If there were such a thing as a just war, the second Iraq adventure would certainly not qualify. This was begun as a preemptive attack, based on a premise that turned out to be a lie.

Continue »

It is inevitable that if politicians think it will win votes, they will talk about their religious views. It is certainly now in vogue to do so.

Continue »

Yes, of course. You can also be a Christian and be critical of the Church and the way the Church has used the Bible over the centuries to reinforce its killing prejudices.

Continue »

No!! Religion per se should not be a mandated program of study for anyone at any time.

Continue »

In a word, No! That, however, does not mean that some Roman Catholics do not think that discrimination still exists.

Continue »

America has not yet escaped all of its prejudices against Mormonism expressed so openly in the 19th century. Most of that prejudice grew out of the controversy over polygamy.

When George Romney, the three times Republican Governor of Michigan, ran for the Republican nomination for President in 1968, he had to seek to blunt prejudice about his religion. It came primarily in the form of questions about the official Mormon policy about black people. He distanced himself from the offending words in the Book of Mormon, but he ultimately lost the nomination to Richard Nixon. His Mormon religion seemed to play little role in that defeat. His comment about having been “brainwashed” over the issue of Viet Nam was thought to be far more the issue than his religion. Perhaps the money and organization possessed by Richard Nixon was the real reason for his defeat.

Continue »

It is difficult for anyone to say with certainty what Jesus was. The portrait painted of him in the gospels was written forty to seventy years after his earthly life had come to an end. By that time Jesus had been wrapped inside both the Jewish Scriptures and the liturgy of the synagogue which meant they interpreted him in terms of Jewish images and Jewish expectations.

The clear impression conveyed by the gospel writers, however, is that Jesus, following in the prophetic tradition in which his life was rooted, took his stand alongside the poor, the marginalized and the dispossessed. He is portrayed as touching the leper, protecting the woman taken in adultery, talking to a woman by the well publicly, welcoming children, extolling the virtues of the Samaritans and as saying “Go into all the world,” thus sending his disciples beyond their tribal limits into a place inhabited by those who spoke differently, worshipped differently and were defined as unclean Gentiles. Jesus was remembered by the gospel writers as a barrier breaker.

Continue »

Yes, completely. If I had my life to live over again, I would choose the same career path, marry the same wife, have the same children and serve the same congregations and the same diocese.

I loved every phase of my professional life. I loved being a priest and pastor. I loved being a bishop and an author. I love being retired now with a still developing writing career.

Do I have worries and concerns. Of course!

Continue »

I doubt if it will change it much. All it demonstrates is that religion is important to a significant part of the American population and no serious candidate for the presidency will ignore that block of voters. Hot button issues like abortion and homosexuality have been used primarily by the Republicans to bind working class Roman Catholics and Evangelical Protestants to their banner.

God, however, is not in the service of any party and the excessive religious claims of Republicans, particularly on such issues as Terri Schiavo, the war, and limiting the availability of approved birth control medications and attempts to amend the Constitution to discriminate against homosexual people has already convinced most Americans that they do not want either party pretending that their policies and God’s policies are identical.

Continue »

I found Governor Romney’s speech on religion to be little more than pandering to right-wing religious enthusiasts. It may help in the primary process with southern and midwestern evangelicals, but should he get the Republican nomination, it will not help him in the general election. He does not seem to embrace the fact that this nation has more than just religious voters.

The fact that Governor Romney is a Mormon has constituted no problem for me. Indeed, I am suspicious of those for whom it is a problem. That arises, I suspect, out of the fact that America’s “Religious Vote” (a category that does not include me, I hasten to add) seems to be eager to impose its view of both God and the universe on this nation in violation of our Constitution. I could support no candidate who would pack the Supreme Court with religious ideologues, seek to create a theocracy in America, or go to war after consulting with his heavenly father. Those have been the tragic mistakes of this administration.

Governor Romney was a more appealing candidate to me before he made the “Faith in America” speech. I was impressed with his demonstrated ability to run the Olympics and to be an effective governor of Massachusetts. When he reversed his position on abortion, gay rights and gun control, I became less enamored. Now that he panders to militant fundamentalism, I am no longer willing to consider his candidacy at all. I once regarded him as the most competent candidate on the Republican side. I think the choice now offered by the Republican Party is quite threadbare. If I were to vote in the Republican primary, I believe my present choice would be John McCain, but I would cast that vote with no enthusiasm.

I found Governor Romney’s speech on religion to be little more than pandering to right-wing religious enthusiasts. It may help in the primary process with southern and mid-western evangelicals, but should he get the Republican nomination, it will not help him in the general election. He does not seem to embrace the fact that this nation has more than just religious voters.

The fact that Governor Romney is a Mormon has constituted no problem for me. Indeed, I am suspicious of those for whom it is a problem. That arises, I suspect, out of the fact that America’s “Religious Vote” (a category that does not include me, I hasten to add) seems to be eager to impose its view of both God and the universe on this nation in violation of our Constitution. I could support no candidate who would pack the Supreme Court with religious ideologues, seek to create a theocracy in America, or go to war after consulting with his heavenly father. Those have been the tragic mistakes of this administration.

Governor Romney was a more appealing candidate to me before he made the “Religious” speech. I was impressed with his demonstrated ability to run the Olympics and to be an effective governor of Massachusetts. When he reversed his position on abortion, gay rights and gun control, I became less enamored. Now that he panders to militant fundamentalism, I am no longer willing to consider his candidacy at all. I once regarded him as the most competent candidate on the Republican side. I think the choice now offered by the Republican Party is quite threadbare. If I were to vote in the Republican primary, I believe my present choice would be John McCain, but I would cast that vote with no enthusiasm.

Obama does elicit fervor. Is fervor somehow considered to be a mark of religion? Perhaps it is for some, but fervor alone is not necessarily an asset. Billy Graham elicits fervor. So did Adolf Hitler. The issue is whether the fervor leads the candidate and the nation in the right direction.

Some presidents seek to reflect the point of view on issues they discover in focus groups. Lyndon Johnson was famous for that. Some are ideologically oriented and try to sell the people on following their lead in moving the country in their direction. Ronald Reagan and Franklin Roosevelt were both successful presidents in doing just that, even though on opposite sides of the ideological fence. Others seek to impose their own ideological perspective on the nation when they have no mandate to do so. The results are usually destructive. George W. Bush is the most recent illustration of that.

A politician’s vision must always be in dialogue with the people that politician hopes to lead. I do not want a president with no vision of his or her own, nor do I want a president who will not listen to the will of the people and seek to be in dialogue with them. In that way fervor and passion will serve the nation.