| 
Mitt
Romney Hits a Home Run
By Maurine Proctor
The full text of Romney’s speech
can be found here
and the speech can be seen here (www.mittromney.com).
Mitt Romney hit it out of the ballpark
yesterday at the George H. W. Bush Presidential Library in College
Station, Texas, as he delivered the speech about how his religious
faith will affect and inform his presidency.
He was Presidential. He was thoughtful
and inspiring.
Kathryn Jean Lopez, writing on the
National Review’s blog, The Corner, said she had received
an email from a plugged-in Evangelical who really was not a Romney
fan and really didn’t want to vote for a Mormon who said:
It was a fantastic
speech. He said what he needed to — not too much, not too
little. At the end, the burden was on the American people —
"Will you really keep me from the Presidency because of what
I believe ... in a pluralistic society?”
And you know me
— I say this only grudgingly. Couldn't have gone any better
for him.
For months, pundits and Romney advisors
have debated whether he should give a speech like the one John
F. Kennedy gave nearly 50 years ago, allaying the fears of some
who were worried about electing a Catholic president. Romney’s
Mormon faith has been such a major topic in his candidacy that
news magazines like Time and Newsweek have done
high-octane front-page stories not so much on Romney or his take
on issues, but on his faith.
The Washington Post reported
that Romney had been torn about giving this speech, “telling
advisers that he had a “comma problem.” Political
journalists always follow his name by a comma, the words “a
Mormon,” and another comma.
"If I give a speech about Mormonism,"
he complained privately, "I'll never get beyond the comma
problem."
It has been a long-standing tradition
in this country, that while a candidate’s belief in God
and his values are important, questions of the intricacies of
his faith or theology are off limits. But this campaign has broken
those rules. In fact, it has been over the top. Rudy Guilliani
has been asked by reporters if he considers himself in communion
with the Catholic Church, and Mike Huckabee, among other things,
has been asked if he believes Mitt Romney is going to hell.
Mitt’s speech invites the discussion
about religion to a higher ground. He said,
There are some who
may feel that religion is not a matter to be seriously considered
in the context of the weighty threats that face us. If so, they
are at odds with the nation’s founders, for they, when our
nation faced its greatest peril, sought the blessings of the Creator.
And further, they discovered the essential connection between
the survival of a free land and the protection of religious freedom.
In John Adams’
words: “We have no government armed with power capable of
contending with human passions unbridled by morality and religion
... Our constitution was made for a moral and religious people.”
Freedom requires
religion just as religion requires freedom. Freedom opens the
windows of the soul so that man can discover his most profound
beliefs and commune with God. Freedom and religion endure together,
or perish alone.
Like JFK before him, Romney used
his speech to assure voters that his Church would not dictate
his policies.
Almost 50 years
ago, another candidate from Massachusetts explained that he was
an American running for president, not a Catholic running for
president. Like him, I am an American running for president. I
do not define my candidacy by my religion. A person should not
be elected because of his faith, nor should he be rejected because
of his faith.
Let me assure you
that no authorities of my church, or of any other church for that
matter, will ever exert influence on presidential decisions. Their
authority is theirs, within the province of church affairs, and
it ends where the affairs of the nation begin.
Romney also affirmed that he would
not be looking out for any one group of people as President.
As a young man,
Lincoln described what he called America’s “political
religion” — the commitment to defend the rule of law
and the Constitution. When I place my hand on the Bible and take
the oath of office, that oath becomes my highest promise to God.
If I am fortunate to become your president, I will serve no one
religion, no one group, no one cause, and no one interest. A President
must serve only the common cause of the people of the United States.
A drag upon the Romney candidacy
has been the charge of flip-flopping and lack of conviction and
sincerity. Although no single speech can allay the questions some
have raised about his taking conservative positions on gay rights,
abortion and gun rights only for political convenience, he was
compellingly sincere in this speech.
There are some for
whom these commitments are not enough. They would prefer it if
I would simply distance myself from my religion, say that it is
more a tradition than my personal conviction, or disavow one or
another of its precepts. That I will not do. I believe in my Mormon
faith and I endeavor to live by it. My faith is the faith of my
fathers — I will be true to them and to my beliefs.
Some believe that
such a confession of my faith will sink my candidacy. If they
are right, so be it. But I think they underestimate the American
people. Americans do not respect believers of convenience.
Americans tire of
those who would jettison their beliefs, even to gain the world.
Given the media scrutiny of his faith,
it would be hard to call that statement convenient.
He became even more personal and
fired with conviction with his expression of his faith in Jesus
Christ.
There is one fundamental
question about which I often am asked. What do I believe about
Jesus Christ? I believe that Jesus Christ is the Son of God and
the Savior of mankind.
My church’s
beliefs about Christ may not all be the same as those of other
faiths. Each religion has its own unique doctrines and history.
These are not bases for criticism, but rather a test of our tolerance.
Religious tolerance would be a shallow principle indeed if it
were reserved only for faiths with which we agree.
That lays out the territory clearly.
Criticize a candidate based on his religion and admit that you
are on shallow ground, foursquare opposed to America’s most
key founding virtues. What we share is what matters.
It is important
to recognize that while differences in theology exist between
the churches in America, we share a common creed of moral convictions.
And where the affairs of our nation are concerned, it’s
usually a sound rule to focus on the latter — on the great
moral principles that urge us all on a common course. Whether
it was the cause of abolition, or civil rights, or the right to
life itself, no movement of conscience can succeed in America
that cannot speak to the convictions of religious people.
Romney’s speech was important,
not just because he addressed his own faith, but because he reaffirmed
the place of faith in America at a time when faith is being severely
challenged.
No religion should
dictate to the state nor should the state interfere with the free
practice of religion. But in recent years, the notion of the separation
of church and state has been taken by some well beyond its original
meaning. They seek to remove from the public domain any acknowledgment
of God. Religion is seen as merely a private affair with no place
in public life. It is as if they are intent on establishing a
new religion in America — the religion of secularism. They
are wrong.
The founders proscribed
the establishment of a state religion, but they did not countenance
the elimination of religion from the public square. We are a nation
“Under God” and in God, we do indeed trust.
He’s speaking boldly about
in an important, undergirding idea. It is America’s founding
principle that our rights and freedoms come from the Creator,
not from the government. The government did not give them to us
and the government, therefore, cannot take them away.
What question about faith, then,
is important to ask a candidate? Romney says it is this, “Does
he share these American values: the equality of human kind, the
obligation to serve one another, and a steadfast commitment to
liberty?”
Romney asserts:
These American values,
this great moral heritage, is shared and lived in my religion
as it is in yours. I was taught in my home to honor God and love
my neighbor. I saw my father march with Martin Luther King. I
saw my parents provide compassionate care to others, in personal
ways to people nearby, and in just as consequential ways in leading
national volunteer movements. I am moved by the Lord’s words:
“For I was an hungered, and ye gave me meat: I was thirsty,
and ye gave me drink: I was a stranger, and ye took me in: naked,
and ye clothed me ...”
My faith is grounded on these truths.
America’s tradition of religious
freedom has profound implications. Europe’s notion of state
religions has left a legacy of beautiful, empty cathedrals. Islamic
jihadists would accomplish conversion by violence. Romney says
that it is the diversity of our cultural expression that has given
the vibrancy, not only to religion, but to our freedom as Americans.
Thus, he affirms,
You can be certain
of this: Any believer in religious freedom, any person who has
knelt in prayer to the Almighty, has a friend and ally in me.
And so it is for hundreds of millions of our countrymen: we do
not insist on a single strain of religion — rather, we welcome
our nation’s symphony of faith.
Romney’s long-awaited speech
on faith was in the words of columnist Mona Charen, “That
was perhaps the best political speech of the year. It was well
crafted and delivered with conviction and — this is unusual
for Romney — considerable emotion. I thought his contrast
of the empty cathedrals of Europe with the violent jihadis was
particularly adroit. He managed to make this a speech about patriotism
as much as about religion. Brilliant.”
You can’t ask more from a speech
than that.
Click
here to sign up for Meridian's FREE email updates.
© 2007
Meridian Magazine.
All Rights Reserved.
|
