Charlemagne, a way forward?

I am constantly playing the "what if" game. In particular, I LOVE reading, or even just perusing through History books to imagine what life would be like if certain practices from different eras were still in place or if they never changed at all.

For example, the other day, I perused a sample of a book on "daily life during the time of Charlemagne" the Holy Roman Emperor crowned by the Pope in 800 A.D (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Charlemagne).

At this time in Church History, and unlike today's U.S. emphasis on "Separation between Church and State," the State and the Church were in many ways, ONE GOVERNMENT.

The Church crowned Charles the Great (Charlemagne in Latin) as "Holy Roman Emperor" over much of what is now France, Germany and Italy. Charles the Great enforced not only civil law, but was a power to appeal to in enforcing canon law.

Is this a way forward for the United States of America?

And no, I am not joking. I obviously support the Constitution of the United States of America and the First Amendment to it that states that Congress shall make no law creating an establishment of religion nor the free exercise thereof.

But, having said this, I am also a Christian, and as such, obviously desire that the Kingdom of Jesus Christ be over all other earthly powers. To think or believe otherwise is simply to not think or believe according to Christianity's central claims. KURIOSIESUSCHRISTOS is the Greek alliteration of the foundational tenet of the Christian Faith, that Jesus Christ is LORD. Caesar is not "lord." A Senator nor a Congressman, nor even the President of the United States is "lord." There is ONLY one KING of kings and LORD of lords, and His Name is Jesus the Christ.

So, how would Jesus' LORDSHIP be instituted in the United States?

Should we just request that someone like Bishop T.D. Jakes "crown" the next President (maybe Barack Obama?) as "Christian President"?

Well, Constitutionally, that would not work obviously.

But, just because Constitutionally it would not work, does this mean that we Christian Voters cannot vote according to our conscience?

After all, I voted for George W. Bush, not because I agree with Republican fiscal policy, but rather simply because George W. Bush is an Evangelical Methodist who happens to agree with my own set of Moral Stands, stands such as being FULLY Pro-Life, not supporting gay marriage, etc.

So, I went ahead and voted, as a Christian, for a Christian President. Moreover, whether Democrat or Republican, I similarly VOTE according to my conscience, and it is the Name Jesus Christ that I look for on the ballot slip.

Therefore, although our Constitution will safeguard us from any "state-supported religion," I nevertheless ENCOURAGE you to VOTE according to your conscience. If you are a follower of Jesus Christ, then do not vote as if that identity did not matter. VOTE for people who happen to agree with your own moral and religious views. This is a democratic republic that we live in after all!

Blessings in Jesus,
Rob J. King, Presidential Candidate for Jesus ("testing the waters" and waiting for a sign . . .)