Ben Carson's political religion

In C.S. Lewis’ The Lion, the Witch and the Wardrobe, Susan asks Mr. Beaver if Aslan, the great Lion, is safe. “’Course he isn’t safe,” answers Beaver. “But he’s good.” Christianity is that way in politics. Other religions, being less true, are less good. But they’re also dangerous to the political order, because religious citizens answer to a higher authority that can disagree with civil authority. That’s why many rulers prefer “civil religion,” a belief entirely subordinate to political purposes. This potentially divided loyalty between the ruler in heaven and the ruler on earth is called “the theologico-political problem.”

Republican presidential candidate Ben Carson had this in mind when he answered NBC’s Chuck Todd, who asked him on Meet the Press, “Should a president’s faith matter?” Carson responded knowledgably: “It depends on what that faith is. If it’s inconsistent with the values and principles of America, then of course it should matter.”

The retired neurosurgeon was assuming that one’s faith governs one’s entire life, that it’s not compartmentalized and privatized. When addressing the abortion question, Mario Cuomo assured us in 1984 that his Roman Catholic faith was safely isolated from his service as governor of New York. In 1960, people were deeply concerned about Democratic presidential nominee John F. Kennedy’s Roman Catholic allegiances. Would the pope be directing American public policy? Given the papacy’s political involvement over the last thousand years or so, it was a reasonable concern. Liberal Democrats today are concerned in the same way that if we elect a Bible-believing Christian, we will be electing Jesus.

But Kennedy settled the matter with this famous assurance:

“I am not the Catholic candidate for president. I am the Democratic Party’s candidate for president, who happens also to be a Catholic. I do not speak for my church on public matters, and the church does not speak for me.”

This is the assurance Carson says he would want from a Muslim presidential candidate. He told Fox News’ Sean Hannity, “I don’t care what religion or faith someone belongs to, if they’re willing to subjugate that to the American way and to our Constitution then I have no problem with that.” He wants to hear a Muslim leader say, “Sharia law does not speak for me.” Given the serious problem that the Muslim demand for Sharia law has become in Great Britain, this too is a reasonable concern.

But what about the Law of Moses? “If you’re a Christian … and you want to make us into a theocracy, I’m not going to support you,” Carson said. In other words, voters should apply the “swear to place our Constitution above their religion” requirement to Christians too, and presumably he would apply it to himself. So he is no Kim Davis. But neither is he the Apostle Peter who dissented from the Jewish authorities of his day, saying, “We must obey God rather than men.”

Chuck Todd was probing the character and beliefs of a presidential candidate, not a private voter. From this we learned that Ben Carson believes Christianity is wholly compatible with the Constitution, but should it come into conflict (think of same-sex marriage as the current Supreme Court majority reads it), then conscience must come second. So it seems that Carson is not a patriotic Christian, but a patriot with whatever Christian faith his love of country will allow.