Is Loving Liberals a Solution?

To most evangelicals, it's an incontrovertible fact:

America is going to H-E-double-hockey-sticks in a hurry.

And the corollary to that assessment is that liberals are the reason.  They're America's enemy.

Of course, the truth is a bit more complicated than that.  Yes, America is facing some serious challenges to our global dominance and enviable quality of life.  Standards of morality in the United States continue to be falling ever lower.  And, at least according to conservative media personalities who claim to be experts on these things, recovering our country's future has been stymied by liberals in the Democratic party and their entitlement-enabling policies.

But even at least one recent Republican administration wasn't innocent when it came to inflamed partisan politics and inflating the size and role of government.  That's why the truth about America's problems isn't as easy as many conservatives assume it is.

I'm wondering, too, if we evangelicals aren't at least party to blame for even more of our problems.

Consider this inconvenient little passage from Matthew 5:43-48:

43 "You have heard that it was said, 'Love your neighbor and hate your enemy.' 44 But I tell you: Love your enemies and pray for those who persecute you, 45 that you may be sons of your Father in heaven. He causes his sun to rise on the evil and the good, and sends rain on the righteous and the unrighteous. 46 If you love those who love you, what reward will you get? Are not even the tax collectors doing that? 47 And if you greet only your brothers, what are you doing more than others? Do not even pagans do that? 48 Be perfect, therefore, as your heavenly Father is perfect.

The inconvenience of this passage comes in its portrayal of a mindset that runs contrary to how most American evangelicals interpret our country's condition these days.  Even though we're supposed to, we don't love our enemies, do we? Especially not our political enemies. Particularly since the days of Bill Clinton's presidency, evangelicals have felt entitled to ruthlessly defame politicians who don't fit the narrow right-wing leadership mold.

Let's assume, at least for the sake of argument, that the Bill Clinton's, Nancy Pelosi's, and Barak Obama's of the Democratic party are genuine enemies to Christ's church.  How often do you and I pray for them?  If we really think they're persecuting us, then we're to be praying for them. 

Not only that, but we're supposed to love them.

Love?!  If there's one thing of which Rush Limbaugh, his peers, and many of their admirers in evangelical Christianity can never be accused, it's loving Democrats.  You know:  the people who are supposed to be our enemies.

You can't love with the level of vitriol and spite which gets slung about the national media each day by right wingers and evangelicals alike.  You can't love by basing voting records on party affiliation rather than individual policy merits.  You can't love by inciting your followers with partisan rhetoric.

Granted, we evangelicals benefit from living in a nation which affords us the ability to participate in how it's run.  However, as long as we're basing policy opinions on Biblical principles, we shouldn't be surprised - or even angry - when we encounter resistance from others who don't share our faith.  People who are, by definition, enemies of Christ, and therefore, our enemies, too.

To what extent might America's problems be due to the fact that God's people prefer getting snarky and belligerent towards our "enemies" than loving towards them?  Remember, life isn't about politics and comforts; it's about being perfect children of our Father in heaven.

And that word "perfect?"  That's not mine; that's Christ's.  And if you don't like this little passage from Matthew, then you're certainly not going to like the passage which immediately precedes it:

38 "You have heard that it was said, 'Eye for eye, and tooth for tooth.' 39 But I tell you, Do not resist an evil person. If someone strikes you on the right cheek, turn to him the other also. 40 And if someone wants to sue you and take your tunic, let him have your cloak as well. 41 If someone forces you to go one mile, go with him two miles. 42 Give to the one who asks you, and do not turn away from the one who wants to borrow from you.

Doesn't that sound completely unreasonable?  But then, look at how well the partisan bickering with which we evangelicals have colluded has worked.

What might God be able to do through us for our country if and when we decide that Rush Limbaugh has it all wrong?  It's not just the liberal policies of our "enemy" that are harming the United States.  It's also the lack of love you and I show those with whom we disagree.

Through the apostle Paul, in Romans 12, God reinforces His Son's teachings in Matthew regarding how we're supposed to behave even to our political opponents:

14 Bless those who persecute you; bless and do not curse... 17 Do not repay anyone evil for evil... 18 If it is possible, as far as it depends on you, live at peace with everyone. 19 Do not take revenge, my friends, but leave room for God's wrath, for it is written: "It is mine to avenge; I will repay," says the Lord. 20 On the contrary: "If your enemy is hungry, feed him; if he is thirsty, give him something to drink. In doing this, you will heap burning coals on his head." 21 Do not be overcome by evil, but overcome evil with good.

Two million years from now, when you and I are just beginning our eternity in Heaven, which will be more important:  the fact that we gleefully belittled politicians with which we disagreed in 2012, or the fact that we earnestly sought to honor God by loving the politicians with which we had strong disagreements in 2012?

Yes, there's a lot that's wrong with America today.

And part of what's wrong is the way we're dealing with what's wrong.
_____

Truth or Popularity

What's the price of popularity?

That can vary, of course, according to how popular something is.  But even if something is extremely popular, that doesn't always mean the popularity is justified, does it?

After all, my blog is proof that popularity is not the ultimate arbiter of truth!

Not that I'm never inaccurate or that my opinions are always sound.  One time on FaceBook, I was participating in a lively exchange on some topic (which was so important I can't remember it now) and the FB friend whose post started it all commented on my "opinion."  I immediately shot back that my contribution to the debate wasn't an "opinion." 

But nobody else found that very humorous.

Christ:  Just the Facts

The only person who ever walked the Earth who never had an opinion was Jesus Christ.  Everything He thought and spoke was - and is - ultimate truth.  Unadulterated, uncompromised, unchangeable truth.  In fact, since He created all truth, He couldn't have an opinion, because since He knew everything, nothing was open to interpretation.

Even though He had no opinions, Christ wasn't very popular, was He?  Even though He spoke utter truth, that's not what most people wanted to hear.  Even Pilate, who asked Christ rhetorically what truth is, didn't really want to know Christ's answer.  Which provides us a reliable metric regarding truth and what's popular:  they're not necessarily the same thing.

Democracy, for example, is a virtue many Americans vehemently endorse.  Some evangelicals even go so far as to say that democracy is the political system God most strongly advocates, since political freedom seems so similar to spiritual freedom.  The problem with assuming such a correlation, however, comes when you confuse the mortal fallibilities of human decision-making with God's divine right to save His people from their sin.

Throughout history, most of Christ's followers have not benefited from our American version of democracy, yet the Gospel is still with us today because it is true.  It has not been eradicated, despite plenty of sociopolitical attempts to do so.  Isn't that amazing?  Obviously, democracy is preferable to atheistic totalitarianism, but it's not necessary for the truth of the Gospel to prevail.

Democracy Doesn't Always Support Truth

That fact should give us hope, but it doesn't, does it?  I suspect that's because we still want our faith and all of the great stuff we enjoy as Americans.  But ironically, just as we benefit from democracy, which is based entirely on popularity, the very foundations of that democracy may be falling apart as Americans vote on popular issues without considering the ultimate truth behind them.

Democracy could end up killing itself.

Unfortunately, democracy isn't so much the ability of a majority of people to make good decisions as it is simply preferable to risking leaving all the decisions up to one person or a small group of unaccountable people.  This means that even though more people support a specific political agenda than those who oppose it, that agenda may not be what's best for the population.

Truth matters, even if it's not popular truth.

If we evangelicals dwelled less on partisan bickering and championed truths we can't deny - whether we think they help or hurt our standard of living - then at least we'll know that if popularity drags America off of a cliff, Christ's truth will still be here for us.

Christ's truth:  our salvation - as if we thought there was any other.
_____

My Church Proves Grace Still Works

Notice 8/17/14:  I am aware from following the Google Analytics data for this blog that there are people online searching for information regarding the self-confessed relapse of Dr. Skip Ryan.  Since Dr. Ryan himself has published a personal letter to Redeemer Seminary, from which he has resigned, I'm providing a link to that letter here so you can hear this from him.

_____



You probably haven't heard, but today is an historic day for Park Cities Presbyterian Church.

Park Cities is my church, part of the Presbyterian Church in America (PCA), and located in Dallas, Texas.

Granted, today's not an earth-shattering day.  Presbyterianism as we know it will not be upended by this day.  Some people may even scoff, and say it's all petty church politics.

But today, the first pastor Dallas' largest PCA church ever had has officially been welcomed back on staff.  And no matter where you live, or what church you attend, this news should be a source of encouragement.

The announcement was made via a letter to Park Cities Presbyterian's 5,000 members and a posting on the church's website.  Upon an invitation by our current senior pastor, the Rev. Mark Davis, and a unanimous vote of our elder board (called a "Session" by Presbyterians), the Rev. Dr. Skip Ryan is returning to our church's pastoral staff.

Dr. Ryan resigned from his post as senior pastor several years ago in the wake of a scandal involving his addiction to prescription painkillers.  But I don't want to spend any more time than absolutely necessary on Dr. Ryan's troubles.  This story isn't about those, but about his God, and His church that has supported him regardless of them. 

Park Cities Presbyterian's story, however, is quite remarkable.  It began when a group of 1,500 members from an older, larger, mainline Presbyterian congregation split to form a new church back in 1991.  Within a span of roughly 14 years, church membership quadrupled, its budget ballooned to $14 million annually, two daughter churches were birthed, and a robust program of inner-city ministries began transforming the ghettos of west Dallas.

It stunned everyone when he resigned in disgrace after being caught lying about his dependence on prescription medications.  Although several lapses in ethical standards took place, we've been told no crimes were committed.  Since then, contributing factors which led to the addiction have been addressed on multiple levels, and a series of punishments and censures were imposed by our denomination upon Dr. Ryan, all of which he obediently served and by which he abided. 

Eventually, he was successfully restored to full fellowship in the PCA, and re-vested with our denomination's permission for administering the sacraments.  He'd even been installed as Chancellor at Dallas's new Redeemer Seminary, which had begun as an offshoot of Philadelphia's Westminster Seminary.

But remember:  this story isn't about addiction, loss, or even penance and restoration.

It's about grace.

It was grace, through the power of the Holy Spirit, that prompted a group of Christ followers to rally around Dr. Ryan, help him take responsibility for his actions, encourage his family during this painful process, and bring him back into ministry.  In many churches, I suspect, the fact that a senior pastor was caught in one of the major pitfalls of our time would be enough to start vicious gossip cycles spinning.  Instead of giving him time to resign, people would have been demanding his head on a platter.  His family could have been hounded out of town, and his name reduced to a laughingstock, or at least maligned enough so that he wouldn't be able to seek employment in a faith-based organization ever again.

Instead, Dr. Ryan and his family were embraced by our church, and they never even left our congregation.  From the beginning, several elders privately guided Dr. Ryan and his family through the revelation, fallout, and recovery from his actions.  It helped that Dr. Ryan was contrite enough to seek a resolution without being forced by our Session to do so.  While he went away for detox, rehab, and therapy, his family - his wife, with her own ministry to women in the church and pastors' wives across our denomination; a son and daughter in college; and a severely handicapped younger daughter - were well cared for by many members of our congregation.

At a special weeknight service arranged for the newly-sober Dr. Ryan to address our congregation, in a forum intentionally labeled a "testimony" since he was not yet allowed to preach, he bluntly confessed and repented to a standing-room-only sanctuary.  Yet I did not get any impression that those of us in attendance were looking for salacious details, or to feast on a bit of schadenfreude.  No - I think the reason just about all of us listened to his testimony with bated breath was because we were waiting for him to announce when the Session would allow him back into our pulpit!

As it happened, Dr. Ryan himself said he would not be seeking reinstatement in any capacity at Park Cities Presbyterian.  And indeed, despite this announcement today, Dr. Ryan's new position is not something for which he was looking.  His successor, Rev. Davis, had the idea last year, and he, along with our Session, had been praying about it since then.  Dr. Ryan will keep his full-time position at Redeemer Seminary, but will re-join the staff at our church as a part-time assistant pastor.

In a way, it may appear to be more a matter of semantics, since Dr. Ryan will continue to do what he's already been doing ever since being restored to full fellowship in our denomination:  ministering to and counseling people recovering from and repenting of sins that bear strong stigmas in our society.  In God's eyes, what Dr. Ryan did isn't any worse than the rest of the sins you and I commit on a daily basis; what's provocative about chemical dependency of any kind are the ramifications our society sees in such behavior.  Ramifications that have their place, yes, since it was the very stigma that helped convince Dr. Ryan he needed professional help in dealing with this destructive behavior.  But other ramifications that, for better or worse, have implications that our society may not be entirely justified in perpetuating.

For his part, ever since he was elected to replace Dr. Ryan, Rev. Davis has had to endure several years of grumbling among some members that he's not nearly the preacher Dr. Ryan is.  And no, he's not.  I suspect even Rev. Davis would readily admit to that.  You might be surprised to learn that I have actively resisted the urge to compare the two men.  Rev. Davis, raised in suburban Oklahoma, doesn't have the scholarly - some might say sophisticated - approach of the Harvard-educated, Connecticut-bred Dr. Ryan.  But some people didn't resist dwelling on those differences, and with the welcoming of Dr. Ryan back onto Park Cities Presbyterian's staff, they might skeptically question whether this is an easy way for Rev. Davis to build some good will among disgruntled congregants.  Or even flaunt the fact that Dr. Ryan is satisfied enough with Rev. Davis that he's willing to serve on staff under him.

Despite all the cynicism I sometimes - okay, oftentimes! - profess on various subjects, I can't be cynical about this news.  Instead, it really, honestly, makes me happy to see the restoration process continue and flourish.  True, in his position as senior pastor of a large, wealthy, influential church, Dr. Ryan benefited from being surrounded by many people just like him who wanted to help him even as he represented a cautionary tale for themselves.  Most of us don't have that strong or extensive a support network to count on.  Still, this is Dallas, Texas, after all - the buckle of the Bible Belt.  Plenty of hypocrisy takes place in the religious palaces scattered across many affluent subdivisions in this part of the Lone Star State.  Plenty of back-stabbing, satisfaction at others' misfortune (the definition of schadenfreude, by the way!), and jockeying for new positions as vacuums are created when a leader falls.

That's why today is an historic day at my church.  And frankly, for evangelicalism in general.

Grace has been proven to work.  Not grace that mortals themselves have managed to manufacture.  But grace given by God and applied by people who believe in that grace.

Maybe the fact that such notable examples of grace are so rare is what's more disappointing than the fall Dr. Ryan experienced.  But as today's news proves, grace does work.

Grace that is greater than all our sins!
_____

Making the Bible Convenient?

If you saw this advertisement on ChristianityToday.com, what would be your first impression?

  - "Cool!  Something to help me cram in a little Gospel while I'm busy with real life."
  - "'Friendly?'  Yes, I've always found the Bible too intimidating."
  - "Here we go again - yet another book that trivializes the importance of God's holy Word."

You can probably imagine what my first reaction was when I saw this ad today.  Instantly, I reacted with indignation.  Even our evangelical society refuses to acknowledge the fallacy in the notion that God's Word should "fit" into life.  Shouldn't it saturate life instead?  The Bible isn't a how-to guide for making life tick as much as it is a source of life from the Creator of it.

Yes, that's probably too severe a knee-jerk reaction to a book that, upon review on its publisher's website, seems geared more to the unsaved than the saved anyway.  People who likely have yet to become convinced through the power of the Holy Spirit of the Bible's primacy and authority.  Here is Bethany House's summary of this book by Dr. Daryl Aaron, entitled Understsanding Your Bible in 15 Minutes a Day:

  The Bible can feel overwhelming at times. What parts should you read first? How can you understand it? What does it mean for your life? Meanwhile, most books about the Bible are time- consuming, leaving you without much time to read the Bible itself.  In Understanding Your Bible in 15 Minutes a Day, Bible professor and former pastor Daryl Aaron answers your most important questions about the bestselling book in history. Broken into topical readings, you can read systematically from the beginning, or pick and choose topics of interest. Each reading is brief, engaging, and easy to understand.

So, OK:  it's not heresy.  In fact, it's not even a bad idea to provide people unfamiliar with the Bible a primer of sorts for how it was put together, why the prose can seem a bit stilted, how it's all inter-related, and other basics.  After all, we're entering a new age in America where more people are unchurched than churched.  The things that generations of kids learned in Sunday Schools across the country are now going unlearned by most kids, since they don't go to church.  They're growing up and entering college without even a fundamental understanding of what the Bible truly is.

If this book can help counter that trend, then great!

However, although this book may serve a useful purpose, Bethany House's advertising for it betrays a marketing ploy that's all too often assumed with our faith walks:  that a token amount of time a day is sufficient for life proficiency.

From pastors who plead with their congregations to spend just 10 to 15 minutes a day in personal devotions or quiet time, to churchgoers who fastidiously watch the clock during services to make sure they get out on time, the urge to compartmentalize and streamline the Gospel permeates modern evangelicalism.

Which can make for some jaded Christians when things don't seem to be going their way, even with their "God box" checked off every day.  Perhaps taking 15-minute chunks for learning factoids about the Bible is a good thing, but who among us can really count on such budgeting to be sufficient?  It's not even the question of 15 minutes, or five, or half an hour.  It's the very idea that God's Gospel is packageable that bothers me.  That it can be parsed out like, well, an instruction manual.  Check off these lists as you complete your read-through.

Rare is the evangelical who will admit that this is how they view the Bible.  But how many of us practice it all the same by the way we live our lives?  Getting done what we want to get done, or what we think needs to get done, and checking in with God's Word every now and then for a shot of faith like we do power drinks.

If God's Word is the essence of life, then will five minutes a day be enough to absorb it for the benefit of our soul?

Hey - it's not like I'm any example of spending hours in the Word either.  I'm preaching as much to myself as anybody here.  Most weekdays, I probably spend ten to 15 minutes in my devotions, so I'm no saint when it comes to "living" in the scriptures.  I'm doing better at reminding myself at different times during the day of Bible passages I've memorized over the years.  But I'm purposefully trying to spend more time with God in His Word because, frankly, I'm realizing how much I need to.  That's why, when I see advertisements like this one that suggest God wants to fit into our schedules, I blow a fuse.

God doesn't want to fit into our schedules.  He wants us to fit into HIS schedule.  In fact, He wants to BE our schedule.

I have a hard enough time applying this truth to my own life without being encouraged to slack up on it by a Christian publisher.

As long as the focus remains on us, genuinely understanding your Bible in 15 minutes a day will never happen.
_____

Reaction Satisfaction

"Lies, lies, lies!"

And then, "vomit."

On FaceBook's new ticker, running along the right-hand side of their main screen, you can watch what your friends are posting on other FaceBook pages.  Mostly, it's pretty boring.  But when you see a triumvirate of "lies!" and then the unpleasant "V" word, you're apt to take note and do some investigating regarding the impetus for such disparaging comments.

Turns out, they were replies a friend of mine was giving to news posts she was reading on FaceBook.  One, from Rush Limbaugh, regarding the widely-held suspicion that President Barak Obama's administration is doctoring unemployment numbers to make them look better than they really are, my friend Paige* swiftly branded as "lies!"

Three times!

Then almost immediately, she fired off her displeasure over a Fox News post regarding California's same-sex marriage ban being declared unconstitutional by a federal appeals court.  To that, Paige wanted us to know she felt like regurgitating.

Granted, these are likely familiar reactions among many of my right-wing FaceBook friends, although those other friends haven't been as graphic and emphatic in their reactions as my friend Paige.

What makes this interesting, however, is that during relatively the same timespan, another FaceBook friend, Leslie*, was posting "likes" to a post by Rev. Tony Evans, the well-known black evangelical pastor in south Dallas.

Granted, Evans wasn't necessarily talking about politics.  Still, instead of inciting his FaceBook followers into a vehement frothing over any issue at all, Evans' post that Leslie "liked" was simply this:  "You can trust what God says, even when you don't know the details."

Can you see the dichotomy here?

On the one hand, we have right-wing political agitators seeking to stir up dissension, rancor, and frustration among America's voting public.  Not that disappointment over the same-sex marriage ruling in California or concern over possible fudging of a basic economic health indicator during an election year are sinful reactions.  But how helpful are they, really?

Sure, Paige got to vent and blow off some steam, and it probably felt good to do so - at least, temporarily.  But how worked-up should we evangelicals be getting over American politics in the first place?

Now, Paige is a frequent reader of my blog, and she'll know exactly who I'm talking about here, even though I've used a pseudonym for her.  So, "Paige:"  please understand, I'm not preaching at you.  I'm simply using your example today as Exhibit A.  And I get as worked-up as you do over many similar topics.  So if I am preaching, I'm preaching to myself here.

How often do we freak out over aggravating circumstances and news instead of allowing the Holy Spirit to remind us that God is still in control?  The more sophisticated we get as evangelical people of faith, doesn't it get easier for us to forget the basics of Who God is and what He does for us?

The same God who provides eternal salvation for His people also guides them in the daily affairs of ordinary life, and those affairs, at least for those of us in democracies, include politics, where we have the privilege of contributing to political processes.  But we've bought into the false, knee-jerk premise that politics dictates our lives, instead of relishing the placidity of God's sovereignty.  We buy that false premise all the time.  Mostly because that's easier for us to believe than the fact that Somebody we can't see or vote for really is in control.  Yes, we are responsible for acting in ways that glorify Him, and those ways include - for example - seeking out truth if data is manipulated, and supporting efforts that preserve the sanctity of institutions God has ordained, like heterosexual marriage.

But shouldn't we keep it all in perspective?

Paige wasn't wrong in reacting as she did as much as she was too gullible.  Like many Americans on both extremes of the political aisle, Paige was more eager to contribute nothing positive to the dialog instead of availing herself of the peace that comes from remembering that God knows the struggles America is facing these days.  Why is that distinction important?  Because the struggles America is facing won't be resolved through soundbites or partisan factoids taken out of context.  And they won't be resolved by simply hurling anger - however righteous it may be - across the political aisle.

I have to remind myself constantly - and I mean constantly - that the Fruit of the Spirit is love, joy, peace, patience, gentleness, goodness, meekness, and self-control.  Don't you see how each of these ooze out of the reminder Tony Evans gives in his FaceBook post?

"You can trust what God says, even when you don't know the details."

Doesn't that put us in a better frame of mind - not to mention a better orientation to acknowledge the Source of our help - than the bluster right-wing media outlets love to incite from us?  And doesn't trusting in God even when we don't know how He's going to work - which is basically what Evans is reminding us - put us in a better position to help advocate for the types of changes and improvements we would like to see take place in our country?

Instead of lies and vomit, let's focus on truth and spiritual food.  We're to be salt and light.

Not doom and gloom.
_____

*Not their real names

Co-Belligerence: the Lesser Evil?

Although it's 75 here in north Texas this afternoon, it's beginning to look a lot like Romney.

For the Republican presidential nominee, anyway.

Even with his painful blunder yesterday when, talking with CNN, he actually verbalized "I don't care about the very poor," and even though he received the endorsement today of buffoonish Donald Trump - in Las Vegas, no less - Mitt Romney doesn't appear to have much left standing in his way on his march towards the nomination.

Of course, the presidency is another story entirely!  But in terms of the nomination, it seems to be all over except for some final hissy-fits from the serial-adultery has-been, Newt Gingrich.

With a Mormon in serious presidential contention for the first time in America's existence, our country's fading evangelical voting block may need to swallow hard and learn a new word.

At least if those of us evangelicals who are Republican will still vote for the party, if not the candidate.

After all, let's not forget that some evangelicals, after seeing a Mormon headlining the ticket, might feel fewer qualms about voting for Barak Obama.  At least he doesn't proudly align himself with a false religion.

Yet the fact that Mormonism is indeed a false religion, combined with nagging worries over the Obama administration's disdain for Christianity (as seen in its intransigence over conscience objections) will likely force many evangelicals to adopt the practice of co-belligerence.

Co-belligerence?

Generally speaking, co-belligerence is when disparate groups join forces to fight a common enemy, even though they have little else in common with each other.  Originally part of military parlance, Francis Schaeffer is credited with introducing the term to conventional Christianity, reasoning that "a co-belligerent is a person with whom I do not agree on all sorts of vital issues, but who, for whatever reasons of their own, is on the same side in a fight for some specific issue of public justice."

In other words, co-belligerence is a compromise between groups who would otherwise be opposing each other, but consider the negatives that might result from their refusal to cooperate on a particular issue to be worse than the negatives that might result if they choose to work together to resolve or conquer that issue.

Or even as Timothy George, a prominent advocate for cross-ministry efforts between Catholics and evangelicals, puts it, co-belligerence is an "ecumenism of the trenches."

In co-belligerence, each entity of the unified front agree to put aside the bickering amongst themselves they would normally do so that they can concentrate on achieving their shared objective.  In this case, it would mean evangelicals would keep our mouths shut about Mormonism being a cult long enough for Romney to not only secure the Republican nomination without too much more intra-party acrimony, but also the presidency.

Of course, the big gap in this relationship is what Mormons bring to the table.  In actually, it appears as though evangelicals will be doing most of the shutting-of-mouths and turning-of-cheeks, since Mormons already consider themselves Christians.  And some hard-nosed evangelicals may consider that too high a price to pay simply to avoid having a Democrat in the White House.

Frankly, I see both sides of the argument.  I understand the dangers of letting as apparently anti-religion an administration as Obama's stay in office for another four years, and I understand that the Republican Party has utterly failed to field a compelling slate of candidates from which to choose Obama's replacement.  So conservatives are going to have to suffer through the discomfort of a painful decision:  let Obama stay, or put a cultist in the Oval Office?

Personally, I think the threats that can be logically assumed from Obama's record thus far justify the co-belligerence necessary for a Romney vote.  But I can also understand how evangelicals, who either simply can't bring themselves to vote for a Mormon, or who remain optimistic - however irrationally - about Obama's ability to minimize his administration's destruction of religious freedom, might see co-belligerence as too much doctrinal fudging or even theological complacency.

In times like these, I'm particularly grateful that God looks at our heart, even as he's with us in the voting booth!
_____