One more late-night/early-morning thought before I drop into a deep-sleep coma for the, um ... few hours that I'll call sleep.

Amped up over the Presidential election? ... and a full year's worth of politicking? Well, here's one place you won't see much of that: Lakewood.

» Newsweek: No Politics From This Pulpit
This is a web-only Q&A with Pastor Joel and just a great read. It's got the obligatory "What about you're critics, Joel?" question - but only one. It's the bulk of the rest of the questions that really stand out for being notably better than we see from a lot of other interviewers.:

NEWSWEEK: As you know, we're in the middle of one hot political season. I hear that any political office holder who attends your service will be recognized, but they are not allowed to address your congregation, and that any current candidates will likely not be recognized at all. Why the policy? Joel Osteen: Well, I think it started back with my father. Really, it was the size of the church. We had 6,000 members back then. It seemed like with city council races everybody would come through two or three months before the elections. It just got to the point where it didn't seem right. Now that we've grown it's the same thing. The way our services are structured here at the church, we have to keep it, if we can, 100 percent worship. We used to introduce every guest and do birthdays and make announcements. We cut all that out and put it in the bulletin. Having said that, I'm a strong believer in honoring the people who have served and are giving their lives to run. For instance, our police chief was here. He comes out several times a year. I just, before I minister, I honor him and thank him for serving. If one of the presidential candidates were to attend, they certainly deserve honor. I think we'd make an exception on that. I think we say we don't let them speak because, well, who wouldn't want to come to speak to 40,000 people here? We would introduce them and I would always put in a good word, whether they are Democrat or Republican.

Do you plan to lend your support to any of the presidential candidates?
I really don't. I like to keep that to myself. Part of it is how I was raised. My father ... kept it out of the pulpit. I think that part of our goal is to reach as many people as we can. Our reach is very broad. Even in the church we are very diverse. There are Republicans, Democrats, independents--everything ... I don't want somebody saying, "He's for this party or that party, and that turns me off."

Given the line you've drawn, what would you do if the next president came to you for, say, counsel on an issue like abortion or the war in Iraq?
I would be glad to give it to him. I would be honored. I would just do it personally. We have had--not presidential candidates--plenty of people call. I don't mind being associated with them. It's not the association. It's that I don't endorse one.

Is there ever a time when it's OK for politics and religion to mix?
I have friends that feel like their calling is to push the Christian agenda. I'm 100 percent behind them. They're great debaters. They're great at making their points. I think there are times when we need to get involved.

There's obviously an evangelical bloc that has a significant amount of power in political circles. Is that bloc called to do politically related work?
I think so. I think they stand for what Christians stand for--at least, in their view. I don't think there's anything wrong with that. I do think, at times, the evangelical gets a label that becomes more political. That's what I don't like. When it's so politicized. There's a fine line there, but I think we can't just sit back and let everybody else express their views. I think it's important that we as believers in Christ express our views.

Those last two in particular are among the more interesting questions I've seen lobbed at Joel. And his answer definitely offers up a lot to chew on. Is there really a "Christian agenda" in politics? If so, what exactly is that? Is that a necessary precursor to needing to "get involved?" And does that help or hurt the fact that the term "evangelical" is used as a political term more often than it is a spiritual one? And lastly ... where is that "fine line," exactly?

Again, I'll try and dive a bit deeper into this one later. It certainly ties into the strand of thought I've been investigating more fully as of late. In the meantime, Pastor Greg Boyd offers a few more thoughts on faith & politics. My bias inclines heavily toward Boyd. I wouldn't go so far as to suggest it's a mutually exclusive view from Joel's, though.

In the medium-term, I've got books by Hunter and Dionne in the mail, with Amy Sullivan's book soon to follow. Sheesh, I may never get to fully absorb Taylor Branch quite the way I'd hoped. Oh, and there's this really huge day of voting on Feb. 5 that could well finalize the choices of who we get to see square off in November. And another month after then, we Texans get our say.

For those who loathe politics, I'll see if I can ever get cracking on a few CD reviews ;-)