What a sad day...

Mollie Ziegler put it well with the attention given to Michelle Bachman:  Are you now or have you ever been a Lutheran?  Others wonder about the Mormon Moment of folks like Mitt Romney and John Huntsman and whether or not Americans can vote for a Latter Day Saint.  You surely have not forgotten President Obama twisting in the wind while his home church and preacher spent unwanted time in the news headlines until he finally distanced himself from it all.  Pawlenty was Roman Catholic, might have been a Lutheran for a time, and now is comfortably a member of a premier evangelical congregation (Wooddale Church) whose pastor is a darling of left and right.  Gingrich came from Lutheran roots, went Southern Baptist, and more recently became Roman Catholic (in the midst of marriages coming and going).  Ron Paul was raised Lutheran and his brother is a Lutheran Pastor but he left a long time ago.  I could go on, but I won't... it seems the one common thread here maybe if you are Lutheran, you gotta change religions or give up seeking to be President?!?

My point is this.  It seems we want our Presidential candidates to distance themselves from their religious faith, to be religious but not very pious, to have values but not values shaped by their faith, and to govern without being influenced by that faith or those values...  It all started with JFK and the fear that Pope John XXIII would pull the strings on his puppet in Washington (having admired him for some time, would it have been so bad to have John XXIII influence the morals and values of the White House?).  This is in stark contrast to the Presidents of previous eras who spoke out loud their faith and whose political speech was clearly informed and shaped by that faith (though this did not automatically make their great Presidents).

I am so confused by all of this.  I know Luther is supposed to have said better a pagan magistrate or political leader than a Christian who is a scoundrel, but... would it not be better if our political leaders WERE influenced by their faith and values?  Don't we want the folks who lead us to be people of conviction and faith, morals and values?  If we don't like their faith and values or how these influence their governing, we can always unelect them, right?  It is as if we want our political leaders to have faith that helps them as people but does not affect how they govern or make decisions.  Is anyone else offended by the shallowness of such faith?

I do not have any particular take on the current candidates and I am not grinding a political axe here except to suggest that we are somewhat duplicitous to suggest that our leaders be religious but not too religious, have faith but not let that faith affect their judgment or decisions, or have values but not to replace the values we have as informed by the latest poll on important matters... It just does not sound right.  Sadly, our political leaders will give us what we ask of them -- they will be as shallow and rudderless as we often are as a nation, with a great history but clearly uncomfortable with much of that history...

I am sure you will be hearing much more about this.... the political season has barely begun and we have a couple of long years to go before we get a brief respite... at least with respect to a Presidential contest.