Would the Mormon Mitt Romney also be considered a Christian?
Well, like it or not this issue has landed foursquare in our laps. Will we deal objectively?
Come, let us reason together...
ECCLESIASTICAL BRAND
At noon yesterday, Meghan Kelly said "...and the preacher from Texas SLAMMED Governor Romney, saying he was not a Christian."
Was Romney slammed? Christianity is clearly defined by Jesus in His Book. A match to the Biblical Jesus equals Christianity. No match/no cigar. That's not judging, that's accepting a belief system. Everyone chooses to believe something and Christianity is a unique brand.
Here's what may be part of the problem. Over time, being a Christian has come to mean less and less as the perimeter got more and more fuzzy. So when people hear you say someone's not a Christian, it's like you are saying they don't love God or they're not nice. That's why when Meghan Kelly made her remark, it was like she was saying "the TX preacher SLAMMED Romney because Romney doesn't love God".
Well, the Governor is a nice man who loves God, but that's not what the TX preacher said. Not being a Christian is an objective fact based on Romney's choice of beliefs. Governor Romney is a Mormon. Mormons have a stated list of things to believe just like Christians have a stated list of things they believe. Both lists have some tenants in common, but Mormons have some extra stuff about Jesus that is not in the Bible and therefore not considered characteristic of what Jesus would have done/asked His followers to do. That matters. It defines.
Similarly, there are people who choose to believe Black Liberation theology. If I said Jeremiah Wright was not a Christian, some would bow up. But the facts are...he adheres to a list of things that are not on the list of things adhered to by historic Christianity. That is not a slap to Reverend Wright. That's just a fact. Black Liberation theology is not Christianity.
Neither is Buddhism. Or whatever that stuff Marianne Williamson and Oprah believe. Or Islam or Hinduism or Shintoism or Baha'i...or any number of other belief systems.
ESSENTIAL BRAND
Last night Karl Rove said "This concern over theology is not productive or important. I would give as an example Abraham Lincoln, who might be described as a casual Christian. Have we now decided HE would not have made a good President?"
What about that? Does theology have a place in politics? Rove was saying that a leader's brand might disqualify him from the office when actually an "off-brand" fellow might be able to be a great leader.
That is somewhat akin to what Bill O'Reilly said. He talked of Rick Santorum being too much of an "ideologue" for the partisan politics of today. O'Reilly figured a more centrist man (woman) would have broader appeal. That's a veiled way of saying ... too much conviction.
So what about brand and conviction? Do they matter? What does our day demand? Should we look for a man (woman) with a certain brand, or should it be "who cares what brand"?
We live in perilous times that are unlike the mid-1800's. Abraham Lincoln had it tough, but our times have shrunk the world and our iThings bring on warp speed. If terrorists don't get us, we will get ourselves...with a looming depression and anarchist mobs roving the country. We need a leader who understands the times because they HAVE an operational God-app. We need someone who is used to walking with/hearing from God...because it's gonna take some clear wisdom from above to sort out all of today's economic and security needs.
I think Mr. Rove is wrong. I think theology is key. Perhaps President Lincoln could be characterized as a casual Christian because he didn't attend church, but I read devout words when I read his writings. I hear great angst in his deliberations and know by seeing his lined face and reading about his life...that he prayed and wrestled with God over the weight of his office. I do not believe that a casual Christian could have written the Gettysburg Address.
So yes, Mr. Rove/O'Reilly. Theology and conviction have a place in the lives of our leaders. It may be just the lifeline that God throws us.
EXCLUSIVE BRAND
BTW, I heard a commentator who "got it right" last night. Ann Coulter said "commentators should stick with what they know". Smile. Commentators are people and people in general want to be inclusive about matters of faith. It just SEEMS open-minded and generous to be inclusive. No one wants to be seen as brittle or judgmental.
But don't forget this. Christians are called to agree with God on what HE SAID, not make up what seems right. And in the Book, we read about many belief systems in the world. And they FROSTED God. He responds by saying He is a jealous God who wants an exclusive relationship with us. He warned over and over and over about the way other belief systems influenced His people Israel. God did not endorse or tolerate any of those systems. In fact, He THUNDERED against them. And when His finger wrote on the stone tablet, the very first thing He ordered was NO OTHER GODS. He was calling His people out of a polytheistic culture and calling them to monotheism. To the one God. To Himself. I didn't make the rules, but I SURE want to follow them. And He said "come unto ME".
P.S. God's phone number is Jeremiah 33.3...and there he makes an exciting promise that would be awsome in regard to leadership.
"Call to me and I will answer you.
I'll tell you marvelous and wondrous things
that you could never figure out on your own."
No comments:
Post a Comment