If Keller is truly concerned about the faith of the current slate of presidential contenders, this list is a better place for a journalist to begin. The questions we ask have a way of revealing a tone of either our “advocacy or news reporting.”

Bill Keller’s column in the New York Times, Asking Candidates Tougher Questions About Faith, exhibits more anxiety than journalistic curiosity. Keller writes of his fear that one of the Republican hopefuls may be “a Trojan horse for a sect that believes it has divine instructions on how we should be governed.” Would not a less reactionary dose of simple journalistic interest be a better place to begin the dialogue? If readership and ratings are the goal, I suppose not.

Too often the questions asked of presidential candidates in public forums about their religious beliefs are laced with suspicion and cynicism? Instead of considering the upside of faith commitments in the lives of leaders, the moderators imagine the worst.

They too frequently seem poised to expose the perceived “threats” of people they deem just a bit “too committed” to their beliefs. In a nation where at least 86 percent of us believe in God (according to a Pew Forum Survey), ironically questions on faith are more often interrogation than honest searches for information.

It would do the inquisitors good to revisit the National Union of Journalist Code of Conduct, which says: “A journalist shall strive to ensure that the information he/she disseminates is fair and accurate.” While it’s fine and good to call on the candidates to be transparent about their faiths and to clarify areas of concern, it’s also right to expect that journalists be “fair and accurate” and avoid “distortion, selection,” and “misrepresentation.”

The Society of Professional Journalists, a peer organization, insists reputable journalists “avoid stereotyping by race, gender, age, religion, ethnicity, geography, sexual orientation, disability, physical appearance or social status” and that they should “distinguish between advocacy and news reporting.”
……

A candidate’s religious conviction should not inspire suspicion in us but rather a sense of security. Arguably, maintaining a consistent faith amidst the challenges of life requires commitment, character and perseverance, all qualities much needed in the soul that would occupy the Oval Office.

One of the qualifications of church leaders, for instance, according to the New Testament (1 Tim 3:2-5), is that they first are good family leaders: “Now the overseer is to be above reproach, faithful to his wife, … He must manage his own family well and see that his children obey him, and he must do so in a manner worthy of full respect. (If anyone does not know how to manage his own family, how can he take care of God’s church?).”

Read More
Robert Crosby is a Professor of Practical Theology at Southeastern University (Lakeland, FL), a contributor to Christianity Today, and the author of several books including More Than a Savior. He writes a column on issues of faith at Patheos.com. He blogs at The Current.

[Editor’s note: Some of the original URLs (links) referenced in this article are no longer valid, so the links have been removed.]