Jeremiah Wright and Obama, Parsley, Hagee and McCain, Rasputin and Nicholas II (via Tsaritsa Alexandra), Thomas More and Henry VIII; the convergence of politics and religion stem from the historical corridors of Mesopotamia to the cherry blossom gardens of Washington D.C.

The ubiquitous relationships in the Presidential campaigns speak more to the target constituency rather than spiritual direction. Jeremiah Wright speaks against white America, while Hagee condemns the Catholic Church and Rod Parsley calls for the end of Islam. Ironically, the candidate that transcends race, Obama, sat at the feet of an Afro centric minister while the candidate that in 2000 repudiated the Evangelical establishment now submits to evangelicalism on steroids.

While I acknowledge Parsley’s, Hagee’s and Wright’s, constitutional right to freedom of speech, at times freedom of silence can speak with greater clarity and in a more vociferous manner. These spiritual leaders need to focus more on the greatest religious asset in the faith arsenal of the American experience; religious pluralism.

At the end of the day, our nation repudiates the idea of guilt by association. However, if Presidential candidates continue to seek spiritual guidance, let the guide by one of righteousness and justice rather than confrontation and exceptionalism. For what it’s worth, the best advice is not to call for the end of Islam, the Catholic Church or white America but simply stated, McCain, Obama and Clinton can experience spiritual enrichment by following this simple truth by the Prophet Micah: Do Justice, love mercy, walk humbly with God.

While all God’s children say Amen!

Sexism and racism are as American as apple pie. Both existed in the formation of our nation and 232 years later, still occupy a significant place in the stage we call the American experience.

The current campaign for the Democratic Presidential Nomination between Sen. Hillary Clinton and Sen. Barack Obama and subsequent outcome will speak accolades on the question of race and sex. Actually the 2008 Presidential elections define a battle, not between Republicans, Democrats and Independents but rather between, Sex, Race and Age. This election speaks more about “isms” than policy.

Continue »

Huckabee’s call to somehow reconcile the U.S. Constitution with God’s standards presents a provocative proposition that very well may redefine the church and state relationship while depicting the Christian majority in an unprecedented role as theocrats.

Before we begin to apply a religious rubric to the American Constitution, let us measure the viability of such proposal with a question. Is the U.S. Constitution a secular or religious document?

Undoubtedly, our founding fathers, though all were not believers, did incorporate a biblical worldview into the birthing of our nation. From the Liberties to the responsibilities, what separates us from the French in respect to their core beliefs and consequently, our uniqueness as a Democracy is our spiritual DNA.

From the onset, our founding documents addressed the concept of inalienable rights. Our rights as Americans stem not from the collective agreement of men or the power of governmental authority but from God.

If the alignment of standards equates to converting America to one religious narrative, then we must reject the effort. If alignment incorporates and reinforces the original intent of our founding fathers then we do not need constitutional amendments. We need Federal and Supreme Court judges who evaluate original intent rather than construct new definitions and applications.

Let us remember that the Battle of our lifetime is not between secularism and religion, but rather between religious pluralism and religious totalitarianism. Let us make sure we preserve a Constitution that refuses to endorse neither secularism nor Christianity but rather guarantees the God given right to Life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness.

Google the word Pride and you will find close to 7 million entries. Extrapolate company names, books, productions and works of art from the list and the digital portal affirms the myriad of applications that accompany and embrace the womb of sinfulness.

Pride is not just an emotion or as Thomas Aquinas stated in Summa Theologica, the root of every sin. Pride is the great motivator for 21st Century success and accomplishment. While humility lays dormant hidden in the closet of archaic virtues; Pride strides down the catway as a model for all to admire.

Pride did not emerge from the idea we call America but, undoubtedly, this anti-virtue is as American as apple pie. Pride embraced slavery, while humility gave birth to abolition. Pride fills the coffers while humility weeps for the children in Darfur, Iraq and the third world. Pride tortures, while humility applies justice. Pride spends, while humility shares. Pride looks inward and says believe in yourself. Humility looks upward and says, “Believe in something greater than self”. Pride walks upright, shoulders back, and eyes straight, while humility kneels down, head inclined and ears open to advice. Pride seeks recognition, while humility seeks righteousness.

Pride stems from the union of success and self-accreditation. However, pride never stands alone. Pride engages in flirtatious activity with envy, gluttony, lust, anger, greed and sloth, yet arrogance always seems to draw closest.

Why do great empires and the vast majority of corporations and relationships fail? Pride. Pride walks down the runway of the 21st century human stage, meanwhile humility stands poised to appear at the precise moment where arrogance falls, pride collapses and Grace renders a silent introduction.

Christ and The Cookie monster both stand as victims of 21st Century American political correctness. Surely these two characters, left uncensored, pose a serious threat that can undermine Western Civilization and catapult America into a downward spiral resulting in the collapse of our society as we know it. Or some may argue.

What is about the Christ that makes Americans so uncomfortable? What is about the boy in the manger that provokes us to convert a Christmas tree into a Holiday tree, Merry Christmas into Happy Holidays and Christmas break into Winter Recess?

Continue »

As Americans, we are both sexual and spiritual people. We carry the New Testament on Sunday Morning and our Viagra pills on Saturday afternoon. Even the Google searches speak of a nation torn between sex and spirituality as pornography and religion top the search engine queries in both the Red and Blue States.

American 21st Century living proposes a platform where both stand juxtaposed in perfect equilibrium. Although the Europeans claim the patent on sexual liberation and openness, our sexual mores incorporate a cosmic and religious thread that facilitates a healthy discipline in order to prevent what all Americans reject in respect to all activities or philosophies; extremes. Are we as a society sexually oppressed? I would rather speculate that we err on the side of sexual caution.

As we historically contextualize the rise and fall of great empires, one common factor resonates throughout; the lack of self-control particularly in the area of sexual conduct.
Is sex outside of marriage a sin? Yes. Sex outside of marriage speaks of the most intimate of human relationships without institutional and divine framework necessary for efficacy.

Continue »

Nations launch wars, governments persecute, institutions reinforce hatred, but the children of God forgive. It is this very act that removes the grave clothes of bitterness, animosity and remorse while simultaneously exposing the vestiges of hope, faith and a new beginning.

The greatest single action any human can take upon this planet is the act of forgiveness. Nelson Mandela inviting his former captors to the his Presidential inauguration, Gandhi’s call to for Hindus and Muslims to reconcile, alongside many other extensions of this greatest of virtues, remind us that in the 21st Century, when war, terrorism, strife and hatred inundate every crevasse of our narrative, forgivers are scarce participants.

Accordingly, mature and balanced relationships at all levels: personal, corporate, bilateral, geopolitical, economic and ecclesiastical require forgiveness to exercise mercy in the presence of justice. Forgiveness without justice grants evil clemency. From the holocaust to Rwanda, from Darfur to Serbia, justice facilitates forgiveness where jurisprudence speaks on behalf of the innocent without acquitting evil.

Those who stand responsible for atrocities must receive the legal and moral consequences of such actions. Soon thereafter, the victims are called to forgive while the rest of us are admonished never to forget. Atrocities prove we are fallen creatures, imperfect and prone to cruelty. Forgiveness proves we are still children of a righteous God.

The American faith narrative repudiates torture under all circumstances and without exception. To acquiesce our moral underpinning in the name of security renders in the hands of our enemies the very victory they yearn. Our nation's faith community stands committed to a value system authenticated via mores and standards which stand without reproach, unconditionally and in all circumstances.

As a member of the steering committee of Evangelicals for Human Rights, I am troubled by evangelicals who embrace a Pro-Life platform yet refuse to address life issues outside the womb such as torture and cruel punishment. Some argue that water boarding and other techniques applied to non Americans does not violate the aforementioned commitment. Our values do not carry an American centric disclaimer. Application of our ethos must transcend boundaries and cultures.

The great biblical Golden rule and popularly embraced dictate tells us to do unto others what we would want done unto us. Such simplicity should guide us in our domestic, foreign and justice policies. Is torture ever justified? Are there any moral absolutes? Our some of our values beyond compromise?

Let the oracles of righteousness and justice articulate a message that protects our nation from terrorism. Not just physical but spiritual, moral and intellectual.

To have within our borders 9 million children without health care coverage is a political disaster, an economic divestment and above all, a moral travesty.

Opponents of abortion passionately argue for the right to life of the child in the womb. The argument falls short in the marketplace of ideas if it does not extend itself beyond the womb. Consequently, the same vociferous opponents must become the lead spokespersons for health care coverage for children, or risk losing intellectual and faith based argumentative legitimacy.

As for the recent failure in Congress to pass the State Children’s Health Insurance Plan or SCHIP demonstrates the moral dissonance between the executive and legislative branches as it pertains to health coverage for children. Is it the responsibility of parents to provide the coverage or does the government count with a moral imperative to guarantee that each child is cared for? The answer, as with many similar queries, is both.

Parents carry the primary responsibility of providing the necessities for their children. However, when parents, for economic or other reasons cannot provide, we as citizens committed to a justice ethos and blessed with the moral wherewithal to exercise faith teachings that instruct us to care for the least of them, must come together, and fill the corresponding need. Our society enriches the collective experience of our citizenry when we articulate, embrace, and include within our corporate sphere a commitment to Life.

Health care coverage for children is a natural extension of a Pro-Life agenda that resonates with the same passion and conviction of a platform that addresses life from the womb to the tomb.

No other partnership can possibly offer humanity and our Planet a chance for survival like the collaborative relationship between faith and science. Truth emerges from the nexus of both streams in order to address the crucial issues of our very existence.

Rather than the historical supposition that both these fields land on opposite sides of the spectrum, both must converge via the avenue of inquiry and discover solutions to critical issues such as global warming, poverty, famine and disease.

Religion will provide the moral imperative for science to press forward in research and development of viable alternatives and solutions to the current issues of our time. Recently, the Creation Care position embraced by many evangelicals in partnership with Harvard Professors, demonstrates the potential impact on society as the followers of Christ, Mohammad and Moses walk along side the disciples of Galileo, Newton and Einstein with the objective of protecting all of God’s creation.

This partnership is not a possibility; it is at the end of day, the solution.

If the world’s major religions coalesce around the virtues of love, compassion, and forgiveness, then why does the early 21st century religious narrative witness hatred, apathy, and intolerance? Is this a case of religious dissonance?

It may very well be another Pollyanna articulation of faith; yet reality speaks otherwise. Arguably, while the world’s major religions may include the aforementioned virtues and traits within each corresponding belief system, the laity and the followers of these religions seem to ignore, neglect, or circumvent these virtues.

While some religions preach love, compassion and forgiveness to members of that particular community; great religions go beyond the framework of self-preservation and with audacious hope extend love, compassion, and forgiveness towards all.

At times, this generation bears witness to the hijacking of good faith by extreme ideologues. At the end of the day, if love, compassion, and forgiveness unite the world’s major religions, then the leaders of these religions have failed miserably to disseminate this message to the followers.

When the oracles of love, compassion, and forgiveness outnumber the prophets and evangelists of hatred and intolerance, then once again, religion will play a major role in reconciling humanity rather than separating God’s children.

As a nation, we are not obliged nor are we predisposed to elect a Christian President. Our commitment, as the electorate, drives us to elect an individual who will uphold the Constitution of The United States. We are electing a President and Commander in Chief, not a National Pastor.

However, this does not inhibit legitimate scrutiny of a candidate’s religious beliefs. If religion plays a significant part in the life of the Presidential hopeful, then this nation must carefully analyze the impact of such religious tenets within the framework of possible domestic and foreign policy initiatives.

Americans exercise a defacto two tier test as it pertains to Presidential elections and the religious beliefs of the candidates. First, does the religious credo of the candidate interfere or contradict with the constitutional and moral obligations of the office. Second, does such belief respect and appreciate the historical Judeo-Christian ethos embedded in the American narrative.

Therefore, the question arises, was Senator McCain correct in stating that he "admired" Islam but would prefer a President with "a solid grounding" in the Christian faith? It may have been a politically incorrect statement; however I do believe it reflects the sentiment of the majority of our citizens. Yet in a world where religion and faith have been hijacked to disseminate hatred and bigotry, my hope is that our Nation will demonstrate that religious pluralism strengthens our nation and intolerance strengthens our enemies.

The Religion of the Middle East is War. Religious discord serves the political apparatus in the region. The birthplace of the world’s three most prominent faith narratives compete in the market place of ideas with the assistance at times of bulldozers, Qassam rockets, enriched uranium and improvised explosive devices.

Roadsides in Iraq become memorials, refugee camps in Lebanon function as sanctuaries for extremists and alleyways as monasteries for jihadists. Poverty serves as High Priest while Oil anoints the powerful elite.

Does it matter? Absolutely! To understand the political, moral and socio-economic dynamics that drive the region, one must accept the religious impetus behind the political and military conflicts. However, the real war is not between Islam, Christianity and Judaism. The true conflict, under the guise of religion, exposes two opposing forces; poverty and authoritarianism on one end and freedom and peace on the other.

Meanwhile, in the birthplace of monotheism where the name of God is invoked daily, He may very well be a prisoner of War.

If Job can question the plan of Providence and if Jesus can cry out “Father, Father, why hast thou forsaken me”, then Mother Teresa can, without tarnish or shame, be admired in the midst of her doubts and fears. In the matter of fact, such personal struggles may demonstrate proof of the miraculous in her life. Mother Teresa walked on her own Via Dolorosa.

Her personal writings expose the fact that not only did she doubt and question God, but she also doubted and questioned herself. That petite fragile woman demonstrates to all of us, even after death, that her strength came not only from her commitment to God and church, but also in the distribution of provision that a times she lacked.

She gave hope, when hope at times she had none. She gave faith when at night she wrestled with unbelief. She spoke on behalf of peace, when her soul was at war. She took care of the orphans when she felt abandoned by her heavenly father.

Continue »

“Take two pills and call me in the morning”, said the Doctor. Today’s moral, political and social climate demands a more viable prescription in order to address the ills inundating humanity today. Regardless of one’s faith experience or lack thereof, the undeniable presence of the revolutionary and transforming figure, Jesus Christ, continues to permeate the 21st century narrative 2000 years after his death. Why?

Dr. Luke in the book of Acts incorporates with surgical precision and accuracy a simple truth in the spiritual body of our journey; Acts 17:28 “For in Him we live and move and have our being”.

This simple yet powerful truth guides us to an unshakeable reality. In Him, not in religion built around him, wars fought in his name, exercises in grandeur, dogmatic systems or hierarchical bureaucracies, but in Him we live. In his humility, love, mercy, grace and compassion, we live. We live when we embrace his nature, his mission and his sacrifice. We live in his purpose to turn the other cheek, love thy neighbor and our enemies while above all, we walk justly before our God.

We move in his character, his holiness, his righteous indignation against the pharisaic spirit. We move in his journey from Bethlehem to Golgotha and all points between. We move in his encounters with the rich and the poor, fishermen and political leaders, we move in his passion for all God’s children to be free. Every opportunity to forgive, assist and heal presents an invitation to move in Him.

Finally, In Christ we have our being. Descartes declared “I Think therefore I am”. Pascal countered with “I believe therefore I am”. My response in the midst of moral relativism, social, political and economic uncertainty is simple; “Christ, Therefore I am”.

Prescription: Live in His nature, Walk in His Spirit and Exist in His Grace.

Once again, I am thoroughly convinced that the current religious debate in America does not conform to what the media portrays as a struggle between Christian Evangelicals and The Left or even between church and state. America's 21st century debate on religion invites a triad of philosophies to contend in the ring of American public opinion: religious secularism, religious pluralism and religious exceptionalism.

Religious secularism enters the fray with the least amount of support, endurance and possibility of victory. This nation may not be a Christian nation but one cannot deny it embraces spirituality. From our founding fathers, whether Deists or Christians, the faith narrative contextualized in our history cannot be denied.

Continue »

If the struggle of our lifetime, as some Muslim scholars have argued, is best defined as one between religious totalitarianism and religious pluralism rather than the Islamic World versus the West, then one must ask, what fundamental change can offer an alternative course?

Simply stated, the Muslim community may very well benefit from a Reformation, a Wittenberg moment of sorts in order to subjugate the impetus of the current transnational movement of militant Muslim totalitarianism. September 11th, 2001, provided an opportunity for the Martin Luthers within the Muslim community to rise up and post the grievances on the doors.

Surely, some argue that the reformation already commenced and what we are seeing on behalf of the militants is a counter reformation. For certain, change in the Muslim community will not come from Western intervention, prompting or coercion. Change in the Muslim community will come from within via a viable and sustainable reformation. A reformation that embraces pluralism and rejects totalitarianism.

At the end of day, Reformation stems from pluralism. Pluralism gives birth to tolerance, tolerance breeds respect and respect invites collaboration.

Heaven is a place of forgetfulness; forgetting the former pains, sorrows, misery, and shame: Isaiah 65: 17

Heaven is a kingdom where one must enter in as a Child; pure, innocent, vulnerable and in need of a Father’s embrace: Mark 10:15

Heaven is a refuge for the poor and the persecuted: Matthew 5: 3, 10

Heaven is God’s Invitation to wipe away the tears: Revelation 7:17

Heaven is Hope’s address, Grace’s goal, and Faith’s destination.

Who will enter? Those reconciled by Grace, Justified by Faith and who, in the face of unbelief, exercise the freedom to call upon the Name of The Lord.

Hell is evil’s lair, injustice’s reward, and hatred’s bosom.

Hell is the gathering place for wickedness, racism, bigotry, arrogance, greed, selfishness, perversion, and unbelief.

Hell is a Kingdom where unrighteousness is King and deception reigns supreme all while strife and bitterness guard the gates.

Hell is a refuge for darkness and the absence of light, music and love.

Hell is Death's invitation to eternity; eternity without God.

Who will enter? Only Heaven knows.

Without dissecting the theological tenents and moral triggers for a “justified or Just War”, America carries a moral obligation as it pertains to the war in Iraq. Such obligation requires us to leave Iraq secure with hope for a future. Regardless of the plethora of errors committed in the onset of and for this war, the current sectarian violence and de facto civil war demand that we fix a situation that exists as a direct result of our engagement.

To leave Iraq today without creating the economic, political and security infrastructures necessary for success would exponentially increase our liability and compound our errors. Reconstruction after the Civil War, the Marshall Plan after World War II, and economic aid after numerous military excursions successfully employed the values of Justice and Reconciliation embedded in the American narrative.

We may not have had a legitimate moral imperative for war in Iraq. Today, we do have a moral imperative to stay in Iraq until we secure peace. A nation demonstrates its military prowess in war, its moral authority in advocating peace.

At the end of the day, our moral imperatives must drive us to advocate a foreign policy of justice. If we must take the lead on the war on terror, let us simultaneously take the lead on the war on poverty. If we are committed to eradicating Al Qaeda, let us be equally committed to eradicating AIDS. We went into Iraq with faulty intelligence; let us depart with righteous conviction after we heal and reconcile.

Faith that is questioned is Faith perfected. Questioning the tenants and doctrines of faith will either solidify belief or guide one to another faith more open to such inquiries. Throughout the biblical narrative and even today, God and his children continue to participate in a dialogue.

The great query presented in the Garden of Eden by God, “Where Are You?”, continues to resonate throughout humanity today just as mankind responds in kind, “What do we need to do to be saved?” God is not afraid of our inquiries. The questions arises, are we afraid of his?

If questioning exposes truth, let us question. A faith that is threatened by doctrinal inquiries and evaluation of certain tenants is no faith at all. A faith that blindly demands belief, obedience, and subjugates the very inquisitive soul that God gave us disqualifies itself from being faith and more accurately falls under the category of a cult. True faith welcomes questions; false faiths discourage and prohibit them.

Yet at the end of the day, let us not forget that if all the questions are answered and proof silences and satisfies all the inquiries, then no longer do we have faith. For Faith is the assurance of things hope for and the conviction of things not seen, Hebrews 11:1.