Theoretically, yes, if such a person was competent and experienced enough to be trusted with the presidency. This is, after all, a "kingdom of this world" office, though many like to infuse it with religious overtones.

Still, I wonder about a person's judgment if he, or she, has embraced paganism with all of the evidence available concerning an orderly universe and the creative mind behind such order. Having judged incorrectly concerning the great "I Am," would a pagan be considered wise enough to judge temporal things? And, in an age when virtually every politician claims some kind of religion, could a pagan win?

Probably not.

Pope Benedict XVI, even when he was Cardinal Ratzinger and the "enforcer" of Catholic doctrine, has flirted with the restoration of the Latin Mass, which was beloved by many Catholics for generations, but jettisoned during reform movements in that church. That he has given his blessing to it now suggests a continuation of the controls on doctrinal freelancing which his predecessor, John Paul II, instituted.

His claim that the Catholic Church is the "one true" church is based on a verse in which Jesus said to Peter, "Upon this rock I will build my church." Protestants have translated that verse as Jesus speaking of Himself as "the rock." Not only does the Greek support such a conclusion, so does logic. Peter would deny Jesus three times. Martin Luther, who led the Protestant Reformation, and others since then reason that Jesus would not likely build his church -- which he saw as a body of believers in whom He would dwell, not an ecclesiastical hierarchy which he fought against in His time -- on a mortal, sinful man.

Will any of this matter to most people? Probably not. Will it hurt the ecumenical movement, especially that which has built bridges between the Catholic and Orthodox churches, both of which claim to be able to trace their roots back to the original Apostles? Probably so.

The "Muslims Speak Out" forum was very useful and an important contribution to dialogue and understanding. I was particularly interested in the remarks of Egypt's Grand Mufti, notably his contention that in Islam there is "no compulsion to believe." Others made similar assertions and many said that the word "jihad" has been misinterpreted by the radicals.

If that is true and not simply fodder for Western consumption designed to make us lower our guard, what the "moderate" Muslims must do to demonstrate their seriousness and desire to take back their faith from the radicals is to conduct a "jihad" against the extremists, their mosques, their schools and their media which regularly preach and teach doctrines directly opposite what most of those in the "On Faith" forum have written.

"By your fruits you shall know them" says a text from another "holy book." Unfortunately the "fruits" of contemporary Islam as witnessed by much of the world are intolerance, discrimination against all "unbelievers" and women and a plan for world domination and the subjugation, or execution, of "infidels." If the Muslim faith has been hijacked, it is incumbent upon those whose faith is being held hostage to liberate that faith from the kidnappers.

Continue »