|
There was a legitimate question at the time American troops were committed to Iraq, whether our action conformed to the Augustinian “Just War” tradition with its various criteria: just cause, proper authority, right intention, last resort, and the like. I felt the just war standards were met by the threat presented.
Obviously I cannot speak for religions other than my own Christianity in the treatment of women. It would certainly appear to an outsider that women have fared very badly, and continue to today, in the Islamic world.
Under our Constitution, there can be no religious test for office. That does not mean, however, that candidates should not make known their religious beliefs.
The answer to both questions is a resounding yes. Israel today is a nation, a free democracy, with vital political contests for office. Like any other state, it can make mistakes, it can be wrong.
The answer is yes and no. The media, after all, is made up of fallible human beings who often get things right and sometimes don’t.
While thankfully the vast majority of Muslims do not practice violence, the answer to whether Islam is a violent religion is: Regrettably, Islam spawns violence.
Jesus was the most radical social revolutionary in human history. But he did not arrive—as the Jews expected—to the sound of hoof beats and swords clashing; rather, he came as a helpless babe born in a manger.
If the Democratic candidates are genuine in their conviction that Christian truth should inform their moral judgments, I am certainly the first to applaud.
While there may have been an argument to be made on just war grounds against the original pre-emptive invasion of Iraq, I believe without any question that applying the just war criteria to the present situation obligates us to remain, and restore civil order and authority.
It is debatable whether paganism is a religion, per say. It is generally defined as a pre-Christian state, but it takes a wide variety of forms—all the way from relatively benign New Age-style nature worship, to pantheism, to witchcraft, and even human sacrifice.
As a Christian, I have experienced working with Muslims in prisons for the last thirty years. Apart from that, I would not feel really qualified to speak out in this week’s discussion.
I don’t know what law would prohibit this. Nor do I think it is an issue of separation of church and state. It is a question of appropriateness, however.
If there were Hindu members of the Senate, then it would be appropriate from a pastoral sense. If there is not a member being represented in the Senate, then there would be no point in having a Hindu pray because, as I understand it, this is a prayer for the Senators. I personally don’t see any problem with representatives of a religion, practiced by the members, praying.
Under our Constitution there can be no religious test for office. Anyone is eligible of any religion or of no religion. At the same time, voters need to look at the total person they are being asked to vote for.
We care deeply about their policies; we care about their character, their integrity, and what they promise to do when they get in office. It is impossible to separate people's religious faith from their worldview, their values, and their character.
So I would advise anyone to look very carefully at the religious belief a particular candidate espouses, how faithfully he has lived consistently with its teachings, what its teachings would require him to do, and whether those teachings are directed to the common good or whether they might be seriously flawed. For example: I would have great difficulty voting for a Muslim who shared Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad’s apocalyptic vision. (I would, as I have written in one of my books, have similar misgivings about a Christian who saw it as his role to use his public office to help usher in the end times.)
While I would not want to disqualify someone because of their religious convictions, I would look hard at what their religious convictions teach about the sanctity of life, for example. I consider that one of the great overriding issues of our day, therefore the extent to which one’s religious conviction informs him or her about the sacredness of life would be a crucial issue. And I suspect this is what Senator John McCain means. He is not applying the religious test so much as he is looking at the teachings of those who share a sincere belief.
The last president I gave advice to got run out of town on a rail; so Governor Romney was wise not to ask for my advice.
Had he asked for it, I would have recommended he say precisely what he did say. In my view, Mormonism departed from historic Christianity a century and a half ago. Christians would find it impossible to equate Mormonism with our beliefs. But that doesn’t mean that an orthodox Christian could not support a Mormon. As Governor Romney put it very well, there is no religious test under our constitution.
Sure, I would have voted to recognize the importance of Christianity in Christmas; but at the same time resolutions are meaningless if people don’t do it in their own hearts. Christmas is to celebrate the birth of Jesus and God’s Kingdom coming to earth.
Merry Christmas!
In choosing a president, good character and competence are the two most important qualities. In the final analysis, a person can have the ability in the world, be brilliant and charismatic, but if he cannot be trusted to do the right thing for the common good, then he could be dangerous, all the more so because of his charisma.
If Governor Huckabee meant this the way it sounds, I would not agree with him. But I don’t think he did, because he understands, as I do, that when you study the founding of our nation -- as Professor Daniel Dreisbach of American University has for example -- you will see that the founders were insistent that this free society reflected the fundamental truths of “nature and nature’s God,” as Jefferson put it.
The sincerity of a candidate's faith is best evidenced by the way his faith informs public policy positions. If one believes, as serious Christians do, that our first allegiance is to the God who created us, then obviously His commandments are to be obeyed.
Leaving aside John McCain's relationship to televangelist Rod Parsley, whom I've never heard of, there's nothing particularly shocking about calling Islam a false religion. If I were a devout Muslim, I would believe that a Christian who believed in the substitionary atoning death of Christ on the cross and the resurrection, as I do, believed in a false religion.
The Question: Jeremiah Wright's sermons continue to be an issue in the presidential campaign. Why? What do you think of his preaching style? What do you wish you understood better about it?
If there’s anything redeeming about the Jeremiah Wright controversy, it is that it may lead to a long-overdue national discussion of race and reconciliation.
What Islam Really Says About Violence, Rights and Other Religions
Gomaa, Fadlallah, Mubarak, Khan, Siddiqi, Ellison, others | On Faith
Comments (91)