Google+
Close
The UnKennedy
We’re more American for Santorum’s run.


Text  


Kathryn Jean Lopez

Rick Santorum was a warrior returning home from battle.

In Washington, D.C., 1,000 Catholics gathered on April 19 for the eighth annual National Catholic Prayer Breakfast. This year, it was all about religious liberty. The former Pennsylvania senator — now former Republican presidential contender — was in the audience and was introduced from the main stage, eliciting a warm welcome and a standing ovation.

The embrace stood in contrast to electoral reality, as Santorum did not win over a majority of Catholic voters. In state after state, he won with evangelical voters instead. A number of years ago, in fact, he was named by Time magazine as an influential “evangelical.” What was that about? People will tell you — certainly it’s what they tell me — that it’s because he comes off as “judgmental.” But what does that mean? As far as I can tell, it means that he has clear moral standards, tries to live up to them, and has the courage actually to talk about what he believes. It also means that he is not a “personally opposed” type of Catholic in public life.

Advertisement
“I almost threw up” is the irresistible sound bite from Santorum’s account of reading John F. Kennedy’s famous 1960 speech on faith and politics. But that doesn’t quite do justice to what Santorum has had to say on the topic. In that speech to Protestant ministers in Houston two months before the 1960 election, Senator Kennedy tried to ease worries about the fact that, if elected, he would be the country’s first Catholic president. He especially wanted to make sure that people didn’t think he would be taking orders from the Vatican. But in the course of doing something politically prudent, he also helped usher in a new era — the one we’re still living in — in which the separation of church and state is all too often considered, to use Senator Kennedy’s word, “absolute.”

Santorum, like Kennedy, is keen on the founding principle that the president should not attempt to impose his religious views on the nation. In a speech two years ago, he said that “while the phrase ‘separation of church and state’ doesn’t appear in the Constitution, the concept of keeping the government apart from religion does.” And, like Kennedy, he believes that a candidate’s religious affiliation shouldn’t be a disqualifier for office. But the Kennedy speech presented a model for pushing religion to the margins of our public life, a fact that has impoverished a nation that once prized religion as an “indispensable” support to “political prosperity,” as our first president put it.

Charles J. Chaput, the current archbishop of Philadelphia, has said that Kennedy was “sincere, compelling, articulate — and wrong.” The 1960 speech, Chaput argued, “began the project of walling religion away from the process of governance in a new and aggressive way. It also divided a person’s private beliefs from his or her public duties.” Kennedy didn’t start the fire, but he “fed” it, as Chaput put it.



Text  


Sign up for free NRO e-mails today:

NRO Polls on LockerDome

Subscribe to National Review