I started reading God's Politics by Jim Wallis, and thought that I would post a few thoughts about the Introduction chapter: "Why Can't We Talk about Religion and Politics?" 

One of his first statements that caught my eye was:

"sometimes the most strident and narrow voices are the loudest, while more progressive, prophetic , and healing faith often gets missed," (pg. xv)

Some questions that I have about that:

• Who exactly is he calling narrow?  The religious right?  Secular left?  Both?
• What "faith" is he talking about?  That word tends to get through around a lot.  If it isn't biblical faith it is meaningless.

Wallis says that there are two ways that religion has been brought into public life historically:

1. The view that "God is on our side"  which he says leads to "triumphalism, self-righteousness, bad theology and often dangerous foreign policy."
2. Asking of we are on God's side (Abraham Lincoln) which leads to much healthier things - penitence and even repentance and humility, reflection and even accountability.

I don't disagree with his summary of the history of religion in the public life.  I may not concur with the conclusions that he draws.