Candidates will bring faith into office. Voters need to know what that means.

July 19, 2026

by Brandon Burley

The Redemption Project Newsroom
Commentary / Civic Analysis

---

KNOXVILLE, Tenn. — It is easy to hear a candidate talk about Christianity and assume the story is simple.

One side hears courage.

Another side hears danger.

One voter hears a candidate finally saying out loud what they believe America and Tennessee were built to be. Another hears government inching toward religious power it was never supposed to hold.

Both reactions miss part of the truth.

Religion has always been present in American public life. The Declaration of Independence speaks of a “Creator,” “Nature’s God,” the “Supreme Judge of the world” and “divine Providence.” Public officials often take oaths on Bibles. American money says “In God We Trust.” Legislatures open with prayer. Candidates talk about faith because many voters care about faith.

That history is real.

But it is not the whole story.

The U.S. Constitution did not create a national church. It does not require a president, governor, legislator, judge or juror to be Christian. Article VI says “no religious Test shall ever be required” for public office or public trust under the United States. The First Amendment says Congress shall make no law “respecting an establishment of religion” or prohibiting the free exercise of religion.

Those two First Amendment protections matter together.

Government cannot establish religion.

Government also cannot erase religious exercise.

That is why the old argument over “separation of church and state” is usually too shallow. The phrase itself is not in the Constitution. The principle comes from several constitutional pieces working together: no official church, no religious tests, no government-imposed worship, free exercise of faith, freedom of conscience and a long line of court cases trying to decide where accommodation ends and establishment begins.

So when candidates for governor speak openly about Christianity, voters should not pretend that is irrelevant.

They also should not pretend it answers every question.

The real issue is not whether a candidate has religious beliefs. Most candidates have some kind of moral framework, whether religious or not. The real issue is how that framework would shape the use of public power.

At Friday night’s East Tennessee Young Republicans gubernatorial forum in Knoxville, religion was not a side issue. It was part of the candidates’ governing arguments.

State Rep. Monty Fritts spoke in direct Christian language, identifying himself as a “Christ is King” Christian and saying Tennessee needs leaders willing to stand for Christian culture, constitutional rights and less government. He tied his faith to his positions on abortion, public education, state spending, immigration, Second Amendment rights and opposition to what he sees as government overreach.

U.S. Rep. John Rose also spoke directly about his Christian faith, describing his conversion as a young boy and saying a personal relationship with Jesus Christ should matter in choosing leaders. Rose tied his faith to his pro-life record, his view of public-school curriculum, his opposition to taxpayer support for organizations he says conflict with Tennessee values and his broader argument that Tennessee needs executive leadership rooted in conservative principles.

Those answers may comfort some voters.

They may alarm others.

But they should not surprise anyone.

Legislators, governors and members of Congress do not enter office as blank slates. They bring moral beliefs, religious beliefs, philosophical beliefs, family histories, business experience, military experience, cultural assumptions and political commitments with them. Those beliefs affect what bills they support, what budgets they prioritize, what laws they veto, what agencies they direct and what advisers they trust.

That is not unique to Christianity.

A secular progressive brings beliefs about justice and equality. A libertarian brings beliefs about individual liberty and state power. A religious conservative brings beliefs about God, family, moral order and the limits of government. A populist brings beliefs about elites, institutions and ordinary people.

The voter’s job is not to demand that candidates have no worldview.

The voter’s job is to understand the worldview before handing that candidate power.

That is especially important in a governor’s race because the governor is not a pastor, judge, school board member or member of Congress. A governor cannot rewrite the U.S. Constitution. A governor cannot create a national church. A governor cannot personally overturn Supreme Court precedent. A governor cannot alone pass a bill.

But a governor can shape state priorities.

A governor proposes budgets. A governor signs or vetoes legislation. A governor appoints commissioners. A governor directs agencies. A governor uses public influence to pressure the Legislature. A governor helps decide whether education, health care, law enforcement, economic development, religious liberty, civil rights and family policy are treated as urgent or secondary.

That is why voters should listen carefully when candidates talk about faith.

Not because faith disqualifies anyone.

Not because faith automatically qualifies anyone.

Because faith, like every serious worldview, can become policy when voters give someone the power to govern.