Well, we are in the final stretch of the U.S. presidential election. (Praise God!)  The major political conventions are over and those provided some surprises.  But throughout the multi-year campaigns faith, religion, spirituality and church attendance has been an issue like I can not remember in any previous election cycle. 

While I may be a GA Junkie I am not that much of a junkie for secular politics.  I follow it, but not closely.  I say this at the outset because this post 1) is intended to discuss the theological and religious aspects and not the secular implications, 2) this is based upon my observations which are not scientific or complete, and 3) feedback on theology is welcome but purely secular political comments will not be posted.

While a number of faith & politics issues have caught my attention, and continue to intrigue me, my thinking, overlap with the regular content of this blog, and reasonable citations lead me to comment on two areas today — experience and women in leadership.

Experience
I must admit to being a bit cynical about the political process and this political cartoon by Marshall Ramsey pushed both the cynicism button and made me laugh at how the whole “experience” thing has played out this campaign season.

I must admit that I find the experience argument in the presidential campaign to be somewhat amusing.  The charges, claims and counter claims should force one to think about what previous experiences are important and relevant.  Also, how much experience should one have in a particular position?  For the two “young, energetic and historic candidate[s] with little experience” I note that while one has almost twice as much experience as the other in a “national” office, neither has completed their first term in that office.

However, I am always amazed in the scriptures that God seems to chose the unlikely candidate for leadership.  Moses was a murderer on the run, David was the youngest of eight brothers and why would God chose the youngest, and many of Jesus’ disciples were not well placed in society or religion being working class, Galileans, and, horror of horrors, a tax collector.

But in each of the examples above, while the unlikely were chosen they either had, or would get important experience before they were thrust into leadership.  As a general rule when it comes to major Biblical leaders, the unlikely are chosen but they are prepared for their role.

I find there to be an interesting juxtaposition with the leadership selections made at this summer’s 218th General Assembly of the Presbyterian Church (U.S.A.).  In the case of the Moderator, the Assembly chose a candidate with some experience in higher governing bodies, but with no experience as the Moderator of a middle governing body.  In the case of the State Clerk election the Assembly chose the candidate with the most experience as a Stated Clerk having served as both a Presbytery Stated Clerk and a General Assembly Associate Stated Clerk.

It has also struck me that in both the presidential and moderatorial election campaigns youth and associated lack of experience, seem to be related to change, new ideas, and renewal.  Right or wrong, if someone is younger they are more likely to be viewed as better connected with new ideas and new ways of doing things.  (I do realize that a political partisan might view it that “my candidate does but not that other one.”)

And for a final parting thought on this topic, check out this post by DP Cassidy over at In Hoc Signo.

Women in Leadership
Since the party conventions many religious blogs have taken up the topic of women in leadership in a way that I don’t remember from earlier in the election cycle.  After all, at any point in this election process there was always a female candidate in the race.

Maybe the highest profile blog to ask the question about women in political leadership but not uniformly in religious leadership is On Faith which asked its religious panel if this was hypocritical.  Needless to say the answers were across the spectrum, which is what that blog is about.  The blog Ethics Daily discussed a switch in position of Southern Baptist Leaders from the ten year old statement that women should be in the home to the position that it is OK for women to serve in high office.  And in the recent frenzy in the blogosphere you can find posts on Presbyterian blogs including the Bayly Blog, Conversational Theology, Tribal Church, and A Church for Starving Artists as well as other blogs, like Ethics Daily and Vintage Faith, that touch on this complimentarian discussion and the role of women, particularly if the secular world differs from religious leadership.

Two additional observations about this topic:
First, in the Pentecostal tradition there is a long standing tradition of women in leadership, with Aimee Semple McPherson being an example.
Second, in the presidential race why did this suddenly become such a hot topic in reformed circles right around the time of the conventions?  Political and denominational affiliation probably were in play as well as family responsibilities and having a new candidate to raise the topic again.  The questions related to women in leadership positions are valid ones, but lets either ask them uniformly or hypothetically.

Enough secular politics for now.  These are areas where the secular news has overlapped with what Presbyterians are dealing with right now.

UPDATE 9/16/08:  1) Thanks to the comment below I guess I need to refer to Conversational Theology as a “transient Presbyterian blog”   2)  Overnight Michael Kruse over at the Kruse Kronicle has posted a thoughtful and detailed piece on complimentarianism in the present political context.  He also points out an opinion piece on the USA Today web site that discusses it as well.