December 6th, 2007 at 11:29 pm
AP has the full text (link dead) of Mitt Romney’s speech.
Religion-wise, I wonder if Gov. Romney’s belief that Jesus is THE son of God rather than A son of God rattled a few Mormon nerves, but other than that, he appeals to the you-plug-it-in God of American Civil Religion. I would replace “religion” with “morality” in his “Freedom requires religion” paragraph, just to satisfy those who believe there is morality apart from religion.
I would have liked to have seen how the Mormon belief that Native Americans were lost tribes of Israel would have manifested itself politically, but Romney seems to have distanced himself from that philosophy with his remarks that he will serve the office.
I do think Americans have a common historical current of morality. Even Jefferson kept the moral statutes of God when he ripped Jesus’s miracles out of his Bible, and I think Romney is valid to appeal to that historical morality. I also find it effective that he sets that against the empty European state-churches and the violent jihadists.
If he would fulfill his promise of fulfilling the office without dictates from Mormon leaders, I do not think Romney’s Mormonism is criteria for voting against him. There are other reasons that don’t have anything to do with Mormonism: state-sponsored universal health care in Massachusetts, subsidies for agriculture and job-training, preferential hiring of people in terms of gender and race, etc.
The Third Moment has more commentary.
December 7th, 2007 at 11:34 am
Wasn’t it George Washington who said there is no morality apart from religion?
Mormons are very hard to pin down on what they believe. It’s disturbing.
December 7th, 2007 at 1:14 pm
I really liked that ABC hit piece last night on Christian “bigots” who hate the US Constitution when they question Mr. Romney about Mormonism.
December 8th, 2007 at 3:06 pm
If you don’t mind me posting the link, I interact a bit here with some of the policy implications of parts of the Book of Mormon.
Toward the end of the post, I also discuss why Romney’s claim that inquiring into the political implications of Mormon beliefs violates the “religious test” provision of the U.S. Constitution is just downright ignorant, if not disingenuous.
December 8th, 2007 at 4:20 pm
Jim, I had already linked you on the post! Thanks for the additional summary.
December 8th, 2007 at 9:40 pm
Gee, I “thought” I read your post carefully. Just goes to show. Sorry for the redundancy.
December 9th, 2007 at 11:42 pm
Dan,
I went to college in a small town in Utah, and I don’t think Mormons have a problem with saying that Jesus is the only “begotten” son of God. Basically they would say that Jesus is our oldest spirit brother who concocted the plan for our salvation that would give the Father the most glory, as opposed to Lucifer’s plan…but Christ is the ONLY one that God was responsible for not only as a spirit child, but for his manifestation in the flesh, “overshadowing Mary” being considered a euphemism for having sex with her (or as one told me…it is possible to get pregnant by being in the vicinity and not having full penetration.
Honestly, there is nothing in the Apostles Creed or the Nicene Creed that they couldn’t redefine into their theology.
My biggest issue with Romney’s Mormonism is that the LDS church president had a prophecy over 20 years ago ordering the faithful to keep a 3 year food store (and if you Google this, you can find lots of discussion about faithfully keeping this and practical advice for doing so). The prophecy stated that eventually our government was going to collapse and because only the LDS Church was prepared for it, our gov’t will turn to them to take over. This may not influence Romney’s desire for the presidency at all seeing how really, LDS theology and practice can look very different and far less stringent outside of Utah (Utah Mormons often consider non-Utah Mormons to be outsiders, and I’ve known many who come from outside the state who can’t believe how serious it is there and how much it permeates daily life). However, it does show that the LDS Church does have their eyes on it, and I am sure they would not hesitate to exercise whatever power possible over a Mormon that holds that office.
In my lifetime, Mormons would have bristled at being called Christian. Over the last 30 years, they have moved far closer to it, even embacing the symbol of the fish (ichthus). When I was in Utah, they still were very opposed to the symbol of the cross or the crucifix. They believe that the blood Jesus shed at Gethsemene was where He atoned for our sins, not on the cross. I frequently heard “if a robber shot your brother with a gun, would you go around with a gun pendant around your neck?” My pastor did predict that in their desire to appear Christian, they would eventually embrace the symbol of the cross.
December 14th, 2007 at 9:46 am
Romney’s belief that Jesus is THE son of God rather than A son of God rattled a few Mormon nerves,
I don’t think so. As noted by RPW, Jesus is ‘A’ son of their god and also ‘THE’ primary son of their god. I have similar experiences as RPW with regard to living in Utah, and I can corroborate his statements.
>>>
With regard to Romney’s as president, the Irony is he is probably the most truly pro-Religious candidate of all of them (both GOP and Dem). Huckabee is ordained, but his voting record is quite politically correct on a number of issues. The other GOP candidates are mostly secular-neutral, while the Dem candidates are mostly all secular-leftwing socialists (or in Hillary’s case, a Marxist).
What I say is not intended to make Romney look good, but to reflect on what the other candidates represent in comparison. And it ain’t a pretty picture.