Amid Trump’s shameful address and breakfast remarks, Romney restores some faith

Sen. Mitt Romney (R-Utah) did himself proud Feb. 5 when he spoke on the Senate floor and gave his reasons for deciding to vote to remove President Donald from office because of his abuse of power. He focused powerfully on the fact that taking an oath before God to exercise impartial justice is no passing nod in the crowd, but something that should transcend considerations of partisanship and power.

Romney neatly and succinctly refuted the defenses put forward by the president’s lawyers, but it was his comments about the ethical obligation of his oath that warrant special attention. He said:

The Constitution is at the foundation of our Republic’s success, and we each strive not to lose sight of our promise to defend it. … The allegations made in the articles of impeachment are very serious. As a Senator-juror, I swore an oath, before God, to exercise “impartial justice.” I am profoundly religious. My is at the of who I am. I take an oath before God as enormously consequential. … Were I to ignore the evidence that has been presented, and disregard what I believe my oath and the Constitution demands of me for the sake of a partisan end, it would, I fear, expose my character to history’s rebuke and the censure of my own conscience. … We have come to different conclusions, fellow senators, but I trust we have all followed the dictates of our conscience.

If did not watch the video of the speech, I encourage to do so. Romney got choked up at key moments. This was not easy for him. The exercise of conscience in difficult decisions usually is not easy, but wrenching. Stephen Colbert, not for the first time, hit the nail on the head when he spoke of Romney’s action and of the cowardice of his colleagues.

People often appeal to their conscience in such a manner that you can be forgiven for thinking they confuse it with whim. Conscience is not self-will but its opposite, it is the voice of God in our heart and mind, telling us in a given situation what it is right to do. Not all consciences are the same and not all reach the same conclusions about the same situation.

In 2009, after Ambassador Mary Ann Glendon declined to accept the University of Notre Dame’s Laetare Medal because President Barack Obama was to receive an honorary degree that day, the turned to a previous Laetare winner, Judge John Noonan. It was a providential choice. He said of conscience:

By conscience, as you graduates of 2009 know, we apprehend what God asks of us and what the love of our neighbor requires. More than the voice of your mother, more than an emotional impulse, this mysterious, impalpable, imprescriptible, indestructible, and indispensable guide governs our moral . Each one is different. You may suggest what my conscience should say, but you cannot tell me what my conscience must say.

Then, turning to the reason he was there and not Glendon, he said:

One friend is not here today, whose absence I regret. By a lonely, courageous, and conscientious choice she declined the honor she deserved. I respect her decision. At the same time, I am here to confirm that all consciences are not the same; that we can recognize great goodness in our nation’s president without defending all of his multitudinous decisions; and that we can rejoice on this wholly happy occasion.

Noonan’s graciousness outpaced my own that day, but of course he was right to affirm that all consciences are not the same.

Romney showed himself a statesman and restored at least a little bit of one’s faith in humanity after the display that was this year’s State of the Union . The president refused to take the outstretched hand of the Speaker of the House, a constitutional officer who presides over the body we the people elected. It was not merely ungracious, it was insulting to her office. Speaker Nancy Pelosi can as well as get and she was entitled to demonstrably rip up his speech at its conclusion, although I wish she had not.

This content was originally published here.