Anyone who knows me also knows that I spent the last two election cycles lamenting the almost entire co-option of the powerful themes of faith and religion by the Republican side of the ticket. When discussing religion, especially recently, however, Democrats have a strong tendency to sound apologetic, meek, tentative and insincere, tacitly ceding this rich bank of imagery and emotions to the Republicans.

Until now.

Now, we have a candidate whose ability to invoke religious themes is entirely natural. Senator Barack Obama’s rallies and speeches could be integrated seamlessly into a church service. As a former theology student, I’m sometimes unsure if I’m seeing a political rally or a big-tent church service when I watch him speak. He has the entire thing down – from the strategic pauses in his speeches, to the eyes lifting to the horizon, to the powerful oratory from a beautiful baritone speaking voice. Far from avoiding religion, Senator Obama embodies it.

So, why, then, does this make me so uneasy?

Role of Religion in Politics
Contrary to popular opinion, I believe that religion and politics can work quite effectively together – not to shove one particular faith’s agenda down the throats of our collective community, nor to control personal behavior that shouldn’t be discussed in public life. Religion works best when it is a gadfly to politics: when it addresses such issues of poverty, injustice, oppression, lack of opportunity, educational failure, to name only a few.

(It’s a scandal, for instance, that the richest nation in the history of the world can find billions of billions of dollars to shore up its defenses, but it cannot provide adequate health care to over 45 million of its most vulnerable citizens. It’s also worth noting that one candidate stands out on the health care issue.

But, I digress.)

Senator Obama’s Message
The use of religious rhetoric to effect political change is nothing new. Many of the great reforms in our world have had religious underpinnings from abolition to Civil Rights to ending apartheid. In his use of such terms as “a movement” and describing this election as “different,” his supporters as “different,” and the decision to vote as “an epiphany,” Senator Obama seems to fit right in.

The problem is, nowhere in his rhetoric can I find him pointing to the central issue, the cause outside himself that sets him apart. Perhaps I have not looked closely enough. However, lacking that, it seems that the core, central goals of Senator Obama’s speech is to simply get him elected – logical in a political campaign, but of a great concern in a social movement.

Human beings simply are not strong enough to carry that weight. No matter how great Senator Obama is, he is still a human being, with limitations and foibles. It is literally impossible for him to realize the visions, goals, dreams, hopes and desires of everyone who support him. Were he to put ending poverty at the center of his platform, for instance, his supporters might well expect him to take significant strides in that direction. Unless Senator Obama finds an outside focus or purpose for their energy and enthusiasm, he is setting himself up, I believe, to fail the first time he does something to disappoint them.

A Call to Service
Without knowing what Senator Obama’s central issue is, I struggle to determine what motivates him. When General Clark was running, that was easy. Protect and serve the country. Senator Robert F. Kennedy (sadly before my time) also had a core issue. Provide a voice for the poorest citizens. Vice President Gore? Protect the environment.

It is obvious that Senator Obama excels at bringing people together. The question for me, is, however, bringing them together for what? Simply electing a new person is a great start, but it’s just that – a start. Given that he is running against the system, what are his priorities? What is it about him – him specifically – that will make him a great president? Put differently, what does he have to offer, beyond his brilliance and personal charisma? Obviously, that is tremendously effective – for some.

What about everyone else?

Running Against the System
Senator Obama has tapped into the great frustration that many Americans feel at our divided government. His speeches emphasize unity, the need to bring people together to work on our common problems. This theme has garnered him a great deal of support.

The problem? Firstly, no one on the other side has offered to share responsibility. Urging unity and a common purpose works well when those who oppose you are willing to join you: it works less well when your opponents see that is as an admission of weakness. Walking forward with your arms outstretched is an act of tremendous courage, but it doesn’t often end well when the other side is armed. It can pay serious dividends – or it can get you killed.

Second, blaming the current politicians and powerful interests who run our country may be deserved and it may be true. It certainly taps into the American psyche. (Whether it's justified to blame both Democrats and Republicans equally is quite another matter.  But, I digress again).

What happens, though, when you are charged with running the system you have criticized? What happens when you make the transition from critic to CEO? There’s a reason that most prophets live outside the system – the skills are different, the needs are different. The vision is different.

The central question remains: are we anointing a prophet or hiring a chief executive? Senator Obama is an effective critic of a system that has experienced some serious problems. He has yet to convince me that will make him an equally effective president.