PAUL writes:

Thank you for your tireless efforts against liberalism.

Traditionalists should vote for Obama if the election is close. If Romney is expected to win, traditionalists should stay home. Before the demographics destroy America, there needs to be a political war that sees traditionalists left with something. Romney is a spineless manager: no more, no less. Obama will serve up the revolution.

Romney has no regard for Western Civilization, considering he is a non-Christian Mormon. So as long as he perceives his cult will be protected, he could care less for the West. He is fully on board with bringing in immigrants, as long as many of them support Mormonism. Brigham Young, a mass murderer, is one of his heroes. Can anyone imagine Jesus or his disciples being in favor of mass murder?

                                      — Comments —

William Jas writes:

Paul should have stopped at “Romney is a spineless manager: no more, no less” instead of trying to make him out to be a spineless manager who is somehow also a religious zealot who sympathizes with mass murderers! I assume the allusion is to Brigham Young’s possible role in the Mountain Meadows Massacre, but it’s a cheap shot. Plenty of mainstream religions have murder in their history as well. One could with equal justice characterize Moses and Elijah as mass murderers (of the Midianites and the priests of Baal, respectively), though Jesus and his disciples seem to have thought pretty highly of them.

The bit about Mormons having no regard for the West is equally silly, given that Mormonism was founded in America, views America as the promised land, and views the Constitution as a divinely inspired document. And, whatever you may think of Mormonism’s heretical theology, there’s no denying that it’s much more anti-liberal than most “mainline” Christian denominations.

Laura writes:

I basically agree with what William says about Romney’s Mormonism as it pertains to the presidency, which is not to say I am enthusiastic about Romney. Furthermore, Obama is intensely hostile to Christian America.

Catherine H. writes:

I cannot agree with Paul’s reasoning regarding traditionalists voting for Obama, as such an act would be material cooperation with evil at the least. Put in simple terms, the ends do not justify the means. Granting that the collapse of current civilization would be a good (with the presumption that a better one would rise in its place), we cannot expect it as an immediate or even eventual result of Obama’s election. I have no doubt that this civilization will fall soon, but I am content to leave the event in God’s hands; it is foolish to attempt to precipitate matters. But perhaps Paul was being facetious?

I also disagree vigorously with one of Mr. Jas’ assertions, that “one could with equal justice characterize Moses and Elijah as mass murderers.” In this, as in other instances such as the effort to expunge the Canaanites from their land, the Jews were commanded by God to do as they did. There is a fundamental difference between (pre-Christian) Judaism and Christianity, and other religions of any age: the former are informed by the Truth and are therefore right, while the latter are wrong.

Regarding Mormonism specifically, I think Mr. Jas may be misunderstanding Paul’s position (but perhaps I am, as well.) The “West” Mr. Jas refers to is not the “West” that Paul has in mind. I took Paul to mean that because Mormonism denies Christ’s unique position as one of the three Divine Persons, it has no affinity with traditional Christianity, and therefore no affinity with traditional Western civilization (meaning the Greco-Roman culture informed by the Christian religion that once united the Western world). The fact that Mormonism is so closely tied to America rather speaks against its place in Western civilization than for it; America was founded on a liberal revolt from everything traditional Christian cultures once upheld.

The “anti-liberal” attributes of Mormonism Mr. Jas refers to are, I assume, such things as the emphasis on the importance of family, modest dress, and some measure of physical restraint (i.e. the avoidance of caffeine). These practices do not indicate true intrinsic conservatism, anymore than the burqas of Islam indicate the “conservative” nature of that religion. Both religions, despite a few superficially “conservative” trappings, are inherently opposed to traditional Western civilization and must be regarded as enemies.

Laura writes:

On the one hand, Catherine is prepared to vote for Romney, not because she endorses his Mormonism or considers him an ideal candidate, but because Obama is so destructive. On the other hand, she recognizes that Mormonism is utterly false, based on outlandish theology and opposed to the deepest principles of Western civilization even though, as William states, it is a thoroughly American phenomenon that does not reject our political traditions.

This is a balanced and thoughtful view.

Romney’s Mormonism is a serious issue but Romney is not a man of deep religious conviction.

Strong Man writes:

Paul’s post was so full of false and misleading information as to expose him as absolutely uneducated and uninformed. On the murder accusation, even if Paul was trying to refer to the Mountain Meadows incident, historians widely agree that there is no evidence linking Brigham Young to the incident. It occurred several days journey from Brigham Young’s location. After the incident, Brigham Young cooperated fully with the legal authorities in prosecuting those involved, and the Church member most directly responsible was executed.

The episode must also be understood in context with a law in Missourri that legalized murder of all Mormons that remained on the books until the 1970s. In 1846, Mormons were driven from their homes in the dead of winter resulting in countless deaths–while legal authorities turned their heads with no support for law and order. At the time of the incident in 1857, 1500 US troops were camped in Utah and tensions and nervousness was extremely high among people who had been driven from their homes numerous times.

Finally, suggesting Mormons aren’t Christian is offensive and makes no sense. The name of the church is “The Church of Jesus Christ of latter-day Saints,” and our central claim is to be the re-established original Christian Church. Most early converts joined because they found Mormonism to most closely match their study of the Bible.

We believe everything the Bible says about the nature of God and Christ, and hold fast to the New Testament as a key scripture on the subject. More than 1/2 of all the verses in The Book of Mormon contain references to Jesus Christ–all of which support and match New Testament teachings. We do not endorse confusing later creeds established primarily as a political compromise to maintain unity and centralize power for the Roman Emporer.

Because confusion on this remains prevalent, I created a blog with posts including numerous scriptures from the Bible and Book of Mormon about our beliefs in Jesus Christ.

Thank you for your support of the idea that Mormons are extremely pro-American. We remain famously so, and so does Romney. The largest fireworks show in the country on July 4th is in Provo, Utah. Mormons are extremely prevalent in the U.S. military today. We believe America was established with Gods’ help and that the constitution is inspired.

Romney may be strongest as a business consultant, but I see no evidence in anything in his life to support the idea that he is not committed to his own faith–I would be genuinely interested in your source for this.

Thank you, though for your generally good work on your blog!

Laura writes:

Thank you for writing.

Just for clarification, I never said Mormons are “extremely pro-American.” Mormons are very patriotic and often good and responsible citizens, but their cultural traditions and beliefs are too removed from the mainstream for me to characterize them as “extremely pro-American.”

Also, I cannot comment on the Mountain Meadows incident as I do not know enough about it.

While Mormonism embraces elements of Christianity, it also embraces elements of polytheistic paganism, Judaism and occultism. Without Christianity and Jesus Christ, Mormonism would not exist, in the same way that without Christianity and Jesus Christ, Islamic beliefs would not exist. However, the premises of Mormonism, resting as they do on unfounded and very bizarre historical events which involve golden tablets protected by a “white salamander,” an unknown language called “reformed Egyptian, Jewish tribes in America and revelations which contain logical and historical errors, are too radically different from orthodox Christianity to consider Mormonism Christian. Mormons have taught that matter is eternal, that marriage also lasts beyond this life, that there is more than one God and that Jesus was a polygamist.

As far as the depth of Romney’s beliefs, he was quoted in Hugh Hewitt’s A Mormon in the White House? as saying, “To understand my faith, people should look at me and my home and how we live. Of course, doctrines and theology are different, church to church, but what my church teaches is evidenced by what I have become and what my family has become.” [This quote comes from Lyle Arnold’s piece on Mormonism.]

 This is tantamount to saying, “The Church of Latter Day Saints is me.” Those are not the words of a man of deeply held convictions. All worldviews are founded on beliefs and one can surely not understand Mormonism by simply looking at the way Romney lives.

As far as the issue of his candidacy, I would reluctantly vote for Romney, but I do not believe he represents any great turnaround for this country and I definitely consider his Mormon beliefs a disturbing facet of his candidacy.

Cynthia Tarnasky writes:

I believe that a lot of the controversy over whether Mormons are Christians come from talking past each other a bit. It is true that Mormons do not claim to be direct inheritors of historical Christianity, and so if your definition of Christian includes that, we are excluded. But if you define “Christian” to mean a follower of Jesus Christ who accepts him as the Divine son of God, and the Savior of mankind, we most definitely fit that description. Which is why Mormons are offended when people say we are not Christian.

I agree with what you said about the quote from Romney making him sound less than serious. It’s out of context, so I can’t speak authoritatively, but I would assume he was mainly speaking of his own faith (ie, his willingness to follow the tenets of a faith). Also, Mormons are prone to make the argument from Matthew 7:18 about the good fruit, which is probably also what he was doing here. I think you would find that Mormons in general study their own theology in more depth than most mainstream Christians, but are not too likely to know a whole lot about mainstream theology and how it differs.

In tangential reference to your comments about the sources of LDS theology, I would be interested to know more about how historical Christianity views God’s purposes for pre-Christian Judaism (why were they the ‘chosen people’, purposes of sacrifices and temple worship, and all that), but clearly that is not relevant to this thread. Thank you for listening.

William Jas writes:

The “white salamander” story you refer to is pure fiction, cooked up by apostate Mormon Mark Hofmann, who is currently serving a life sentence for forging historical documents (including the “salamander letter”) and for two murders committed to cover up his forgeries.

But of course the salamander isn’t really the point. It’s obvious that, salamander or no salamander, Mormon beliefs differ in many fundamental ways from those of Catholics and Protestants. If “Christian” means believing in the New Testament and worshiping Jesus Christ, then Mormons are obviously Christian. If it means subscribing to essentially the same religion as Catholics and Protestants, then they are obviously not. I would say that Mormonism is to Christianity what Christianity is to Judaism — each originated as a sect of, and saw itself as the fulfillment of, the older faith, but each is still sufficiently different to be considered a different religion.

(In the interest of full disclosure, I should probably mention that I am myself an apostate Mormon. I was raised in the faith and still hold it in high regard though I no longer believe it to be the truth.)

Catherine H. writes:

I suppose it’s unsurprising that sects such as Mormonism wish to re-define Christianity in order to shoehorn themselves within its boundaries: it’s a common liberal practice to seek to conform reality to one’s desires, rather than to conform one’s desires to reality. Nevertheless, true Christianity requires adherence to the understanding of Christ as promulgated by Christ Himself, and as historically and traditionally taught by His Holy Church. It is not enough for other religions to say that they have their own understanding of Christ and his teachings, and that this new understanding must be accepted under the umbrella of Christianity.

Catherine adds:

I forgot to add that if Cynthia Tarnasky genuinely wants to look into an orthodox view of the relationship of modern Jews and Judaism with the Catholic Church, and especially their role in the end times, I recommend Roy Schoeman’s book Salvation is from the Jews. It is an intriguing and fascinating account from a Jew who converted to Catholicism: his conversion makes an amazing story as well.

Jesse Powell writes:

Laura said “I definitely consider his [Romney’s] Mormon beliefs a disturbing facet of his candidacy.”

How religion has factored into the Republican primaries is very interesting. Santorum who is a staunch Catholic got more support from Evangelical voters than he did from his fellow Catholics and Romney who comes from the extreme minority religion of Mormonism is the one who is likely to win the Republican nomination. It seems in general Mormons are much more powerful in Republican politics than their demographic numbers would predict.

Laura characterizes Romney’s Mormonism as “disturbing” but I tend to view it as encouraging. Mormons have the reputation of being a strongly conservative religion that produces good family outcomes. This is certainly true with the Romney family. I think that Mormonism has a feel good aura surrounding it based on its reputation for strong family life and that this is why Mormons are so strong in Republican politics in spite of their small numbers.

Of course Mormons are not mainstream and their religion is significantly different from the Protestant and Catholic Christianity that the history of American culture is based on. However, Mormonism is better than mainline Christianity in terms of family life today. Putting Mormons on a pedestal and anointing them our leaders is a way of honoring and seeking to promote the virtues of conservative religious practice.

This is encouraging if one focuses on the importance of reestablishing conservative religious practices and it is “disturbing” if one focuses on how this indicates the decline of the relative moral standing of mainline Christianity.

 Laura writes:

Romney is not a social conservative. Jesse is suggesting that people are voting for him because of Mormonism’s social conservatism, but that is not true. His family’s wholesomeness may be attractive to some voters but ironically the people to whom this image would appeal the most – social conservatives – are not enthusiastic about him, as we see from the large Evangelical vote for Santorum.

Jeff writes:

It is disturbing in a nation of three hundred million people that Obama or Romney may be the only options available to voters. Pity we couldn’t do better. Either way I think our nation is beyond the point of no return.

Perhaps one of your Mormon readers could explain what was left undone in the Christian Gospel that is resolved by Mormonism. Christians believe Jesus is the fulfillment of scripture. There are no Christian “Prophets” after Jesus Christ because no further revelation or testament is needed. However, the Book of Mormon claims to be just that, another testament.

Please follow and like us: