Why Mitt Romney should open up on Mormonism
Former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney greets supporters during an election party at the Red Rock Casino Feb. 4, 2012, in Las Vegas. / Getty Images
In the current presidential election campaign, many, if not most, Americans are expecting that Mitt Romney's quest for the White House will be buffeted by questions about his religion. How to handle Romney's Mormonism has proved especially vexing, both for the candidate and for the electorate. It's worth considering exactly why that's the case.
The essential question, from the perspective of many voters, concerns the very nature of Mormonism, an upstart religion born in western New York in 1830 and persecuted for much of the nineteenth century. After Joseph Smith Jr. translated the golden tablets that he had excavated from a hillside near Palmyra, New York, and published the translations as the Book of Mormon, Smith began receiving revelations regarding temple endowment ceremonies, lifestyle (no alcohol or hot beverages, commonly misconstrued as a proscription against caffeine) and, most incendiary of all, polygamy.
Special Section: Election 2012
Biographer: Mitt grew up in "series of bubbles"
Osteen: Romney "believer in Christ, like me"
Under pressure from the federal government, one of Smith's successors as president of the church famously rescinded the practice of polygamy in 1890. But "gentiles" (the Mormon term for non-Mormons) have nonetheless continued to harbor suspicions--theological and social--about Mormonism. Many Americans doubt that Mormons, with their belief in the Book of Mormon as scripture and their exclusive baptismal rites, actually qualify as "Christians," despite the prominence of "Jesus Christ" in the church's logo. Even more off-putting is the Mormon penchant for secrecy. Many Americans, with their deep distrust of secrecy (witness the public outcry over the secret rites of Masonry in the nineteenth century), bristle at the fact that entry to Mormon temples is limited to Mormons in good standing. (It doesn't help matters that Joseph Smith apparently modeled his temple endowment ceremonies on Masonic rites.)
There's no doubt that, to some extent, the voting public's interest in Mormonism is informed by prurience. But that's not to say it should be dismissed entirely. What ought to interest us about Romney's faith are not the vagaries of Mormon theology, fascinating as they are, but how he understands that theology, how his faith informs the way he lives, his sense of responsibility toward others and how that might affect the way he governs.
Granted, there are relevant political questions peculiar to Mormon teaching. The Latter-day Saints, for example, teach that the United States Constitution is divinely inspired. It's fair to ask Romney how that affects his understanding of the Constitution. Although Mormons are hardly the only group that claims to be the "true" religion, how does that teaching inflect Romney's notions about pluralism and toleration? But the more pertinent question applies to all presidential candidates who make declarations of faith: How does religion shape your policies? Unfortunately, Romney has remained studiously tight-lipped about all matters of faith, referring only vaguely to "my church."
Indeed, much of Romney's problem traces to his inept handling of questions about his religion. He has managed to reinforce the image that many voters already have of him, namely that he's a moving target, a wind-sock politician who adjusts his positions according to the prevailing political breezes. When asked about his faith, especially during the 2008 primaries, Romney's stock answers were, "I'm not a theologian" and, "I don't speak for my church." Both responses may be accurate, but they belie his deep involvement with the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, as a bishop and "stake president" (both volunteer assignments) and as a major contributor (to the tune, apparently, of millions of dollars). Not only does his caginess reinforce his image as evasive, his reticence about his faith reflects Mormonism's lack of openness.
Similarly, it should come as no surprise that his attempt to clear the air about his religion the last time he ran for president fell flat. Romney's "JFK speech"--as his address at the George Bush Library in College Station, Texas, in December 2007 was widely called--failed. Romney, retreating to the safety of bromides like "We are a nation 'Under God' and in God, we do indeed trust," was no more forthcoming about his faith and how it shapes him and his policies than he had been previously.
Mitt Romney is not the first person of his faith to vie for the presidency, of course. Heading into the presidential primaries in 1968, the leading contender for the Republican nomination was also a Mormon: George Romney, Mitt Romney's father, then governor of Michigan. But remarkably, the elder Romney's faith elicited little attention or scrutiny back then. (His candidacy eventually ran aground over his remark that he had been "brainwashed" about Vietnam.) So why does Mitt face such a different landscape from that of his father on matters of religion?
- no previous page
- next
1/2
Eric
http://www.eacology.com/2012/02/are-mormons-such-as-mitt-romney.html
JFK was a pew sitter. He is not known to have conducted Sunday School classes, he was not ordained, he was not an Elder or a Deacon that anyone is aware of, he attended church like a lot of people do, but comparing him to Romney?
Romney was raised by a fourth/fifth generation Mormon family. He father was a Stake President, his father's cousin was an Apostle, so he was indoctrinated every Sunday, and every day at home.
Romney is ordained. Romney attended Seminary. Romney went on a 30 month missionary assignment. Romney was a Bishop and Stake President.
Comparing JFK and the Pope question with Romney and the Utah mystic prophet can't be compared.
Romney can't help but bring his church's morals, philosophy and beliefs to the Oval Office.
Do we want a cultist in the White House?
NoMormonInWhiteHouse blogspot com
a one hour video will teach you what most mormons do not know and are not allowed to discuss if they do know.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LXNeMYwEaIQ&feature=related
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OhzuEHPPZA0 (temple architecture video)
http://www.mazeministry.com/resources/books/doombook/doomtext/20architecture.htm (temple architecture and so much more written)
The question that I wrestle with personally is why our LDS leadership have been evasive about the truths in our faith that are the most important, at least to me, namely exaltation.
Inside the LDS Church, Gordon Hinckley was very clear about what we believe: "On the other hand, the whole design of the gospel is to lead us onward and upward to greater achievement, even, eventually, to godhood. This great possibility was enunciated by the Prophet Joseph Smith in the King Follet sermon; and emphasized by President Lorenzo Snow. It is this grand and incomparable concept: As God now is, man may become!"
However, when speaking to the press in 1997, Gordon Hinckley risked the appearance of equivocation. Why is it that even some of our leaders are evasive on this truth: "As man is, God once was; As God is, man may be."
Joseph Smith taught that: "First, God himself, who sits enthroned in yonder heaven, is a man like one of you. That is the great secret." "You have got to learn how to be Gods yourselves, and to be kings and priests to God, the same as all Gods have done before you". And his teaching is indeed confirmed by Doctrine and Covenants 132:20.
We believe, based on Joseph Smith's revelations, that God the Father was not always a God, but was a man before he was exalted to godhood. Why is it that some of us seem embarrassed about that? I do not see that as something to be embarrassed about, but rather, an encouragement. For if God the Father was once a man, and was exalted to become a God, so too, I may be exalted to become a God.
So why not proclaim this truth instead of hiding it?
__________________________________________
"As man is, God once was; As God is, man may be."
Read through the posts in this news string and you can ascertain some of the hypnotism or amimal magnatism it produces.
God is not, and never was man:
"God [is] not a man, that he should lie; neither the son of man, that he should repent: hath he said, and shall he not do [it]? or hath he spoken, and shall he not make it good?" (Numbers 23:19)
"God forbid: yea, let God be true, but every man a liar; as it is written, That thou mightest be justified in thy sayings, and mightest overcome when thou art judged." (Romans 3:4)
"God [is] a Spirit: and they that worship him must worship [him] in spirit and in truth." (John 4:24)
"For [as] the heavens are higher than the earth, so are my ways higher than your ways, and my thoughts than your thoughts." (Isaiah 55:9)
"But one in a certain place testified, saying, What is man, that thou art mindful of him? or the son of man, that thou visitest him?" (Hebrews 2:6)
"For [he is] not a man, as I [am, that] I should answer him, [and] we should come together in judgment." (Job 9:32)
Man who claims he will be "like God" (or "a God") is the spirit of anti-christ who will be destroyed:
"Wilt thou yet say before him that slayeth thee, I [am] God? but thou [shalt be] a man, and no God, in the hand of him that slayeth thee." (Ezekiel 28:9)
"Let no man deceive you by any means: for [that day shall not come], except there come a falling away first, and that man of sin be revealed, the son of perdition; Who opposeth and exalteth himself above all that is called God, or that is worshipped; so that he as God sitteth in the temple of God, shewing himself that he is God." (2 Thessalonians 2:3-4)
The very things the Bible warns against are the things the Mormons believe. "Another Jesus" was created by the preaching of a "false angel" (Satan as an angel of light):
Galatians 1
6 I marvel that ye are so soon removed from him that called you into the grace of Christ unto another gospel:
7 Which is not another; but there be some that trouble you, and would pervert the gospel of Christ.
8 But though we, or an angel from heaven, preach any other gospel unto you than that which we have preached unto you, let him be accursed.
9 As we said before, so say I now again, If any [man] preach any other gospel unto you than that ye have received, let him be accursed.
2 Corinthians 11
3 But I fear, lest by any means, as the serpent beguiled Eve through his subtilty, so your minds should be corrupted from the simplicity that is in Christ.
4 For if he that cometh preacheth another Jesus, whom we have not preached, or [if] ye receive another spirit, which ye have not received, or another gospel, which ye have not accepted, ye might well bear with [him].
The reason Mormon's believe they have "more" truth than the Bible is because they have additional books, a "wider authority" that structures their religion. As such, they reinterpret the Bible in light of the "newer" authority brought to them through Joseph Smith and his "visions of angels." This is how deception works -- they build up an entire system of thought based on some authority "in addition to" the Bible that causes them to reinterpret the Bible with greater weight on the "new" revelation. That's why they reinterpret the verses above to "mean something else" than what they say. They will have an answer for every verse I could possibly quote because they are "reinterpreted" by their "new and improved" revelation that causes them to reject the Bible alone as the sole Authority.
So, Mormons effectively deny the warning God gives at the close of the Bible:
Revelation 22
18 For I testify unto every man that heareth the words of the prophecy of this book, If any man shall add unto these things, God shall add unto him the plagues that are written in this book:
19 And if any man shall take away from the words of the book of this prophecy, God shall take away his part out of the book of life, and out of the holy city, and [from] the things which are written in this book.
This book is *not* just the book of Revelation, but the Bible ...
"Then said I, Lo, I come: in the volume of the book [it is] written of me," (Psalm 40:7)
"Then said I, Lo, I come (in the volume of the book it is written of me,) to do thy will, O God." (Hebrews 10:7)
Jesus prayed unto His Father. Hebrews chap verse 3 Christ is like unto the Father. The Father is a glorified being
These all point to human characteristics