: Outsourcing Religion

Posted: 08/22/2012 10:35 am

Mitt Romney's choice of Paul Ryan as his running mate marks the first time in American history that no Protestant will appear on a major-party ticket for president. Ryan is Roman Catholic, and Romney, of course, is Mormon.

Alfred E. Smith, the Democratic governor of New York, broke the Roman Catholic barrier (nomination) in 1928, and John F. Kennedy became the first, and only, Catholic to win the presidency, in 1960. Romney, formerly a stake president (essentially a lay bishop) for the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, is the first Mormon to win a place on a major-party ticket.

But aren't Mormons Protestants? That would require a much longer conversation, but historians of religion generally do not classify Mormons as Protestants. Many people, in fact, especially evangelical Protestants, deny that Mormons are even Christians -- although Mormons themselves take great umbrage at even the suggestion that they are not Christians. The very name of their church, they hasten to point out, is Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints.

The real puzzle, at least on the face of it, is why Romney didn't choose an evangelical for his running mate, especially if he was so concerned, as widely reported, to solidify his base. The religious right, after all, has been the core constituency of the Republican Party ever since the 1980s. Throughout the primary season, evangelicals were profoundly suspicious of Romney's Mormonism, especially because he studiously avoided talking about it.

Heading into the fall campaign, many evangelicals remain wary, or at least unenthusiastic, about the presumptive Republican nominee. Tapping an evangelical for running mate might have assuaged their anxieties.

So why didn't Romney choose an evangelical? The first, and most obvious, answer is that there was no clear candidate. Mike Huckabee, a Baptist minister and former governor of Arkansas, might have fit the bill, but many Americans suspected he was just a tad too loopy when he pursued the Republican nomination for president in 2008. His tenure as a Fox News host has apparently done little to alter that impression.

After Huckabee, who? Sarah Palin? Well, that's the point -- and the answer to Romney's quandary also goes a long way toward explaining the absence of Protestants on the Supreme Court. Despite George W. Bush's political indebtedness to the religious right, he appointed no evangelical to the Supreme Court; both of his appointments were Roman Catholics.

The evangelicals aligned with the Religious Right have every right to wonder why Romney and the Republican Party are willing to pass them by and defer so frequently to Catholic conservatives. This is especially puzzling because politically conservative evangelicals, more than any other political constituency, have been responsible for the electoral success of Republicans over the past 30-plus years.

Part of the explanation lies in the fact that evangelicals are still relatively new to organized politics (late 1970s) and they still haven't developed a stable of politicians, much less legal scholars, at least at the national level. The Republican Party, therefore, has in effect outsourced its religion to conservative Catholics, witness names like Clarence Thomas, Antonin Scalia, Samuel Alito and now Paul Ryan. Two of the prime contenders for the evangelical vote during the Republican presidential primaries were Rick Santorum and Newt Gingrich, both of them Catholics.

Yes, it's true that evangelical suspicions of Roman Catholicism have abated over the last several decades. Still, most political players expect some return for their support.

In the Hebrew Bible, Esau traded his birthright for a mess of pottage. More than three decades ago, politically conservative evangelicals cast their lot with the Republican Party and in the process, many would argue, defaulted on the teachings of Jesus to care for "the least of these."

What do these evangelicals have to show for their partisanship?

Randall Balmer, an Episcopal priest and chair of the religion department at Dartmouth College, is the author of more than a dozen books, including "God in the White House: How Faith Shaped the Presidency from John F. Kennedy to George W. Bush."

 
FOLLOW RELIGION
 
 
  • Comments
  • 29
  • Pending Comments
  • 0
  • View FAQ
Comments are closed for this entry
View All
Favorites
Recency  | 
Popularity
11:49 PM on 09/25/2012
Balmer states that no Protestant is running on a major party ticket for president in 2012. It is my understanding that for most of his adult life, Obama has been a member of the United Church of Christ, one of the most liberal Protestant denominations. If Balmer has other information, I hope he will advise his readers.
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
nonni-g
02:54 PM on 09/04/2012
"politically conservative evangelicals cast their lot with the Republican Party and in the process, many would argue, defaulted on the teachings of Jesus to care for "the least of these."" THANK YOU for someone finally saying that!! I have been asking that same question for the past few months and no one seems to even understand what I am talking about. How can an evangelical, a christian and/or a believer even consider voting for the current Republican candidate or any Repbulican? They are so worried about abortion being the reason God will judge America harshly, but won't He do the same for the treatment of the poor, the hungry, the sick, the old, the homeless, for the least of these? They seem to forget that particular instruction.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Hales Swift
12:23 PM on 08/23/2012
I think the main reason that Romney didn't choose an Evangelical is because he had other priorities that he saw as having greater strategic value and decided that he could court Evangelicals in other ways. I notice that he is increasing the amount he is communicating about religion in the run-up to the convention including inviting reporters to church. This is only a marginal change, but combined with his also beginning to run commercials about religious freedom issues seems to suggest that he is covering the religious voters (and particularly the Evangelical) base with communication rather than by choosing someone they can 100% identify with. Also, after seeing how much support Santorum got from Evangelicals, it is difficult to conclude that Catholics are still looked at askance as they once were. The main thing the Ryan choice indicates to me is that Romney intends to have a policy intensive conversation. I certainly hope that's what it means, because the combination of policy detail avoidance (on the part of both major party candidates) and the endemic obnoxious name calling has significantly lessened my personal enjoyment of this year's political season.
09:04 AM on 08/23/2012
I thought Obama claims to be a Protestant Christian . . .
08:33 AM on 08/23/2012
So what religion does President Obama claim, if not a Protestant Christian?
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
kella
01:45 AM on 08/23/2012
" it is a restoration of the Church of Jesus Christ as originally established by the Savior in the New Testament of the Bible. The Church does not embrace the creeds that developed in the third and fourth centuries that are now central to many other Christian churches."

If the church follows only Jesus teachings, why originally they accepted polygamy? And also does it mean that all Mormons have to reject riches in order to go to heaven as Jesus said?

Personally, the Mormons as a whole seem to be very decent people. I never discuss religion with my friends because it can be to intrusive and controversial.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Hales Swift
12:38 PM on 08/23/2012
Polygamy is a fascinating and complicated topic. A main initial motivation seems to have been wondering why Abraham and other of the early patriarchs did this, but were still approved of by God. These individuals lived before Moses, so it wasn't just part of the Law of Moses, so one of the prophets asked the Lord about it and was told to practice it. The complete reasons for that practice aren't fully known. If you are interested, there is a somewhat speculative list available here:
http://en.fairmormon.org/Mormonism_and_polygamy/Purpose_of_plural_marriage/Possible_benefits
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
kella
03:42 PM on 08/23/2012
Interesting site. Thanks you.
08:20 PM on 08/23/2012
The Lord has stated that he approves polygamy when he wishes to raise up righteous seed. Otherwise, it isn't sanctioned. He has also said that when He says it is okay, it has to be by His rules. In the O.T. the Lord told Soloman and David who to marry. When they did as He asked it was counted to them for righteousness. Both fell away and took wives that were not approved by the Lord. Then they fell under condemnation. In short the Lord says, "When I say its okay you have to do it My way, otherwise, it is not sanction."
been2there
Facts have a liberal bias.
11:04 PM on 08/22/2012
They have the contempt of people who think it matters to care for the least of these, far to many provable instances of greed and corruption, and, worst of all, a distorted idea of what faith means. They have lost so much, it really hurts--and they can't see it.
05:20 AM on 08/23/2012
Greed and corruption are consequences of freedom, and I wish that didn't happen. But those consequences are so much better than the consequences of having no freedom. The difference is that republicans are about allowing us to choose to care for the needy, while the democrats wants to force wealthy people to share with the needy. That is the road to communism and it will never ever work and never has worked. Real care only comes when people choose to care and share, not when they are forced to.
been2there
Facts have a liberal bias.
03:47 PM on 08/23/2012
The caring for of the needy was, from our nations founding, considered the duty of the more fortunate.  The founders would be appalled by your statement!
And a decent safety net is not the same as communism.  The final results of greed are far, far worse than communism.
FYI the first communists were the early Christians.
09:02 PM on 08/22/2012
I now know of a dozen books that I won't need to read. Does Randall Balmer, an Episcopal priest, speak for all Episcopalians?
photo
basilva1
123avlis
02:35 PM on 08/22/2012
So many things could be productive discussions from this article. I will focus solely on your reference to Esau. As an evangelical I believe my generation missed the mark entirely when they left their churches, mission fields, soup kitchens, etc. for the "promise land" of politics. Your reference is good. We have sold our birthright.

Certainly the "Church" has nearly 2,000 years of a contentious marriage between itself and politics. But it was not meant to be that way. New Testament theology is very clear on who our allegiance is to and who we are to follow (MAN IS NOT ON THE LIST). 2 commandments (love God, love your neighbor) pretty simple instructions. The Old Testment is filled with what happens when Gods people do what they want instead of what God has told them. In spite of this knowledge Evangelicals saw in the political right the potential to change America for the better. With that comes all sorts of misconceptions about being "chosen," "light on the hill,", "providence" etc. Evangelicals have overstepped their authority and trusted in man instead of God.

Where are Christian best? Serving the needy. Anyone know the actual monetary number attributed to Evangelicals in political spending. Weren't we given a mandate by God to use those funds to help the poor, the infirmed, widows, and orphans?

Well we are sheep. baaaaaaaaaa
02:32 PM on 08/22/2012
Funny question - why wouldn't Romney choose an evangelical as it was reported and conjectured. Simple answer: Romney is not the person that press makes him out to be. Every action he has taken in his campaign has shown his leadership skills. They aren't reported that way in the media, since they're slanted left, but his choice of Ryan as VP is no exception. To find balanced news coverage to make truly informed opinions these days you have to seek out both sides, because both sides leave stuff out.
Also, for the record, the LDS church position of bishop is comparable to pastor and Romney's position of stake president is more comparable to being in charge of a diocese, normally a group of about 10 LDS congregations in an area. To find more accurate information regarding Mormonism, please visit mormon.org or mormonnewsroom.org, which is a website specifically designed to make accurate information attainable to the press. Thanks for listening.
www.conservativemormonmom.blogspot.com
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
readbofm
Member of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day
02:18 PM on 08/22/2012
Are Mormons Christian?

Yes. The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints is a Christian church but is neither Catholic nor Protestant. Rather, it is a restoration of the Church of Jesus Christ as originally established by the Savior in the New Testament of the Bible. The Church does not embrace the creeds that developed in the third and fourth centuries that are now central to many other Christian churches.

Latter-day Saints believe God sent His Son, Jesus Christ, to save all mankind from death and their individual sins. Jesus Christ is central to the lives of Church members. They seek to follow His example by being baptized (see Matthew 3:13-17), praying in His holy name (see Matthew 6:9-13), partaking of the sacrament (see Luke 22:19-20), doing good to others (see Acts 10:38) and bearing witness of Him through both word and deed (see James 2:26). The only way to salvation is through faith in Jesus Christ.
Read more about Latter-day Saint Christianity
http://www.mormonnewsroom.org/article/christianity-following-jesus-in-word-and-deed
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Cindbird
Using my head for something other than a hat rack.
01:17 AM on 08/23/2012
Except for the lie about Jesus coming to America and talking to my native American ancestors.
05:14 AM on 08/23/2012
And what is your evidence that he did not visit the Americas in ancient times? There is tons of evidence that he did. Have you never heard of all the traditions that a white bearded God had been there and promised to return for example?
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
readbofm
Member of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day
09:04 AM on 08/23/2012
You can find this woderful account of the Saviors love in the scriptures.
Here is an excerpt:

http://www.lds.org/scriptures/bofm/3-ne/11?lang=eng

7 Behold my Beloved Son, in whom I am well pleased, in whom I have glorified my name—hear ye him.

8 And it came to pass, as they understood they cast their eyes up again towards heaven; and behold, they saw a Man descending out of heaven; and he was clothed in a white robe; and he came down and stood in the midst of them; and the eyes of the whole multitude were turned upon him, and they durst not open their mouths, even one to another, and wist not what it meant, for they thought it was an angel that had appeared unto them.

10 Behold, I am Jesus Christ, whom the prophets testified shall come into the world.

11 And behold, I am the light and the life of the world; and I have drunk out of that bitter cup which the Father hath given me, and have glorified the Father in taking upon me the sins of the world, in the which I have suffered the will of the Father in all things from the beginning.

You simply must read futhre to see the great love the Savior had for these people.
This accout is in 3 Nephi Chapter 11
http://www.lds.org/scriptures/bofm/3-ne/11?lang=eng
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
readbofm
Member of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day
02:15 PM on 08/22/2012
Political Neutrality
http://www.mormonnewsroom.org/official-statement/political-neutrality

The Church’s mission is to preach the gospel of Jesus Christ, not to elect politicians. The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints is neutral in matters of party politics. This applies in all of the many nations in which it is established.

The Church does not:
•Endorse, promote or oppose political parties, candidates or platforms.
•Allow its church buildings, membership lists or other resources to be used for partisan political purposes.
•Attempt to direct its members as to which candidate or party they should give their votes to. This policy applies whether or not a candidate for office is a member of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints.
•Attempt to direct or dictate to a government leader.

The Church does:
•Encourage its members to play a role as responsible citizens in their communities, including becoming informed about issues and voting in elections.
•Expect its members to engage in the political process in an informed and civil manner, respecting the fact that members of the Church come from a variety of backgrounds and experiences and may have differences of opinion in partisan political matters.
•Request candidates for office not to imply that their candidacy or platforms are endorsed by the Church.
•Reserve the right as an institution to address, in a nonpartisan way, issues that it believes have significant community or moral consequences or that directly affect the interests of the Church.