More on Kerry as a "cynical nonbeliever"

My reluctance to embrace Duncan Frissell's second-guessing of Kerry's faith (see "Kerry's Faith as Pretense?," below) has prompted reader reaction on both sides of the debate. Patrick H. Stiehm writes to note his agreement with my comments and to remind us that entering into another individual's mind and conscience in the mode of judgment "is God's place not ours, even if we happen to be a bishop." Mr. Stiehm notes that he is "very uncomfortable with the whole tone that the debate over Kerry's Catholicism is taking," but he suspects "it is only going to intensify."

On the other hand, Frank Wilson asks "what exactly does [Kerry's] faith consist in?" He explains:

I can well understand how a Catholic politician might reluct to vote for making abortion illegal. But to positively support abortion in every way possible is quite another matter. Kerry's record is quite simply pro-abortion. Moreover, it appears he was never granted an annulment of his first marriage. . . . And I think it should be possible to distinguish between a profession of faith and a pretension of it. Especially when a person does not publicly adhere to the rules of the faith in question.

My disagreement with Mr. Wilson may center simply on how we frame the inquiry. Should the policy positions of purportedly Catholic politicians cause us to challenge the politicians' standing within the community of faith, or should they cause us to challenge the sincerity of the politicians' faith itself? I still believe that the former is the more appropriate avenue, and that the latter path not only verges on the presumptuous, but also is largely unnecessary as a means of speaking truth to power.

Mr. Wilson also challenges my assertion that Bush, not just Kerry, is guilty of religious posturing for political gain. I admit that the posturing is more obvious by Kerry because he does not naturally (from what I can tell) make his faith a visible part of his public role, whereas Bush has made his faith a thread that runs throughout his public identity. And while much of Bush's religious imagery is unobjectionable, even inspiring (I'm thinking of his post-9/11 speech to Congress), that does not negate the political component. And in particular contexts like the marriage amendment, I maintain that posturing is the appropriate term, even if I have no doubt that Bush's underlying faith commitment is sincere.

Rob