All Comments (16)

Dr. Crossan is right as can be in this essay.

Bravo, Dr. Crossan. I hope your voice is heard widely among politicians.

As for focus on the end times, I've read that every generation likes to think the end times are coming during their lifetime -- makes them feel special.

Pretty scary.

"In order, however, to enter the public square and argue for their political vision in that open venue, they must translate their traditional religious language into communal public discourse."

Well, there you go again......the REAL problematic of this ridiculous focus on religion in politics is the following:

FAITH: You don't know WHO OR WHAT OR HOW it's done, but it's a MIR A CLE!!!! (Toothfairy and Santa 101)

VS

SPIRITUALITY: I know something is larger than my self (with a small 's') and that's fine with me...and it isn't a guy with a white beard sittin' onna cloud.

FAITH-BASED politics is DANGEROUS/ILLOGICAL and NOT SUITABLE for an open country.

I have absolutely NO FAITH in mixing religion and politics.

What HAPPENS in church should STAY in church.

OR

If you INSIST on mixing Politics and Religion - GIVE UP YOUR NON-PROFIT STATUS AS RELIGIOUS ORGANIZATIONS. COME CLEAN. SHOW YOURSELVES.

It IS that simple.

Give me spirit over that 'ol time religion' ANY day.

Organized Religion....soooooo 18th/19th and 20th century.

Hey, the Pope wears Prada...and THAT'S a fact.

Dr Crossan, we are ecumenical are we not? That means that all faiths are coming together, being as one and not unlike the Trinity with the coming together of the three divine persons. There's no more Matthew 16:19 to prove the pope is infalible is there? What do Dr Billy Graham and his holiness talk about in their face to face summits if not that faith is faith? Surely it's not taking over the world in preperation for the second coming of Jesus? You don't suppose?

The leading power in the world is a grand prize in that heavenly coup. Don't you agree? Doesn't the road to control of the world begin with the leading power in the world? What happens when religion divides the leading power? Does that make it easy for religion to take it over or open the door for a forein power, say China as a random example, to become the new world leader while America drowns in the quagmire or division brought about by faith?

http://www.hoax-buster.org/sellyoursoul for the customery and usual 30 pieces of silver.

Beware the religious zealot politician who hides his beliefs or waters down his oratory to help get him or her votes. Case in point is Mitt Romney. What are his true beliefs about people of color and gays? Most Mormons believe God cursed the fence sitters in the pre-existence who supported neither Satan nor God in the great war. The curse, according to them, is darker skins for on-going generations. The Mormon Church has electro shocked gays to try to *cure* them. Where does Romney really stand on gays and minorities? Does he have his own ideas or, as a loyal Mormon, follow the hateful and bigoted beliefs of his forefathers?

Yes I agree the literal requirement as necessary, but wouldn't it be better for a greater electoral system to allow multi party representatives rather than two parties...

A candidate may well have all the qualities of a good citizen and etc, but the final decision is influenced by advisors and molded by party politics.

For example; a lot of people are screaming out to withdraw from Iraq, but the President doesn't think so. Whether that is a religious influenced decision or pressure from somewhere else, the people who merit democracy a valid principle are not in the equation.

Professor Crossan,

Any political candidate who mentions his religion is using his religion to troll for votes. That's why I never vote for these characters and don't bother considering their views on other topics.

If your bilingual politician is to translate ”What Would Jesus Do?” into “What Would Justice Demand?”, would that mean:
(1) a Marxist ideology of radical egalitarian sharing of the world's resources? Or would a liberal, Rawlsian fair distribution according to merit also do?
(2) an active campaign to get rid of a justice system that rests on the principle of punishment / retribution?
(3) a vision and program to abolish the nation-state, since "no nation-state can be Christian" on account of its violence -- as you claimed in your statement of December 14, 2006?

you wrote:

"If you get even the faintest scent that candidates but especially presidential candidates are using religion to get your vote, drop them fast, drop them hard, drop them cold."

I agree, which of course would have meant, that every president since at least Jimmy Carter would not have been elected. All politicians and presidents use religion for no other reason but to get elected. So, by your logic, all truly religious leaders must call for a ban of any discussion of any candidates' private spiritual matter.

Thank you.

I believe Professor Crossan means being bilingual in religion not language.

Prof. Crossan is right. People must be at least bilingual. Not only in religious language, but in foreign languages.

Unfortunately, unlike most of the rest of the non-English speaking world, Americans, Australians, British, Canadians and New Zealanders do not really find any reason to learn a second language, much less other people's religions and cultures.

And we wonder why all these religious and cultural misunderstanding and faux pas happens here and there on matters of religion and culture.

As per Father Edward Schillebeeckx, contemporary Catholic theologian and author, prophets and prophecies are not possible for even God does not know the Future i.e. Future is a subset of the gift of Free Will.

In his book, Church: The Human Story of God, Schillebeeckx notes, "Therefore the historical future is not known even to God; otherwise we and our history would be merely a puppet show in which God holds the strings. For
God, too, history is an adventure, an open history for and of men and women."

St. Paul's prophecy about the imminent Second Coming fortunately for us did not materialize but it did convert a lot of Gentiles and indeed opened their purse strings and still does with significantly stupid ideas like rapture.

Two quotes from Jonathan:

“Nothing frightening about belief in rapture. Nothing frightening about belief in God.”

“Furthermore, the idea of the rapture happening soon arises from profound similarities between prophecies given 2000 plus years ago and the events of today.”

*** I’m always curious about why the ‘end times’ or the ‘rapture’ or the ‘second coming’ are of any particular interest to Christians or anyone else for that matter. I have read and reread the New Testament many times over the years and I think it is a fair statement to say that Jesus suggested, and that both the apostles and Paul believed, that Christ would return in their own lifetimes. I bring this up in order to contextualize the current fascination some Christians have with the ‘end times’ prophesies they find referenced in the New Testament. If the apostles got it ‘wrong’, and they actually walked with Jesus and heard his words, what would suggest to any modern believer that they now have better or more direct evidence about the rapture, the end times or the second coming of Jesus. Personally I’m inclined to think, that on these issues, a large dose of humility is in order.

I’d also suggest that any preoccupation with the end times that distracts Christians form being Christ-like, from living their faith in the present moment is counter productive. Simply stated, if and when Jesus will return is none of our business. Our work as Christians is to be loving, kind, compassionate and peaceful right now, not worrying about or obsessing on something that may happen tomorrow or ten thousand years from now. We are called to be Christ-like today, with our families, our friends, our neighbors, in our communities and in the world.

I do believe that we as voters ought to be aware of the religious heritage of those for whom we vote. The religious convictions of people matter a great deal. Knowing where a person stands religiously is likely to inform us about where that person is politically. Having said that, I for one would not vote for any candidate that I felt either used their religion to pander for votes, or whom I believed would act narrowly and dogmatically along the lines of their particular religion.

I would add that, especially where religion is concerned, a bit of self-doubt and skepticism are healthy things. Denial of doubt usually leads to judgment, intolerance and often far worse. Doubt is an inescapable element of religious faith. If this were not true, there would be no need for faith at all. Denying ones doubt is unhealthy and can lead people to become delusional.

And I think this holds especially true for those politicians that profess deeply held convictions such as that we are in the “end times”. I believe that any person holding the view that the “second coming” or the “end times” are immanent should never be president. Such deeply held beliefs could consciously or unconsciously lead to disaster for the whole world.

I believe that we as voters ought to be aware of the religious heritage of those for whom we vote. The religious convictions of people matter a great deal. Knowing where a person stands religiously is likely to inform us about where that person is politically. Having said that, I for one would not vote for any candidate that I felt either used their religion to pander for votes, or whom I believed would act narrowly and dogmatically along the lines of their particular religion.

And I would add that, especially where religion is concerned, a bit of self-doubt and skepticism are healthy things. Denial of doubt usually leads to judgment, intolerance and often far worse. Doubt is an inescapable element of religious faith. If this were not true, there would be no need for faith at all. Denying ones doubt is unhealthy and can lead people to become delusional.

I think this holds especially true for those politicians that profess deeply held convictions such as that we are in the “end times” or other similar beliefs. I believe that any person holding the view that the “second coming” or the “end times” are immanent should never be president. Such deeply held beliefs could consciously or unconsciously lead to disaster for the whole world.

Oops, make that "testosterone".

Professor Crossan,

Articulation at its best!! Thank You!!

And much better than the "testerone" rational for women being treated badly by religious men.