No Iron in Romney’s Velvet Glove
Former Massachusetts Governor Mitt Romney, hoping to settle the minds of GOP primary voters about his Mormon faith, stood before an audience comprised predominately (we may presume) of Christian Conservatives and proceeded to defeat himself in the 2008 general election.
In a speech that some conservatives are calling a masterpiece, Romney sounded several excellent notes and a few pleasantly banal ones before he fell perilously out of key.
While hardly Reaganesque, Gov. Romney managed to nicely characterize the positive aspects of many different religions, and to serve up reminders about American tolerance, liberty and basic freedoms that the citizenry have not been treated to since President Bush’s memorable and excellent speech to the joint houses of congress, following the attacks of 9/11. Romney’s “Americans acknowledge that liberty is a gift of God, and not an indulgence of government” could have come out of the pen of Michael Gerson and the mouth of George W. Bush.
Romney inserted a perfunctory assurance that just as John F. Kennedy managed to be faithful to his church without becoming the tool of Rome in the Oval Office, he, Romney, would maintain fidelity to the faith of his fathers while sparing the nation the concerns of Salt Lake City. That was all very nice, but the truth is – in an age where voters are media-and-spin savvy, and where every political move is increasingly examined less for its content than its calculation – Romney probably did very little to appease the suspicions of some. His speech should be looked at as a pre-emptive strike, meant to deflect direct or penetrating questions about what he believes by making the whole matter of a candidate’s religion “off-limits” to the press and the opposition. It is doubtful that his vague generalities will accomplish that, particularly when the press and the Democrats have some time, yet, to introduce suspicion and doubt into the minds of voters
As far back as 2005, blogger Betsy Newmark was sounding the warning bell on Romney’s difficulties:
I have had a vision of what would happen if Romney were the Republican candidate. No one would attack him explicitly on his religion. That would be too crass. Instead, the media would run human interest stories on the history of the Mormon church, warts and all. We’d read again about Joseph Smith getting the word from the Angel Moroni with the Book of Mormon on golden plates. We’d learn about the persecution suffered by the early Mormons and the assassination of Joseph Smith and how Brigham Young led the Mormons across the country to Utah. Vivid stories of the Mountain Meadow Massacre would appear on the History Channel. The history of Mormons and polygamy would be introduced in segments on the evening news as well as the fact that the Mormons allowed black ministers only in 1978 and women in 1984. Newsweek and Time would have cover stories looking at the tenets of the Mormon religion with special attention to baptism of dead ancestors, their lack of belief in the Trinity, their conviction that God has a physical body, and their condemnation of homosexuality.
Newmark was prescient. CNN managed to split-screen Romney so that even as he sought to re-assure voters, those watching were being treated to “red-meat -to-the-Evangelicals” (and fodder-for-the-secularists) informational LDS “church history” sidebars reading,
· Joseph Smith was killed by a mob in 1844
· Mormons believe the Book of Mormon is the word of God
· They accept the Bible as scripture but not as final authority
· Smith claimed God told him Mormons should have more than one wife
· For years Mormon Church did not admit blacks to the priesthood
I’m sure that, given time, someone at CNN would have dug up the fact that Mormons – in opposition to Christian scripture – believe that marriages exist in heaven and throughout eternity, and thrown that out there to upset Evangelical Christians. The press knows it need not examine the LDS church too closely until such time as Romney seals the nomination – but CNN’s display came off like a warning shot across a bow. Romney has not taken his religion off the table.
Mitt Romney is an unexciting orator, but he does have an assured manner, so I suspect he did manage to shore up his support among Republicans and religious Democrats in a general way because there was little there to offend any person of faith. Really, the speech was one-part boilerplate, one-part salesmanship and too-many-parts comfortable, “applaud-here” clich√©.
However the speech was not wholly innocuous. If Romney does manage to become the GOP nominee for president, this will follow him around like a Kindergarten report card:
You can be certain of this: any believer in religious freedom, any person who has knelt in prayer to the Almighty, has a friend and ally in me. And so it is for hundreds of millions of our countrymen: we do not insist on a single strain of religion – rather, we welcome our nation’s symphony of faith.
I believe what he meant to say there, was, “we do not insist on a single strain of religion – or indeed the embrasure of any religion at all – we welcome the dance of faith and reason.” Not saying it was a big mistake.
It’s true that the speech was intended for believers, but a presidential candidate must always – even in the earliest moments of his declared candidacy – bear in mind that his every utterance is being heard and measured by a broad swath of humanity, and that he is speaking not to a focus group, or a base, or a troubling voting bloc, but to a whole nation of individuals. And every voter is listening to hear one thing in particular: will you be my president, too, or only theirs?
http://www.saintsalive.org/mormonism/israel_mormonism.htm
Mormon theology is itself an ancillary, though less tangible issue. Mormons
see themselves as Jews of the tribe of Ephraim, one of the tribes of Joseph,
whereas Jews are thought by them to be of the descendants of Judah. This
means that Mormons hold themselves as coequal in status to “other Jews,”
which is why to them all non-Mormons except Jews are “gentiles.”
Mormon’s believe Native Americans are Jews. http://tinyurl.com/27b7sb
One of the 13 articles of faith #10 We believe in the literal gathering of
Israel and in the restoration of the Ten Tribes; that Zion (the New
Jerusalem) will be built upon the American continent; that Christ will reign
personally upon the earth; and, that the earth will be renewed and receive
its paradisiacal glory.
Mormons view humans as ultimately spirits, who lived with God as spirits
before they were born on earth. God chose a specific time and place for each
spirit to come to earth to receive a physical body.
The Restoration of the Priesthood http://tinyurl.com/2fs6b4
Jesus Christ as Chief Editor of The Book of Mormon
http://www.cumorah.com/bookofmormon.html
LDS Church teaches that God the Father was once a man and was exalted to Godhood. God (and his heavenly Wife)
begat billions of spirit children, the firstborn of whom was Jesus. Lucifer was the leader of God’s rebellious spirit
children. Those spirits who did not rebel become human beings in order to begin process potentially leading to exaltation
to Godhood.
Death and Afterlife Joseph Smith also taught that Mormon families can live together forever in heaven
if they are “sealed” through special temple ceremonies. The rest of us are what?
And Romney wants to be President, Priesthood, and Godhood?
Harry,
I am not quit sure what you are intending with your post. If it is to educate people on the tenets of LDS theology you have done a poor job.
I also find it funny how people try to apply reason to religion. Religion is based on faith.
I mean come on. To a rational reason thinking person the crossing of the Red Sea sounds like a fantasy. Along with loading 2 animals of every kind in a big boat to avoid a global flood. It sounds crazy that a man was hung on a cross and then came back from the dead three days later. And conveniently appeared only to his believers.
This author is wrong. Mitt Romney is not setting up an “off limits” wall regarding religion. In almost every interview since his campaign began, he is asked to explain Mormon doctrines. Mitt responds with the core beliefs of his religion and the values he gets from them. As far as when he is asked “penetrating questions”, yes Mitt does not take that bait. And rightfully so. The people who ask those penetrating questions want to drag him into a theological debate. A political campaign is not an appropriate time to tackle such a huge subject as religious doctrines and their history. People asking him to do it are stupid and rude.
The media has already developed the “warts” when writing about Mitt and his Mormon religion. In most articles, you can’t read one without seeing the word “cult” used half a dozen times. I expect that to continue ad nauseam.
Also the Mountain Meadow Massacre has been aired on The History Channel. Hollywood released a film called “September Dawn” this summer about the same event. PBS’ American Experience Frontline series aired The Mormons early this year as well, which covered a big “wart” Warren Jeffs, who is apart of a splinter LDS group.
And as the writer points out, CNN has indeed displayed how they will treat a Mitt Romney GOP nomination. But those who want to believe CNN after their horrendous journalistic malpractice in the YouTube debate aren’t interested in intellectual honesty anyway.
As an agnostic, Mitt Romney reminds me what I like about religion. Mitt has my vote for many reasons and this is one of them.
Leaving Mitt, Mormonism and the greater culture unsettled. Why has no Romney ever served in the military for, at least, 150 years? What’s up with that?
There was one Mountain Meadow Massacre launched by a local leader under a time of great duress. (When has the US government marched on any other religious body?) In spite of the circumstances it was inexcusable and the guilty paid to one degree or another.
It makes me wonder how many times a lynching may have been launched by the local Southern Baptist or evangelical preacher.
We all have a bit of horror somewhere in our pasts. Mercifully for most, it is forgotten. Regrettably for some it is hurled in their faces ad nauseum ad infinitum.
The three biggest things that Americans should fear are Islamism, socialism and Calvinism. Calvinists have a gloss of Christianity but they despise freedom just like Socialists and Islamists. A significant percentage of those who attack Mormonism are, in fact, Calvinists to one degree or another and at their core they despise any theologically founded belief in freedom.
Really?
Are any other religions on your bad list?
The Presbyterians are a lot like the Calvinists, are they on the bad list too?
What about agnostics and atheists?
There are too few Presbyterians to worry about it.
I think you are reading too much into this. His speech was notable mainly for saying nothing new — which is a good thing. He placed himself firmly in the American tradition of a private faith informing a public life. He emphasized the common moral values the we, as Americans, share regardless of the specifics of our various faiths. He explicitly disavowed the possibility of answering, as President, to his religious hierarchy. I would say that the reason he did not (and apparently does not) talk much about Mormonism is because he is a politician, not a missionary. Those who keep questioning him on his religion are the ones doing the damage. Those who believe that Mr. Romney’s religion is relevant to his candidacy have a duty in justice to explain why they believe this. Absent this explanation, I will not assume that these questions are relevant just because “many people” are asking them.
I don’t care about his religion, it’s his membership in the billionaire club which bothers me.
Who needs another Schwarzenegger or Bloomberg to nanny state this country to death.
You go, Iceworm!!
Presbyterians ARE Calvinists. The religion was founded in Scotland by John Knox, a follower of Calvin. And, yes, there are now too few to worry about. But if you insist on being paranoid about Calvinists, you can always worry about the Dutch Reform Church. I hear they are making a comeback somehwere in the wilds of Western Michigan.