A religious label no longer fits me - Catholic, Protestant, Evangelical or Independent

I confess I do not agree with all Catholicism and Evangelism teachings. There are some of each that I like. There are some of each I believe. There are some of each I follow in my personal walk with God. There are some of each that I believe have it all wrong. Neither of them any longer totally satisfy me. I have come to believe most Catholic priest read and study the Bible with their mind and a lot of Evangelical ministers read and study the Bible using only their hearts.

Being a product of the seminary I loved those deep discussions on theology and philosophy. But, I finally realized I knew God with my mind, but I did not have a real personal heart relationship with Him.

The Bible may have become just another academic course I had to complete to be ordained. I take responsibility for it, but I also blame the priest that trained me. It was a shock when I entered the reality of ministry and found some parishioners really had a better personal relationship with God than I did - with all my book smarts. It was also a shock when I started to watch Christian television and on occasions stumbled on an Evangelical minister that had something worthwhile to say and was not begging money.

I now realize how important it is to read the Bible with both the heart and mind. I now know how important it is to stop and pause and allow God to speak to us as we read and study.  We can memorize all the scripture we want, but if it does not touch our heart we really have accomplished nothing. I guess as many Christians do we can use it to impress others.

I recently read a book on brain/thought/mind and quite time. This may sound foolish to some of you that are smarter than me, but I always thought of my brain as the organ that produced action and thought. After reading the book and spending a lot of time thinking about what the author wrote I came to believe the brain only reacts to what our mind (thought) tells it to. I wonder if the Bible really means ‘mind’ when it speaks of heart so many times.

If you are like I was you may be spending time in daily Bible study aimed more at interpreting the text than at meditation and experiencing God. You may also find your prayers are more ritualistic or formal than personal. Is your prayers dominated by petitions for needs and confession of sins. Mine was. If you are Catholic yours are probably taken from a little prayer book. It saddens me when I see Sunday after Sunday people with their little paper prayer books praying from them instead of having a simple conversation with  God.  The words used by great men of the church is not what God wants to hear. God wants to hear from us.

I began to notice many years back that parishioners were leaving the Mass after some of the priest delivered their homily without getting any practical knowledge to take with them to apply in their daily lives – a waste of time. The priests were delivering the same stuff that was delivered to them in the seminary without feeling, personal experiences or practical application given. I have found that in a lot of the Evangelical churches the congregation leaves full of emotional feeling (Adrenalin)and little mental comprehension. There needs to be a balance. What is the point in going to church if you are fed book knowledge or given an Adrenalin high that does not carry you through the week and cannot be applied to real life situations.

I am opposed to those speed reading Bible assignments that some ministers believe produce such great fruit. Read only with your mind and not your heart and you will not accomplish anything. Reading the Bible should be about establishing a personal relationship with God. I have had relatives that are more interested in CHECKING off the daily reading list given by the pastor or purchased in bookstores than really understanding how it applies to their life. That yearly Bible reading goal should not interfere with the big-picture of having 365 daily opportunities to feed your soul in God’s word.

If I am pressed for time and do not have the time to read scripture and then meditate on what I read I put it off until later in the day, but if possible always accomplish it before I go to sleep that night. Reading the Bible should not feel like an obligation it should be something you enjoy and want to do. After reading scriptures you need to take time to ponder on them (meditate) and seek how they can apply to your daily life. I have a relative that was in the hospital for about a week and unable to read her Bible. When she got home the first day she caught up on all the daily reading she had missed and called me to confirm that she had. I did not have the heart to tell her I was not impressed. I would have preferred she just picked up with the daily reading on the day she got home.

Research shows nearly six in ten (59%) of young people who grow up in Christian churches end up walking away from either their faith or from the institutional church at some point in their first decade of adult life. Sadly when asked what has helped their faith grow, “church” does not make even the top 10 factors. Instead, the most common drivers of spiritual growth, as identified by Millennials themselves, are prayer, family and friends, the Bible and their relationship with Jesus.

This tells me the organizational church is failing the young people. We need to stop blaming society and start looking within our own walls. Perhaps the organized church has allowed itself to fall out of step with modern times – I believe it has.  I think many young people feel the organized church is not relevant’ or see attending worship services ‘a boring duty’. If that is true then it is the Churches fault. I do not think most churches today offer the depth young people need to deal with their everyday life decisions. Modern life is complex!

Many Evangelical Churches have created a Young People’s Country Club or Night Club and that is not the solution in my opinion. They are looking for the same thing we adult Christians are looking for - a personal relationship with God, a place where they can be accepted for who they are and to be given an opportunity to take a meaningful and productive role in the church.

I think people have the right to expect from their church:

Acceptance

People want to feel not only welcomed and loved but also wanted. I think the Catholic Church does an awful job of making visitors feel welcome. A lot of Protestant Churches go to great pain to make first time visitors welcome and forget about them after that. Is your Church a place that welcomes people on the first visit and beyond the first visit?

Accountability

People want to be held accountable. They want someone to follow up with them and make sure they are understanding what has been taught and how it can be used in their daily life. Is your Church a place that motivates and provides  partnership to the goal of serving Christ?

Discipleship

People desire to know more about their faith whether it’s newfound or not. People want to understand what they are doing, why they are doing it and how to improve what they are doing. Is your Church a place of learning that equips the believer with the tools necessary to survive in the Christian walk? 

Opportunity

A growing Christian wants an opportunity to get involved in the ministry of the church they attend. People want to be a part of something. People want to serve, and we must not forget God wants them to serve as well. As a Church we must be excelling at preparing our members for service. Giving them an opportunity to serve Jesus. So many times we can fail because we wait too long to get new members involved in serving. They want to serve, and we must let them. Is your Church full of opportunities to serve?

Is your Church a place of acceptance, accountability, discipleship and opportunity or is it a place where the leadership has expectations for everyone else, but not themselves.

Cruz should have the majority of evangelical votes - but he doesn't - why?

Donald Trump is a mainline Protestant who hardly goes to church. Ben Carson’s 15 minutes of fame is over. Marco Rubio’s faith journey has taken him from Catholicism to Mormonism to evangelicalism and back to Catholicism. If Rubio has as difficult time making political decisions as he has making religious decisions I question his loyalty to any principle.

Cruz is supposed to be the real deal. A true evangelical Christian, loyal to the U.S. Constitution, Southern Baptist, a preacher’s kid and yet he has not sewed up the evangelical vote – why? He announced his candidacy at Liberty University, founded by Jerry Falwell, but Jerry Falwell’s son who is head of Liberty University supports Trump – why? No one has a better record in Congress on the social issues that “Old style” conservatives embrace, but he still does not have the evangelical vote in the basket – why?

Trump all but matches Cruz for evangelical support in Iowa. Trump’s refusal to participate in the FOX debate may change that. Cruz is going to twist the truth and out and out lie to use Trump’s refusal against him. I noticed since Trump announced he would not participate in the debate Sean Hannity who has had his head up Trumps backside has pulled it out and stuck it up Cruz’s backside. That may hurt Trump in Iowa.

Could it be that evangelicals know Cruz is a hypocrite? Southern Baptist teaches tithing ten percent of your gross income to the church is essential to your faith and according to public records Cruz contributes LESS than ONE percent. He claims to be against Wall Street, yet his wife is an executive of one of the largest Wall Street firms and even borrowed one million dollars from Wall Street banks to help finance his campaign. There’s got to be something more that’s made a lot of evangelicals wary of throwing their support to Cruz, and I think I know what it is. Evangelicals hate hypocrites.

In the last Republican presidential debate, Cruz gave his testimony, and (as he notes) he gives it all the time. But the conversion story he tells is his father’s, not his own. Cruz was born in a Christian home and has always been a Christian and was raised in the church.

I have not decided to support Trump because to be honest I do not like his fight with Megyn Kelly and FOX, Carly Fiorina (face), and Marco Rubio (sweat) or his more serious attacks on Mexican immigrants (accusing the many of what the few do), his character assault on Ben Carson, comparing him to a child molester who has pathological problems and, most recently his apparent mocking of the disability of a New York Times journalist. It bothers me he does not apologize for his remarks. I do not like his extra-large ego and pettiness, but I am convinced he can do more to help the economy and foreign affairs than any of the other candidates – he would be a strong leader. 

The warnings in Proverbs are strong: “Do you see a man who is hasty in his words? There is more hope for a fool than for him” (Proverbs 29:20). “A fool gives full vent to his spirit, but a wise man quietly holds it back” (Proverbs 29:11). I really think this applies to anyone, but especially to anyone who wants to be President of the United States.

Do you think white evangelicals are recalling an earlier election and are looking more for a candidate that is better for the country, rather than better for the church? The year of the evangelical was the Southern Baptist Jimmy Carter. President Carter brought millions of evangelicals into the political process — on behalf of the Democratic ticket. The list of white evangelicals who supported Carter that year reads like a who’s who of the religious right, including Pat Robertson, Jerry Falwell and Billy Graham. That fall, Carter won nearly half the evangelical vote. No Democrat has even come close to that in the decades since. Few people today would deny Carter was the worse U.S. President in our lifetime. I personally think Obama took that title from Carter.

I think the Rev. James Linzey, a retired Army chaplain and vocal leader among some conservative Evangelicals, sums up his support for Donald Trump and it applies to me and many evangelicals, “Because he tells it like it is, and he exudes honesty and transparency, and he’s the kind of person who is not going to deceive us. Evangelicals are tired of being deceived by wolves in sheep’s clothing.”

I do not think any of the political pundits or media elitist’s or Republican establishment realized how deep the voter’s frustration with the GOP really was. The Republican Party has failed to take care of even one major issue that concerns conservatives and evangelicals over the past many years.

I am not impressed with Tony Perkins, president of the Family Research Council endorsement of Cruz. He has for a long time urged Christian conservatives to pick a consensus presidential candidate early in the nomination process, but remember he early on endorsed the nominations of John McCain in 2008 and Mitt Romney in 2012. I do think Cruz will gain strength among evangelicals and the only one in the end that will share in those votes is Rubio, but I believe Tony Perkins is wrong again and Cruz is not the candidate to beat a Democrat candidate.

Ted Cruz is a good talker, but can he win a General Election?

To my knowledge Donald Trump has never said Ted Cruz is not eligible to be President of the United States. He has said repeatedly there is a question and someone would most likely file a lawsuit challenging Cruz’s eligibility. It turns out once again Donald Trump was right.

An attorney in Houston, Texas has filed a federal lawsuit challenging the Canadian-born senator's eligibility to be president. Newton Schwartz asked the Supreme Court to decide if Cruz's birth to an American mother and Cuban father while they lived in Calgary, Canada violates the Constitution's "natural born citizen" requirement.

Ted Cruz argues that because his mother is American, he became a U.S. citizen at birth. But the Supreme Court hasn't previously considered the eligibility question. Until recently, Cruz held dual citizenships in Canada and the United States. He renounced his Canadian citizenship to run for President of the United States. I have always questioned the loyalty of a man who wanted to be a U.S. Senator, but did not want to give up his Canadian citizenship to do so.  I never understood why my fellow Texans elected a man Senator who was not sure if he wanted to be a citizen of the United States or Canada.

The issue could harm Cruz. In a Reuters/Ipsos poll taken from January 7 to January 14, a quarter of Republicans, along with a quarter of independents and voters in general, said they believed Cruz is unqualified. Only 47 percent of respondents said that Cruz is qualified and 26 percent said they weren’t sure.  The matter needs to be settled before the General Election.

The Tea Party Republican from Texas has continued to seek out a spot at center stage in politics by being divisive. His enemies characterize him as power-hungry and self-righteous. I do not consider myself an enemy of Ted Cruz, but from all I know of the man I think his enemies have defined him well, but I would add to it ruthlessly ambitious. I also believe he would be another power hungry, self-righteous, ruthlessly ambitious clone of President Obama.

Ted Cruz brags that his three years at Harvard Law School, from 1992 to 1995, sharpened his political vision and trained him for his intense sparring with liberals. Sparring has become his signature style as a national politician. I think one of the main problems with our government today is there has been too much sparring between conservatives and liberals in Washington and not enough discussion of what is good for the American people.

 Ted Cruz says he has mellowed since his days at Harvard, but frankly if he has he must have been a monster at Harvard.  Ted Cruz’s father was happy his son was going to Harvard and said Harvard was a place that would allow his conservative son to preach to the liberal elite. It is obvious Ted Cruz and his father has an ‘us vs them’ attitude so Ted Cruz came by his naturally. I do not want a President or any politician preaching to me. I have had eight years of a President preaching he knows what is better for me than I do.

Ted Cruz claims that after working on George W. Bush's 2000 campaign then being passed over for a senior position with the new administration was "a crushing blow."  That is not true. Cruz was offered a job as White House associate counsel, but he rejected it. Cruz thought the job was beneath him and that he should have had a more senior role of deputy White House counsel. The incident is an example of how his personal ambition rubs colleagues the wrong way. If Cruz would have taken the position instead of letting his pride stand in his way the position would have better qualified him to be President. Later Ted Cruz acknowledged his refusal to take the position was a mistake and said, "I was far too cocky for my own good." His stint in the Senate tells me that he is still too cocky for his own good.

When Ted Cruz mocked what he called Donald Trump's "New York values," in the debate the other night, some New Yorkers have taken it very personally and I don’t blame them. The Daily News hit the streets with a big front-page illustration of the Statue of Liberty giving Cruz the finger. The headline: "DROP DEAD, TED." New York Governor Andrew Cuomo, a Democrat, took to the airwaves to denounce the Texas senator and demanded an apology for comments he called "obnoxious on every level." During the debate, moderator Maria Bartiromo asked Cruz to explain his comments on "New York values." Cruz replied, “You know, I think most people know exactly what New York values are.” Bartiromo said, "I am from New York. I don't."

Cruz was playing to the Iowa voters, but it may have just cost him the New York Republican voters. It should! Representative Steve King, a conservative Iowa Republican who supports Cruz, suggested on CNN that Cruz's remark may have backfired, saying, "It would have been better on the part of Ted Cruz not to have had that exchange." One New Yorker, Wall Street hedge fund mogul Robert Mercer, contributed $11 million last April to a super PAC that supports Cruz. Cruz doesn’t have any problems bashing New Yorkers, but he certainly will take money from Wall Street.  New York has 29 Republican Electoral Votes to Iowa’s 6.

I don’t believe Cruz can win in a general election. Americans don’t typically elect politicians who are seen as polarizing to become president, but I must confess 2012 with Obama’s second win contradicts that statement. Goldwater was a hardcore conservative who was also seen as polarizing, and he got destroyed in a general election.  I see Cruz as being a Goldwater Republican. I just cannot imagine over 50% of the country coming together and voting for Ted Cruz to be our next president.

Americans look for someone who will unite the country, not divide it even further. That’s why they voted for Carter, Reagan, Clinton, Bush, and Obama. Obama ran as one who would unite and the media pushed that narrative. He was perceived that way by many Americans, who didn’t know the details of his past, or the radical policies he supported in the past. LET US NOT MAKE THE SAME MISTAKE AGAIN - know who you are voting for!

How would Ted Cruz work with Congress to get bills passed when he admits that most politicians in both parties of Congress can’t stand him? Cruz has always said both parties in DC are like a cartel who only care about staying in power, but if he’s elected president, he is going to have to find a way to work with that cartel.

+++Ted Cruz proved who he was and what he was at the Republican Convention.  Republican's should be proud of the fact they found him out before they elected him their candidate for President in 2016.  Win or lose in November I am thankful Cruz is not on the ticket and I hope his political career is over.