From the standpoint of political cooperation, I have no problem with Santorum’s religious views. I've voted for pro-life conservative Roman Catholics before and certainly expect to do so many times again in the future. That's not a problem for me, and given the clear intent of the Founding Fathers to give full civil rights to Roman Catholics in Maryland, that shouldn't be a problem for any conservative who values the Constitution.
With regard to World Magazine, not only do I read the magazine and have for many years, I attend church with Janie Cheaney, whose name you will probably recognize as one of the magazine's longest-term writers. Back in the 1990s when I was working in the ultimately failed fight against liberalism in the Christian Reformed Church, I stayed in contact with Joel Belz and some of the other top leaders of World, but I have had no reason to maintain close contact with them for a long time. I respect World's positions on most issues and when I have a problem with something in the magazine, it's usually something written by a staff member or columnist that does not reflect the view of the top management.
My point here is not in any way to criticize Rick Santorum. After all, I voted for him and hope he wins the presidency.
My point is that as evangelicals, we need to clearly understand that there are important differences between Protestants and Catholics. Cooperating in the political sphere is perfectly fine. What we don't want to do is act as if the Roman Catholic Church is just another denomination. It is not.
Also, what we do **NOT** need is another Michelle Bachmann moment when people figured out what her conservative Lutheran denomination believes and then got upset. The Council of Trent is not a dead letter to a conservative Roman Catholic. Unlike Bachmann who apparently didn't know what the Wisconsin Evangelical Lutheran Synod's doctrinal statements said, I'm assuming that Rick Santorum actually knows what his church believes about the difference between Protestants and Roman Catholics. Bachmann could have easily solved her problem by pointing out that Wisconsin Synod Lutherans and Roman Catholics have cooperated for many years in the pro-life movement without agreeing on theology, and I assume that the Bachmann incident gave Santorum fair warning of the need to be prepared to answer such questions when — not if but when — they get raised about his beliefs. Considering that he apparently attends a church which celebrates the Latin Mass and is tied to the Opus Dei movement, and that has already been raised by some of his critics, I'm assuming he's got a good answer to give when pressed on the point.
Since Rick Santorum presents himself as a faithful Roman Catholic, he **SHOULD** believe things which are just as negative toward Protestants as our confessions teach about Roman Catholicism. That doesn't bother me; we just need to understand up front as evangelicals that whenever we work with a Roman Catholic, we're working with someone who can be an ally in politics, but who does not share the beliefs for which Calvin and Luther fought at the risk of their lives.
Political cooperation does not need to lead to theological compromise, and as long as both sides understand that, I'm fine with cooperating with Roman Catholics.
I hope that is of some help in understanding where I'm coming from. This is going to be an issue sooner or later, probably sooner, but I'm pretty confident in the ability of a well-catechized Catholic to explain and defend what he believes. It's us as evangelicals who sometimes get fuzzy around the edges of our doctrine and have trouble explaining ourselves.
OK...and Thanks :)