, has a few chps on political or hot-button issues, including situation ethics, abortion, homosexuality and war. I don't want to enter into the discussion of homosexuality or war at this time, in part because Adam's book presents some addresses he gave at his church. So, I will skip ahead to his 21st chp to how he addresses the issue of faith and the presidential elections. He has a set of questions that we can think back on now to see where we stand.Obama said he was a Christian; Romney said he was a Mormon; McCain said he was "saved"; Huckabee was a Baptist pastor. Stats reveal that many vote on the basis of their faith and choose a candidate that aligns the closest to their faith.
Hamilton ponders these kinds of questions, and I'm wondering how you proceeded in your voting. Were these your questions? Did you have others? (What were they?) Now the touchy one: How do you answer these questions for Obama?
1. Is the person genuinely a Christian or has the person become Christian for expedient reasons?
2. What kind or version of Christianity does the candidate embrace? Does the candidate embrace both the personal and social gospel?
3. Is being a devout Christian adequate to make one a great president?
4. Can one be a good president and not devout?
1. Is the person genuinely a Christian or has the person become Christian for expedient reasons?
2. What kind or version of Christianity does the candidate embrace? Does the candidate embrace both the personal and social gospel?
3. Is being a devout Christian adequate to make one a great president?
4. Can one be a good president and not devout?
Add to Del.icio.us
Add to Technorati
Add to Digg
Add to Newsvine
Add to Facebook
Add to StumbleUpon
Subscribe
Answering the questions with respect to Obama:
1. Its always difficult to tell with politicians, but Obama seemed more sincere to me in various conversations on religion than the other key candidates this year (Clinton and McCain).
2. I disagree with the posters who suggest that Obama's version of Christianity emphasizes social gospel over personal conversion. I was surprised to read his talk from a couple of years ago at Sojourners regarding his conversion experience, which was in response to an alter call at Trinity (I didn't realize they have those at UCC churches). Yes, he and his church also understand the social aspects of the gospel, but that is a good thing. It shouldn't be an either/or thing -- the Bible emphasizes both, and if we focus on only one we are ourselves distorting it.
3. Being a devout Christian is far from adequate to make one a great president. I don't doubt that Bush is devout, but as a lifelong Republican (at least until this election), I view him as a terrible President.
4. I think a person can be an excellent president and not be devout. I don't really factor this issue much into my voting, given the experience with Bush.
No. 12 was me.
1. Is the person genuinely a Christian or has the person become Christian for expedient reasons?
This can be more complicated than the question allows. I expect many people didn't "become" Christian for expedient reasons, but I'm sure they play up their faith background in the right settings, just as a Southerner will play up his/her Southernness or candidates will reference local connections they have to wherever they happen to be. For Obama, I think it's genuine.
2. What kind or version of Christianity does the candidate embrace? Does the candidate embrace both the personal and social gospel?
Obama's probably more toward the social gospel, but not to the exclusion of the personal.
3. Is being a devout Christian adequate to make one a great president?
Of course not.
4. Can one be a good president and not devout?
Sure. But I think an atheist (or anti-theist) president would have a hard time with some of the more ceremonial/head of state aspects of the job.
Another question I would tend to ask is how a candidate's faith has affected his/her life. How serious are they about it? This is applicable to non-Christian politicians as well. If they're of no faith, by what philosophy or outlook do they orient themselves to the world, and how does that affect their decisions?
Honestly, faith does not rank high on the list for me when it comes to elections. I probably take notice if someone says they're a Christian, but they don't automatically become my candidate because of it. As for the Obama questions:
1. One can't tell unless you know the person intimately what their reasons for becoming a Christian were and whether or not they were for the right reasons. Ultimately, that's up to God to judge, although we can discern some things from a person's life. Sometimes I think we judge people's Christianity as authentic if it lines up with what we believe. Jimmy Carter's a Christian, but for some conservative Christians, they acted as if George Bush was the first Christian in the White House. I think this was simply because they felt his expression of faith lined up with theirs, so it must be the real deal.//
2. I think Obama embraces both the personal and social gospel. Again, his personal embrace may not pass some people's test.//
3.Being devout is not adequate to being a great president or for that matter, a great CEO, carpenter, cashier, etc. There are people who are very devout (again, how devout gets defined is subjective) but they have poor work ethics, social skills, business skills, etc. Now, I would HOPE that a life really lived for Christ would positively affect one's ethics, but it doesn't always.
4. Yes, a person can be a good president and not devout. I’ve seen many people who were genuinely good people with good hearts or intentions and I saw what great potential they could have within the body of Christ. God doesn’t just give talent to Christians.
Alan #8 wrote- "For 20 years, he attended a "church" that does not preach a Biblical gospel. For 20 years, his "pastor" was a man who preached a message utterly inconsistent with that of Scripture. (Just look at the church website's statement of faith.)"
I went to the United Church of Christ website, and here is what I found-
"The United Church of Christ embraces a theological heritage that affirms the Bible as the authoritative witness to the Word of God, the creeds of the ecumenical councils, and the confessions of the Reformation. The UCC has roots in the "covenantal" tradition—meaning there is no centralized authority or hierarchy that can impose any doctrine or form of worship on its members. Christ alone is Head of the church. We seek a balance between freedom of conscience and accountability to the apostolic faith. The UCC therefore receives the historic creeds and confessions of our ancestors as testimonies, but not tests of the faith."
BTW, One of my favorite presidents John Adams (and best first lady ever, Abigail) were Congregationalists (which changed their name to United Church of Christ.)
Doug
Post a Comment
By submitting these comments, I agree to the beliefnet.com terms of service, rules of conduct and privacy policy (the "agreements"). I understand and agree that any content I post is licensed to beliefnet.com and may be used by beliefnet.com in accordance with the agreements.