Posted on 01/08/2008 8:16:22 AM PST by jdm
Bloggers had speculated on the actual subject of a series of e-mails from a publicist breathlessly informing us of a "Swift-boating" on a major presidential candidate, complete with documentation and hard evidence. Some thought it might target Hillary Clinton, some John Edwards, but the plurality went with Mitt Romney -- and that turned out to be the correct answer. Revelation Press apparently wants to conduct the Klan's 1928 anti-Catholic campaign against Al Smith, updated for eight decades later, at least according to the e-mail I received:
"Should Romney become U.S. President," Moody explained, "his oaths create an inevitable conflict of interest. Just as an Army private is not free to question his General's orders &-- and does so only at the risk of a dishonorable discharge -- Mormons such as Mitt Romney question their Living Prophet's revelations and edicts only at risk of excommunication. This penalty is unthinkable to any faithful Mormon -- and in Romney's December 6th speech, he swore to remain faithful to his religion.
"As Noah Feldman pointed out," Moody pointed out, "since the days of founding Prophet Joseph Smith, Mormons have held their secrets close -- including their 'White Horse Prophecy:' one day a Mormon leader will literally ride in to save the U.S. Constitution -- and to transform America into the base for the institution of a world-wide Mormon theocracy. Since his college days, when I was Mitt's fraternity brother at Brigham Young University," Moody said, "Mitt's made it clear to his intimates that he was pre-ordained to fulfill this prophecy, to become the Mormon President who would save our Constitution and transform America as Joseph Smith prophesied.
We've seen this crap before, especially those Roman Catholics among us. As I noted above, it played right out of the Ku Klux Klan's playbook in the 1928 presidential election, and even came up during John Kennedy's campaign in 1960. The argument goes that a man who professes allegiance to a church, especially one with a hierarchy, cannot "serve two masters" and therefore cannot serve the Constitution. America heard a lot of nonsense about Papal infallibility and how the Pope cannot be defied on any matter -- all of which was nonsense then, and is still today.
I had to laugh at this press release, though, as it is so badly written. Take for example this passage: "As Noah Feldman pointed out," Moody pointed out, ... That's a lot of pointing in a short space of time. Did someone lose their Roget's Thesaurus, or can we presume that this is indicative of the literary quality of Revelation's stable of authors?
For the record, Mormons, Catholics, and Anglicans have no trouble separating the spiritual from the temporal. If Noah Feldmans' hypothesis was true, then we couldn't be trusted in the military, either. Who knows when the Pope or the Mormon's leader would issue contravening orders, preferably through secret handshakes or subliminal broadcast from the Temple? We also couldn't be trusted as governors -- never mind Mitt's failure to turn Massachusetts into East Utah, or his father's failure to convert Michigan residents into good Mormons.
Catholic and Mormon politicians have given this nation splendid public service, and given no hint of disloyalty or even confused priorities between their public responsibilities and their religious beliefs. People like Feldman want to create the kinds of sectarian animosities that have riven other democracies. They should be rejected, and then aggressively ignored.
Yes, this is a real question, I have never heard this before. It seems very strange that a person would not be allowed their own thoughts without fear.
I’m just curious whether Mormons believe the church was wrong when it refused to ordain blacks prior to 1979.
If a “magic Negro” like B. Hussain Obama can be the Dumbocrat nominee with his background in the “Trinity Church” (check its website) then a Mormon candidate should pass thru in a breeze./IMHO!
Unlike the Huckster, candidate of the religious left, who will call anyone Unchristian who doesn't go along with his political agenda.
Or pardon convicted murderers if they "find Jesus." Even Forrest Gumpf had the brains to observe "I didn't know he was lost."
[”As Noah Feldman pointed out,” Moody pointed out, “since the days of founding Prophet Joseph Smith, Mormons have held their secrets close — including their ‘White Horse Prophecy:’ one day a Mormon leader will literally ride in to save the U.S. Constitution — and to transform America into the base for the institution of a world-wide Mormon theocracy. Since his college days, when I was Mitt’s fraternity brother at Brigham Young University,” Moody said, “Mitt’s made it clear to his intimates that he was pre-ordained to fulfill this prophecy, to become the Mormon President who would save our Constitution and transform America as Joseph Smith prophesied.]
Combined with the question of whether Mitt believes in Exaltation - whether he is becoming a God - this is a question that will hound a Romney presidency, like it or not.
Only when they do so in a very public way (e.g. publishing books, appearing on radio/TV talk shows, etc.), or are actively trying to convince fellow members to change their beliefs and oppose LDS Church teaching (e.g. organizing private religious study groups involving other Church members).
The notion that a President Romney would need to worry about being excommunicated for pursuing legislative or military agendas that the Church leadership didn’t agree with is simply ludicrous. The LDS Church leadership is very pragmatic, and wouldn’t dream of spoiling the PR dream of having a Church member as President of the United States. The leadership would be more likely to issue a bland statement about the “Church doesn’t take on official position on matter X”, if public attention were drawn to an apparent conflict between Church teaching and Romney’s actions as President.
Hell with that stuff; I want to hear more about the special underwear.....
And both are very good workers and parents as well.
LDS are implored to think, pray, and study for themselves on whether or not teachings are true, correct, and from God.
Thanks for posting this.
In the context of this discussion, no. It's not correct.
If Mitt were in a position of leadership in the Church, and were to publicly repudiate and contest the President and the Twelve and their decisions, encouraging others to disregard them and/or rebel against them, then he would probably find himself in trouble for doing so.
Plain ol' questioning and personal disagreement have never been excommunication material, only outright rebellion.
Was Moses wrong when he refused to ordain anyone outside the Israelite tribe of Levi?
Thanks for your replies.
Harry Reid is Mormon and he’s still a member. Questioning the prophet is not grounds for excommunication. Actively and publicly campaigning against the church and calling the prophet names does.
So--teachings could be correct for one, but not another?
Relativistic Theology?
Was Moses wrong when he refused to ordain anyone outside the Israelite tribe of Levi?
No, Moses was not wrong. But I'd still like to hear an answer to the first question. Do you have one?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.