Mitt Romney presented a speech on his faith, faith in general, and the role of religion in American politics. You can read the text and see the video at Powerline. There is commentary galore online, so let me just direct you to Joe K. and Julie Ponzi at NLT and you can go from there.
I am less enthused than most commentators, but more enthused than some. Romney gave a fairly sound but not very novel discourse on religion and politics and delivered it in a respectable (if a bit rehearsed) manner. Just a few comments.
The beginning of the speech is a little too much Mitt. Was it really necessary to take a trip on Mitt's Magical Faith Journey? I don't know if people really do ask him all the time about Jesus Christ, but to discuss the nature of Jesus Christ contradicts Romney's argument that it is morality not theology that is politically important. I understand why he brings it up. He wants Evangelicals to know that Mitt digs Jesus, a bone of contention between Evangelicals and Mormons. Still, to be consistent he should have kept his theological opinions to himself.
Later in the speech Romney hits a solid note when he says it is morality based on faith that holds Americans together, not specific doctrine. This is straight from Tocqueville, who argues:
The sects that exist in the United States are innumerable. They all differ in respect to the worship which is due to the Creator; but they all agree in respect to the duties which are due from man to man. Each sect adores the Deity in its own peculiar manner, but all sects preach the same moral law in the name of God.
Romney develops an idea throughout the speech. Democratic government relies on a moral people able to restrain their passions. Religion is indispensable support for morality and restraint of passions. Ergo, democratic government needs vibrant religion.
Romney could have taken another lesson from Tocqueville. Romney says that freedom is good for faith and faith is good for freedom, but he doesn't pursue the implications of that idea. Tocqueville suggests (I summarize) that freedom is good for faith as faith must stand alone on its own merits. It cannot be lazy, such as in nations with established churches (as in Europe, as Romney notes, where the embers of faith burn low). Faith is good for democracy because, as noted above, faith restrains the appetites of the people that may lead them to injustice. These arguments are implicit not explicit in Romney's presentation.
Overall, Romney gave a serviceable defense of religion's just place in the public square. I don't know whether this speech helps him or hurts him politically. I suspect at this point any attention that is not about what a creep you are is good attention for the candidates.
Recent Comments