I would say it’s part of the Mormon culture, but doctrinally...no, it’s been thoroughly “torn to shreds”, to to speak. It’s not even hanging by a thread, considering how it’s been lambasted by Church leadership for the last 100 years.
Mormons that actually research this, know this. The reason it’s culturally significant is that it borrows elements of truth, that LDS actually believe, that the Constitution will hang in the balance and need to be saved, partially by members of the Church.
Do I think it’s Romney? Not on your life.
Ezra Taft Benson, who was President of the Church and also served as Secretary of Agriculture to Eisenhower for 8 years while he was an Apostle, said specifically that the Constitution would not be saved in Washington. (see above quotes)
I think Washington, and by definition the Government, is toast. Get your food and ammo, it’s going to get ugly.
The article sounds pretty accurate then, it never said it was Doctrine, I don’t believe and it seems to permeate Mormon culture.
Anything that helps us keep Romney out of the White House, is all for the good, and good for America, to that we can all give a hearty, patriotic cheer.
The people who are purported to have heard/recorded the prophecy are the ones who have been “lambasted, discredited, torn to shreds, denounced, etc.”.
I’ve seen the word “alleged” used quite often when it comes to referring to the prophecy coming from JS.
What is curious to me though is this; if the prophecy was/is of no consequence, that the church has disavowed it, why then, did so many subsequent presidents(so-called prophets) reference the prophecy?