If some readers feel that I’ve been piling on Romney of late, or that I’m guilty of Mormon-bashing, I plead no contest on both counts. Three cheers for Mormon-bashing! Having clarified my insidious agenda, let’s move on to what I want to talk about.
Romney supporters like Wayne Grudem, Richard Land, and John Mark Reynolds suggest it’s out of bounds to question Romney on his Mormon faith because that’s irrelevant to his presidential qualifications.
Let’s us concede, for the sake of argument, that his Mormonism is, indeed, irrelevant to his presidential qualifications. Does it follow that he shouldn’t be questioned on his Mormon theology? Not at all. Even if we accept the premise of this argument, we can build on that same premise to draw the contrary conclusion.
You see, Romney is a Mormon celebrity. Indeed, running for president has made him a celebrity. And he’s not a celebrity who just so happens to be Mormon—as if you had to be a devoted fan to know this obscure detail about his private life.
There may be clueless Americans out there who have never heard of Romney because they don’t follow politics. But if you know who he is, you know he’s a Mormon. He is known for being a Mormon. He is famous for being a Mormon.
A consequence of this fact is that Romney is now the public face of Mormonism in a way that Gordon B. Hinckley is not. You either have to be Mormon or a countercult junkie to know who Gordon B. Hinckley is.
Romney is to Mormonism what Donny & Marie used to be to Mormonism. Probably Glenn back is, at present, the only another Mormon of comparable notoriety.
When, therefore, Romney presents himself as a Christian, that, of itself, is reason enough to publicly question his theology. This represents a rival interpretation (or radical reinterpretation) of the Christian faith. If Romney were a nobody, it wouldn’t matter. But it does matter when a popular, high-profile cult-member or cult-leader is identified with the Christian faith.
Like it or not, Romney is a de facto evangelist for Mormonism. Just by calling himself a Christian, his sheer celebrity catapults him into the role of a Mormon missionary—with vastly more media penetration and potential impact than the square young men in the Eisenhower era business suits. He’s a national ad for the equation between Christianity and Mormonism. You couldn’t have a bigger, louder commercial for the Mormon cult than a promising presidential bid.
So, yes, Romney should be grilled on Mormon theology. Even if that’s irrelevant to his presidential qualifications, it is highly relevant to the public perception of what constitutes the Christian faith. That may be an incidental side-effect of his presidential ambitions, but however ancillary to his presidential credentials, it has now taken on an importance of its own and all it’s own. And in terms of our Christian priorities, is that not at least as important as who wins in November?
Amen! Amen! I'm all for heretic bashing. Let's call 'em "idiotMormons".
ReplyDeleteBy the way....I appreciate you guys standing your ground with the idiotMonk. While other reputable bloggers back down from him, you guys are not afraid to speak the truth to him and put him in his place. Michael Spencer becomes more apostate and more useless as the weeks go by.
Dan
We call this discrimination...it's such a contradiction in a nation founded on diversity, tolerance and religious freedom that so many have lost connection with our heritage by condemning those of other faiths as if to declare my version of the truth is now the state religion. What a sad truth.
ReplyDeleteAnonymous said:
ReplyDelete"We call this discrimination...it's such a contradiction in a nation founded on diversity, tolerance and religious freedom that so many have lost connection with our heritage by condemning those of other faiths as if to declare my version of the truth is now the state religion. What a sad truth."
1) Discrimination comes in two forms: good and bad. Some forms of discrimination are good.
We have a criminal law code that discriminates against general classes of individuals according to certain categories of social misconduct, viz. rape, robbery, murder, arson, assault, embezzlement, forgery, counterfeiting, vandalism, DUI, &c.
2) The 13 colonies that ratified the Constitution all had anti-sodomy laws on the books. Doesn't sound very tolerant or respectful of diversity, if you ask me.
Several colonies had established churches that carried over into the Republic.
Anonymous said:
ReplyDelete"We call this discrimination...it's such a contradiction in a nation founded on diversity, tolerance and religious freedom that so many have lost connection with our heritage by condemning those of other faiths as if to declare my version of the truth is now the state religion. What a sad truth."
Notice that our anonymous commenter is reading into this post something I didn't say. In this post, I didn't say if Christian voters should discriminate against Romney because of his religious affiliation. Rather, I gave reasons for why it was fair game to question him on his theology.
I do have an opinion on whether his Mormonism should count against his political ambitions, but that wasn't the point at issue in this particular post.
No doubt Mormonism is at the center of a national conversation today. About the issue of Romney, or a Mormon being a Christian, as a Mormon, I can say that a Mormon living his faith certainly is a Christian. The name of the Church is the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, and Jesus Christ is at the center of it. The distinguishing characteristic is that "Mormons" believe Jesus restored the Gospel in this age, through a prophet, Joseph Smith, (and as you mentioned, the current prophet Gordon B. Hinkley). But the message the prophets carry is the Gospel of Jesus Christ. It's difficult to see where the confusion comes that people think Mormons to not be Christians...probably just misinformation.
ReplyDeleteWhy are you calling it a "Mormon cult"? It is a church, religion, or faith, but not a cult. Why do you want Mitt Romney to answer questions on his faith? As Romney said, "No candidate should become the spokesman for his faith." If you want to find out about his faith go to the source. Attend a church meeting, talk to a mormon, or go to mormon.org Mitt Romney is running for president. You should ask him what he will do as president, not his every single beleif as a mormon.
ReplyDeleteanonymous said...
ReplyDelete“No doubt Mormonism is at the center of a national conversation today. About the issue of Romney, or a Mormon being a Christian, as a Mormon, I can say that a Mormon living his faith certainly is a Christian.”
That’s an assertion, not an argument.
“The name of the Church is the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, and Jesus Christ is at the center of it.”
And forgers sign the name of the author or artist whose work they’re counterfeiting. The Antichrist takes the name of Christ.
“The distinguishing characteristic is that ‘Mormons’ believe Jesus restored the Gospel in this age, through a prophet, Joseph Smith, (and as you mentioned, the current prophet Gordon B. Hinkley).”
As if we were unaware of that claim.
“But the message the prophets carry is the Gospel of Jesus Christ.”
False prophets who carry the false gospel of a false Messiah.
“It's difficult to see where the confusion comes that people think Mormons to not be Christians.”
It’s difficult to see because all you know is Mormonism.
“Probably just misinformation.”
To the contrary, Mormonism is so culturally and ethnically ingrown that many Christians know more about Mormonism than Mormons know about Christianity.
cynthia said...
“Why are you calling it a ‘Mormon cult’?
I’m calling it a cult because it’s a cult—just as I call a cat a cat because it’s a cat. Same thing with dogs, horses, and heretics.
“It is a church, religion, or faith, but not a cult.”
A cult can take the form of a church, religion, or faith.
“Why do you want Mitt Romney to answer questions on his faith?”
Why do you ask me questions I’ve already answered?
“As Romney said, ‘No candidate should become the spokesman for his faith’."
Candidates don’t dictate to voters what voters are allowed to ask. Unless, that is, they wish to be losing candidates.
“If you want to find out about his faith go to the source. Attend a church meeting, talk to a mormon, or go to mormon.org.”
I already know about his faith. The problem is that Romney isn’t coming clean about his beliefs.
“Mitt Romney is running for president.”
I’d say that sums up the problem in a nutshell.
“You should ask him what he will do as president.”
Given how he’s reversed himself on a whole raft of issues, that’s rather like asking a Pinocchio if he’s a liar. Somehow I don’t think a chronic liar is the most credible character witness to speak in his own defense. Answers are only as good as the speaker.
Awesome, Steve!
ReplyDeleteAnd to Cynthia. You really need to read your early American history and understand what the founders stood for and wanted in their leaders. Any true leader's faith (whatever it may be) will come into play with their decision making to some extent. Especially during times of pressure and stress (which I assume the President of the US faces regularly).
It's sickening to read over at the Boob's Head Tavern how even their pet "Presbyterian minister" is raising his hand in favor of Osama...I mean Obama. It really shouldn't suprise us though because at least one or two of them are switching to Buddhism (i.e. Jim Nicholson). Here is what one of them said:
"Someone emailed to ask if I’ve seriously converted, and if so why I became a Buddhist. The answer to that is: I’m the Buddhist equivalent of a ’seeker’ at this point, but I’m finding it difficult to find the Buddhist equivalent of Bill Hybels. As for my motivation, frankly: it’s not that I no longer believe in the Christian God. I just don’t much care for the company he keeps.
Posted by: Jim Nicholson @ 3:07 am | Trackback
Comments (0) "
Pathetic! See what the apostate Michael Spencer is leading! How proud he is of his little following. All hail the idiotMonk!
Anonymous said:
ReplyDelete---
It's difficult to see where the confusion comes that people think Mormons to not be Christians...probably just misinformation.
---
I would think that it's rather obvious that the eternal second person of the Trinity, who is "Light of Light, very God of very God, begotten, not made, being of one substance with the Father" is not quite the same Person as the spirit-child of Elohim who only became immortal because God the Father (who is immortal) literally sired him.
Since Christians believe the first and Mormons believe the second, it's quite obvious that they do not believe in the same Jesus at all.
Then again, perhaps Romney just believes in Nelson De Jesus Silva...
Cynthia,
ReplyDeleteYou're right, a Mormon can be president. Speaking for myself, that's not the issue. The issue is that, like Bill Clinton's "is," Romney is equivocating over the meaning of "Christian."
By "Christian" we mean a person who affirms the basic doctrines of the historic Christian faith which include the Trinity and, as Protestants, justification by faith alone. Mormonism categorically denies them both. Indeed, as you know "monotheism" in Mormonism is not belief in the existence one and only one God. It is belief in Elohim, god of this earth and worship of that god and no others. He is still one of many such gods. Your faith is, by definition, polytheistic, but you don't worship the other gods, only Elohim.
So, no Cynthia, you are not a Christian. Indeed, if you'd do the homework, you would see we are merely taking your own group at its own word. In the 19th century, the claim that Mormons are Christians in the sense meant by Romney would never have been uttered.
Our problem isn't his family values. We’re not saying “Mormon values and Christian values don’t overlap” (They do because Mormonism is a Christian heresy). Rather, we’d have a lot less of a problem with Romney if he’d just flat out admit that Mormon Christology bears no resemblance to Christian Christology. We’d like him to admit the truth about what Mormons actually believe. We’d be more comfortable with an honest pagan than a dishonest pagan, regardless of what sort of pagan he or she is. We are tired of presidents who waffle around in a misleading fashion, and this has been happening since the Clinton years. It needs to stop.
On top of that, I live in a state where waffling around has resulted in several officials getting charged with corruption and being sent to the federal pen. They range from officials in our Council of State to the very Speaker of the House! Speaking for myself, I'm looking for somebody who is honest, or at least somebody who I can pin down so I know where they stand. I see Romney, with respect to his religion, as being duplicitous.
We’re tired of the “we’re all just one big happy (Christian) family) rhetoric, and consequently, we look at Romney and see in microcosm what we’ve seen in Mormon “evangelism.” They use the same techniques to “win souls.” That’s their “hook.” Ergo, we’re not concerned about having a Mormon for President, we’re concerned about what the Mormons would do with a Mormon President who claims we’re all just one big family and they are just different sorts of Christians. Indeed, my local newspaper even reported in the religion section that a representative from the Mormons actually came right out and said they would, in fact, use a Romney Presidency as a platform to promote Mormonism. What more proof do we need?
Thus, another of our concerns is that our leaders, two of which you name here, seem to waffle around on sound doctrine as they justify their support of Romney. It makes it look like a Romney Presidency would lead to (even more) backsliding in our churches, as if we don’t have a big enough problem already. If the potential Presidency is having this effect, what does this say about an actual Presidency? These are all things we consider. Add to that the fact that Huckabee really is “one of us,” the very sort of person that 30 years of politicking by evangelicals has tried to produce for a presidential candidate and then our leaders are rejecting him?!!! What’s wrong with this picture? This doesn’t even begin to get into the secular side of the equation. These are all simply considerations that I have from a theological and denominational standpoint. Yes, these do affect my decisions leading up the primary. I cannot and will not vote for Romney for these reasons alone, though I do have some others.
What is interesting about Romney and his religious question being objected to is one person. Hugh Hewitt. Hewitt wrote a book called "A Mormon in the White House" and Romney continues to use Hewitt's radio show as a platform.
ReplyDeleteA commenter on Hewitt's blog summed it up well.
On the one hand you rail against Huckabee for posing a question which is, arguably, substantively correct. You chastise him for introducing religion into the election. Yet on your show today, you were critical of Huckabee for not releasing transcripts of his sermons. This is the absolutely height of hypocrisy. Huckabee's sermons are presumably about his Baptist faith. If Huckabee's sermons and interpretation of his Baptist theology are relevant for voters to consider, how is Romney's belief in Momonism not?
One final question which I know you will decline to address: why is it wrong for anyone to mention Mitt's Mormonism, but you can commercially capitalize on a book that made Romney's Mormonism the central theme? Mitt just said on your show that bringing a candidate's religion into the political debate is inappropriate -- how does he rationalize his complicity with you in publishing a book about his faith?
From a former RLDS,
Mark
Romney or Hilary. You decide.
ReplyDeleteeveryone shoud read this entire debate on teh Christian question regarding Latter-day Saints.
ReplyDeletehttp://blog.beliefnet.com/blogalogue/mormondebate/
Start at the bottom and read up.
Summary: "call Mormons nontraditional christians and everyone can be happy.