Christopher Hitchens seems to have scuffed his rep up quite a bit in the last six years (not that he seems to care), but that doesn’t mean he can’t still string together a few cogent thoughts. In his most recent Slate piece he talks about Mitt Romney’s refusal to answer questions about his Mormon faith.
Sen. Robert Byrd, D-W.Va., has had to be asked about his long-ago membership of the Ku Klux Klan (which, I would remind you, is also a Protestant Christian identity organization), and he was only a fiddle-playing member, not a Grand Kleagle or whatever the hell it is. Why should Romney not be made to give an account of himself? A black candidate with ties to Louis Farrakhan could expect questions about his faith in the existence of the mad scientist Yakub, creator of the white race, or in the orbiting mother ship visited by the head of the Nation of Islam. What gives Romney an exemption?….His family is, and has been for generations, part of the dynastic leadership of the mad cult invented by the convicted fraud Joseph Smith. It is not just legitimate that he be asked about the beliefs that he has not just held, but has caused to be spread and caused to be inculcated into children. It is essential. Here is the most salient reason: Until 1978, the so-called Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints was an officially racist organization. Mitt Romney was an adult in 1978. We need to know how he justified this to himself, and we need to hear his self-criticism, if he should chance to have one.
I would add that were an Agnostic or Athiest running for office there would be no end to questions regarding their personal beliefs. I see Romney’s side. A Christian can run for office with nary a comment about the fantastical and contradictory stories that form the foundation of their history. It’s only the fact that not enough dust has collected on the wild (and demonstrably, archaeologically false) claims of Mormonism that brings it under such intense scrutiny. I would offer that this should justify more questions for all candidates regarding the depth and details of their religious beliefs, not less for Romney. Candidates want to wear their religion as a badge of morality, an indicator that they are right thinking family folk, as if these qualities could not be attributed to individuals absent of religion. It’s only at moments like the one in the Republican debate earlier this year when candidates were asked to raise their hands if they didn’t believe in evolution, that we see how blinding their faith can be. Whether you’re religious or not, I think we’d benefit from more moments where candidates had to articulate what they actually believed, rather than merely make appearances in front of churches and collect the associated votes.
November 28, 2007 at 6:00 am
The Church of Jesus Christ (LDS) is often accused by Evangelical pastors of not believing in Christ and, therefore, not being a Christian religion. This article http://mormonsarechristian.blogspot.com/ helps to clarify such misconceptions by examining early Christianity’s comprehension of baptism, the Godhead, the deity of Jesus Christ and His Atonement.
The Church of Jesus Christ (LDS) adheres more closely to First Century Christianity and the New Testament than any other denomination. Harper’s Bible Dictionary entry on the Trinity says “the formal doctrine of the Trinity as it was defined by the great church councils of the fourth and fifth centuries is not to be found in the New Testament.”
Perhaps the reason the pastors denigrate the Church of Jesus Christ (LDS) is to protect their flock (and their livelihood).