Posted on 05/04/2007 5:46:36 AM PDT by Saundra Duffy
They Shoot Mormons, Don't They? Religious bigotry, alive and well today
May 4, 2007 - by Saundra Duffy-Hawkins
“I wouldn’t vote for a Mormon for dogcatcher, much less President of the United States!” There’s a lot of that kind of hateful rhetoric going around since Mitt Romney decided to throw his hat in the ring – as if Mormons are some kind of hideous evil monsters. The loudest anti-Mormon shouts, sad to say, are coming from America’s so-called “Christian right”. How can Mitt Romney hope to get a fair shake in this spiritually polluted atmosphere?
There was another man running for President who faced the same dilemma – John F. Kennedy – only he was the target of anti-CATHOLIC bigotry. In his 1960 speech to the Greater Houston Ministerial Association, JFK said the following: “. . .I believe in an America where religious intolerance will someday end - where all men and all churches are treated as equal - where man has the same right to attend or not attend the church of his choice - where there is no Catholic vote, no anti-Catholic vote, no bloc voting of any kind - and where Catholics, Protestants and Jews, at both the lay and pastoral level, will refrain from those attitudes of disdain and division which have so often marred their words in the past, and promote instead the American ideal of brotherhood.” John F. Kennedy Library & Museum (Speeches, 1960). By the way, if you listen to the audio version of JFK’s speech, you will hear the hurt and frustration in his voice and the unfair treatment surely must have caused many a sleepless night.
Fast forward to 2007 where JFK might as well have been “whistlin’ Dixie”. The hostility toward Mormons today, in my opinion, is even worse than that suffered by JFK. Although it is said that JFK lost about a million votes to religious intolerance, Romney stands to lose even more if the anti-Mormon evangelicals hang together.
According to Media Matters for America - “. . . a Web-based, not-for-profit, 501(c)(3) progressive research and information center dedicated to comprehensively monitoring, analyzing, and correcting conservative misinformation in the U.S. media” - FOX News is not reporting accurately on the level of evangelical hostility to the Romney run. Media Matters for America points out that among evangelical leaders rejecting Mormons: Shirley and James Dobson (National Day of Prayer and Focus on the Family, respectively), the Southern Baptist Convention (collectively), Pat Robertson (Christian Broadcasting Network), and Dr. D. James Kennedy (Coral Ridge Presbyterian Church in Florida). “Among many conservative evangelicals – who comprise a significant part of the Republican base – Mormonism is considered an un-Christian cult.” Media Matters for America (2007)
While stumping in Florida, a man in the audience stood up during the Q&A portion and said the following to Romney: “You, sir, you’re a pretender. You do not know the Lord. You’re a Mormon.” Media Matters for America (2007). This is the kind of un-American, disrespectful treatment Mitt Romney will apparently have to endure throughout the entire campaign – as if just being a Mormon is reason enough to open the floodgates for free flow of pent-up hatred and vindictiveness.
For the record, the Mormon bashers know full well that the official name of Romney’s church is “The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints” and the members should rightfully be called “members of the LDS Church” but the words “Mormon” and “Mormonism” have an aura of negativity so they prefer to use the “M” word as if it were dirty.
Less than five minutes cruising around the official LDS website (LDS.org) will show anyone who’s interested that the Church is a Christian organization, with Jesus Christ at the Head. There are no paid clergy – all are volunteers. Humanitarian aid is legendary. Members of the LDS Church believe in strong family values; they are patriotic, they are law-abiding upstanding citizens of their community. Many LDS young men right out of high school go on two-year missions – you know, the guys on bikes – and during their mission they don’t date, read newspapers, go to movies or watch TV; but rather they dedicate two years of their lives to serving others. Many women go on missions as well, and couples, only theirs is 18 months in length but the obligations are basically the same. Most members do not shop or go out to eat on Sundays – reminiscent of the good old days when shops and stores were closed in obedience to the Commandment, “Remember the Sabbath and keep it holy”. If they can help it, LDS Church members do not work on Sundays, either, preferring to spend the day at church and with their families. Church members are encouraged to store up a year’s supply of food and water so they will be able to care for their families in the event of an emergency. The LDS Church believes in self-sufficiency and self-reliance but in the event of a financial hardship the Church distributes food and supplies through their welfare (Bishop’s Storehouse) program. Members of the LDS Church do not drink alcohol nor do they use illicit drugs; they do not drink coffee and tea. A Mormon in good standing, therefore, will not be found in a drunken stupor puking her guts out at 3 a.m. anywhere in the world. Furthermore, members of the church are encouraged to dress modestly, be polite and courteous. And members of the LDS Church are faithful tithe payers. Come on, people, what’s not to love?
So what on earth is their beef, the anti-Mormon zealots? Why is there such disdain for the LDS Church and its members? In Hugh Hewitt’s book, “Mormon in the White House?” he states his thesis that the fierce anti-Mormon sentiment among main-stream Christians stems from one or two or all three of the following factors (in order of importance):
1) “It is just too weird.
2) “A Mormon president will supercharge Mormons’ missionary work.
3) “If there is a Mormon in the White House, Salt Lake City will call the shots, at least on the biggest issues.” Hewitt (2007, p. 221-227)
Hugh Hewitt has written an exquisite book about the Romney campaign and overcoming the “Mormon problem.” It’s a good read and I highly recommend it. Of the three problem points listed in the previous paragraph, Hewitt believes – unless some unforeseen blunder destroys his chances – none of the three is insurmountable for Mitt Romney. (Plus, he has the best hair.)
Well, I’m no Hugh Hewitt, not even close; he’s an icon on the conservative radio talk show circuit. Hewitt could talk circles around me (I’ve seen him in action in Sacramento); he’s brilliant; he’s well educated, well read, no doubt a genius, plus he’s kind of cute. I’m basically a “nobody” – an overweight grandma – but after having researched for this paper, I have come to a totally different conclusion as to why there is such in-your-face angst over Romney’s religion of choice: It’s all about money, power and control (in that order). I think they’re (the evangelical religious bigots, that is) scared half to death and are revving up their attacks, not to save souls, but to save their reputations (which if tarnished would lead to financial ruin).
As I said, all one must do is browse around the LDS official web site to see what the LDS Church believes and stands for. Any reasonable person would conclude that Mormons are not evil monsters at all. In fact, they are God fearing, Christ believing, Holy Ghost following people going about doing good. “You will know them by their fruit” and the LDS has plenty of fruit and they are willing to share.
Earlier, I stated that some high-powered ministries have publicly condemned Mormons: Shirley and James Dobson, the Southern Baptist Convention, Pat Robertson, and Dr. D. James Kennedy – just to name a few. There are hoards of others. Sunday after Sunday, preachers, evangelists, reverends and ministers from all Christian denominations pound the pulpit with anti-Mormon rhetoric. I heard the message loud clear when I was a Baptist and when I tiptoed through evangelical/Pentecostal territories. Was I ever miffed when I later learned for myself the Gospel truth about the LDS Church.
Just think about it, please. If Dr. D. James Kennedy, for example, who wrote the book, The Wolves Among Us, were to admit he’d been wrong in labeling the LDS Church a “cult” that leads unwary ignorant people astray (to hell), what would become of his multi-million-dollar ministry? Suffice it to say, there’s big money to be had by sale of books, tapes, CD’s, videos, and other anti-Mormon propaganda, not to mention speaking engagements and world-wide religious crusades. We’re talking trillions, all told. I realize the anti-Mormon aspect of these ministries is but a small portion of the business, but if the truth came out, that they had been using falsehoods about the LDS Church as a cash cow, their entire empires could tumble.
The ABC News program 20/20 aired on March 23, 2007, exposed the lavish lifestyles of some of the top evangelical preachers – million dollar mansions and personal jets. ABC News - 20/20 (2007) (Again, the LDS Church has no paid clergy.)
It’s nothing new. Severe harassment and persecution has been the lot of the LDS Church since it’s inception in 1820 when a 14-year-old boy named Joseph Smith saw visions and communed with heavenly beings. Rather than discuss the spiritual aspects of the LDS Church, however, let’s stick to facts of history. Taken from a college-level early American history textbook, Joseph Smith, upon experiencing the visions and visitations, believed “that God had work for me to do, and that my name should be for good and evil among all nations, kindreds and tongues.” Ayers, Gould, Oshinsky, and Soderlund (2004, p. 292). The textbook continues, “They were met with hostility virtually everywhere they went . . . . As the movement gathered momentum, hundreds of people joined the church; entire congregations of churches of other faiths joined . . .” Ayers, Gould, Oshinsky, and Soderlund (2004, p. 293)
During the dark time of American history when slavery was flourishing and when Native Americans were forced from their lands, the pioneers of the LDS Church also suffered at the hands of unscrupulous politicians, governmental leaders, and angry hate-filled mobs. “In the face of relentless persecution, Joseph Smith, the founder of the church, had led his flock to Illinois. There they had established the town of Nauvoo, which by the mid-1840’s had become the largest city in Illinois with over 15,000 people. . . In June 1844, a mob of non-Mormons broke into the jail where Smith was being held and killed both him and his brother. . .The Mormons abandoned Nauvoo in the spring of 1846 as anti-Mormons pounded the town with cannon, destroying the Great Temple. In a well-coordinated migration, 15,000 Mormons moved in stages to the Great Salt Lake.” Ayers, Gould, Oshinsky, and Soderlund (2004, p. 334-335) Many walked all the way and many died along the way, including innocent babes.
Joseph Smith at one time was tarred and feathered by a mob. No jury, no trial, no judge – and they had planned to castrate him, too. On October 27, 1838, the then governor of Missouri issued an “extermination order”: “The Mormons must be treated as enemies, and must be exterminated or driven from the State if necessary . . .” Far West History (n.d.) Please note that the order called for exterminating “Mormons” making no distinction between men, women and children, and indeed women and children were subject to the extermination order.
In an event known in LDS history as “the Haun’s Mill Massacre”, precipitated by the extermination order, 30 to 40 LDS families were surprised by some 200 to 250 militia. After the smoke cleared, seventeen LDS people lay dead including a ten-year-old boy. Thirteen LDS members were wounded including a woman and a seven-year-old boy. “A few Missourians returned the next day and took plunder.” LDS FAQ (n.d.) No Missouri militiamen were killed but three were wounded. Just a few years earlier, the LDS folk who died that day had been members of other churches - Congregational or Methodist or Baptist or Presbyterian.
In l976, Governor Bond of Missouri officially rescinded the extermination order and presented apologies for the “unfortunate developments” it caused. Quoting from Governor Bond’s Executive Order: “WHEREAS, Governor Boggs’ order clearly contravened the rights to life, liberty, property and religious freedom as guaranteed by the Constitution of the United States, as well as the Constitution of the State of Missouri; and . . . Expressing on behalf of all Missourians our deep regret for the injustice and undue suffering rescind Executive Order Number 44 dated October 27, 1838, issued by Governor W. Boggs. . .” Far West History (n.d.) The individuals who harassed, abused, and even murdered Mormons in cold blood were never tried for their crimes.
I read Rev. Martin Luther King, Jr.’s Letter from Birmingham Jail and it really touched my heart. There he was, suffering for the Lord in jail, and these religious leaders with highfalutin titles on the outside wrote an open letter (“A Call for Unity”) in which they criticize King’s tactics and basically blame King for the racial turmoil of the time. Though you can tell King is upset and hurt by the attack – made worse because he’s stuck in jail and can’t confront the religious leaders face-to-face – his response is gentle genius. “I wish you had commended the Negro sit-inners and demonstrators of Birmingham for their sublime courage, their willingness to suffer, and their amazing discipline in the midst of great provocation. One day the South will recognize its real heroes.” Barnet and Bedau (2005, p. 881)
King has a few choice words for the Church, too: “If today’s church does not recapture the sacrificial spirit of the early church, it will lose its authenticity, forfeit the loyalty of millions, and be dismissed as an irrelevant social club with no meaning for the twentieth century. Every day I meet young people whose disappointment with the church has turned into outright disgust.” Barnet and Bedau (2005, p. 880)
King signs off with “Yours for the cause of Peace and Brotherhood”.
There’s an eerie commonality between what JFK and MLK endured at the hands of the religious bigots of their day and what Mitt Romney is facing today. I hope and pray that Romney will be able to fend off these undeserved attacks from the religious hypocrites with the same grace, dignity and God-inspired resolve displayed by the other two.
A few popular bumper stickers read: “Honk if you love Jesus” and “Christians aren’t perfect, just forgiven” or “Jesus is my co-pilot”. Yet, apparently, these same bumper-sticker Christians are the ones waging war against Mitt Romney’s run for the Presidency solely on the basis of his chosen faith in a Church that bears the name of the Savior of the world.
References
ABC News - 20/20 (2007). Philanthropic donations come from your heart, but where do they end up? Ex-money manager says "enough!" to secretive Christian Ministry spending. Glenn Ruppel & John Stossel. United States: ABC News.
Ayers, E. L., Gould, L. L., Oshinsky, D. M., & Soderlund, J. R. (2004). American Passages - a history of the United States - Volume I: to 1877 (2nd ed.). Belmont, California: Thomson/Wadsworth.
Barnet, S., & Bedau, H. (2005). Letter from Birmingham Jail. Current Issues and Enduring Questions - a guide to critical thinking and argument, with readings (7th ed., pp. 867-882). Boston and New York: Bedford/St. Martin's.
Far West History. (n.d.). The Extermination Order and how it was rescinded. Retrieved April 28, 2007, from http://www.jwha.info/mmff/exorder.htm
Hewitt, H. (2007). A Mormon in the White House? 10 things every American should know about Mitt Romney. Washington, D.C.: Regnery Publishing, Inc.
John F. Kennedy Presidential Library & Museum. (1960, September 12). Address of Senator John F. Kennedy to the Greater Houston Ministerial Association. Retrieved April 22, 2007, from http://www.jfklibrary.org
Lds Faq. (n.d.). What was the Haun's Mill Massacre? Retrieved April 28-2007, 2004, from Brigham Young University Web Site: http://ldsfaq.byu.edu/view.asp?q=57
Media Matters for America. (2007). Fox News whitewashes evangelical hostility to Romney's faith. Retrieved April 22, 2007, from http://mediamatters.org/items/printable/200702280002
Uh. Whatever happened to: “Then Peter and the other apostles answered [after being “commanded” that they not teach in Jesus’ name] and said, We ought to obey God rather than men?” (Acts 5:29)
So the will of slaveowners trumps the will of God that the Gospel go to slaves? Is that what you’re telling me with a straight face?
So what if the LDS favored freeing slaves back in its Mizzou days? What does it matter, REALLY, if you personally favored freeing slaves’ bodies but disfavored freeing their souls? Repent of such nonsense!!!
First, for you to leave out the important part of the context of that verses in the D&C is so telling, that I will from now on be forced to treat every one of your posts with as much respect and sincerity as the pattern which you are choosing to give them in. You do yourself and your cause a HUGE disservice by such blatant misinterpretation.
This is clearly about masters rights and the sanctity of life for the slaves, who's lives could be in jeopardy if they went against their masters wishes. The doctrines of the restoration include being judged on whatever degree of light and knowledge we have, not on wither or not all men are baptized, that's what Baptisms for the dead are for, and that's why there is a 1000 year millennium, to do all of Gods work for all his children, since the world began, for free and bonded.
This vote is only for Mormons to take as we are trying to find out who actually understands what Mormons believe, me, or CF
As for me and my house, we will choose the DU answer.
I’ll start with my definition of the label anger so you can understand where I’m coming from.
Anger is energy seeking change. If I let that energy fester and be directed at an individual or group then I believe it becomes a sin. Because that anger changes into a blame and self deception. E.G. “They are to blame so I don’t have any responsibility until they save they are sorry” kind of thinking. You end up giving away your power to choose how you feel, to another.
However, if I use that energy to move me to change, often it’s an internal change, then I can transform what has the potential to be negative and harmful into something productive and worthwhile. But this takes focused choice and desire.
Lying / bearing false witness. Hey that’s one of the big 10. So I’d have to say it is sin. But certainly a habit that could be broken.
That’s just what I’ve learned from my life experiences.
Interesting, how different? Is it hard to run or do sports?
...thereby jeopardizing the lives of men...
It ‘was’ hard, but I was able to play in HIgh School and after college to compete on a park tennis league in B’ham, AL, and years later to win my club championship in golf. But I didn’t post that data to distract the thread. Of what relevance is it to you?
Rev. 3: 21 21 To him that overcometh will I grant to sit with me in my throne, even as I also overcame, and am set down with my Father in his throne.
So the righteous will sit in God’s throne. Is that even more arrogant?
Have you read the scriptures?
Well said. I would add that in addition to being joint heirs with Christ, and sharing the throne with God, those who are faithful will also be given a crown.
Tim. 4: 8
8 Henceforth there is laid up for me a crown of righteousness, which the Lord, the righteous judge, shall give me at that day: and not to me only, but unto all them also that love his appearing.
1 Pet. 5: 4
4 And when the chief Shepherd shall appear, ye shall receive a crown of glory that fadeth not away.
For those just coming in for this exchange at this point: Sevenbak is chastising me for not citing ALL of D&C 134:12, which I will do here:
"We believe it just to preach the gospel to the nations of the earth, and warn the righteous to save themselves from the corruption of the world; but we do not believe it right to interfere with bond-servants, neither preach the gospel to, nor baptize them contrary to the will and wish of their masters, nor to meddle with or influence them in the least to cause them to be dissatisfied with their situations in life, thereby jeopardizing the lives of men; such interference we believe to be unlawful and unjust, and dangerous to the peace of every government allowing human beings to be held in servitude." (D&C 134:12)
How do I plead to Sevenbak's chastisement? (Well, I do plead "guilty" to leaving out the phrase, "thereby jeopardizing the lives of men"--which to be fair, does seem to support Sevenbak's "sanctity of life" argument).
My point in addressing all of this is that it might be one thing to say "we won't interfere with bond-servants or their stations in life," but I took objection to the phrase, "neither preach the gospel to" along with the phrase at the end that the key danger beyond "jeopardizing the lives of men" (whether these saints meant slaves, slave-owners or both, they don't say as "dissatisfied slaves" could become a physical threat to slave-owners) was what I would call the illusion of "peace" of governments which tolerate slave ownership. [For more of what I mean here, just consult Abraham Lincoln's speech where he basically said that the Civil War blood was recompense/God's judgment to our nation for answering every drop of slave blood shed at the hand of an owner's whip].
Anyway, what was Sevenbak's reaction to my concern over withholding the gospel being preached to slaves? (Oh, don't worry, "...that's what Baptisms for the dead are for, and that's why there is a 1000 year millennium...")
So let me get this straight, SEVEN: You are "all for" the first part of D&C 134:12: "We believe it just to preach the gospel to the nations of the earth..." but ya know, if our teens, being what they are--just teens--don't get 'round to most corners of the earth...'cause, after all, "...that's what Baptisms for the dead are for, and that's why there is a 1000 year millennium..."??? just hang loose, bro? REALLY?
And to quote Seven's already posted words, he'd probably would come right back and answer me, "Yeah, Sure, C! Ya see 'The doctrines of the restoration include being judged on whatever degree of light and knowledge we have...' and God isn't going to judge those folks we don't get 'round too seriously if they don't have much light & knowledge. Ya know, we were thinkin' it might even go a tad bit rougher if we showed up with all that light and knowledge..."
Bottom line: Seven still is trying to justify why slaves were supposedly unworthy of receiving the gospel in 1835 when D&C 134 was written. "We'll just get them on the back side of the graveyard," Seven reassures us. "We didn't want to bright up their life too much on this side of the graveyard lest the Lord hike up His level of judgment on them." "We got a 1,000-year hitch comin' up to do our gospel-sharing time vs. a 70-year hitch on this side of the veil."
Every argument, Seven, you used to justify why black slaves were supposedly "unworthy" of having the gospel preached to could be used to withhold the gospel against any people group...ANY...!!! Why bother "gospelizing" anybody or any people group if you're just going to fall back to those weasel ways.
But, we want to thank you. Because frankly, you highlight for us why the writer of Hebrews implies that "second-chance" doctrines (when no second-chance doctrines constitutes spiritual reality) wreak of the stench of death. [The Hebrews' writer wrote: "...It is appointed unto men die once, but THEN the judgment." 9:27] Only such putrid doctrines as baptizing corpses (who cares if they're "spiritual" corpses) could be used to try to justify the putrid racist doctrine of withholding the gospel from slave folks lest (to quote D&C 134:12) "such interference" constitutes behavior that is "unlawful and unjust." Well imagine that. Imagine that just suppose a group of 1835 saints did advocate such slaves were worthy of the gospel? (I mean, ya might have a civil war or something & would so many soldiers' lives be worth the expenditure?) [sarc--But isn't that just a "modern translation" of the D&C 134:12 portion that says preaching the gospel to slaves, baptizing slaves, and meddling with slaves is "dangerous to the peace of every government allowing human beings to be held in servitude."]
Three whole days he was among them?
Gotta wonder how many he tried to tempt and corrupt in that time.
Good question!
Let's ask Joseph Smith Jr, the most honored prophet of mormonism --
In Pearl of Great Price, Book of Abraham, Chapter 2:22-25, he relates the following --
22 And it came to pass when I was come near to enter into Egypt, the Lord said unto me: Behold, Sarai, thy wife, is a very fair woman to look upon;
23 Therefore it shall come to pass, when the Egyptians shall see her, they will say—She is his wife; and they will kill you, but they will save her alive; therefore see that ye do on this wise:
24 Let her say unto the Egyptians, she is thy sister, and thy soul shall live.
25 And it came to pass that I, Abraham, told Sarai, my wife, all that the Lord had said unto me—Therefore say unto them, I pray thee, thou art my sister, that it may be well with me for thy sake, and my soul shall live because of thee.
So according to Joseph Smith, God commands lying and tempting others into lying.
But wait!
In the Book of Mormon, authored by Joseph Smith Jr (oops, I mean translated by Joseph Smith Jr, I mean authored by ... aw, never mind), we read that God takes a dim view of lying --
Ether 3:12
12 And he answered: Yea, Lord, I know that thou speakest the truth, for thou art a God of truth, and canst not lie.
2 Nephi 9:34
34 Wo unto the liar, for he shall be thrust down to hell
Your premise is flawed, Bonaparte. Sarai was Abraham’s sister. They shared a parent.
Again, if you believe there is a mistranslation, you are entitled to that opinion. I happen to believe the verse is correct. In fact, perhaps the verse he is quoting from the “law” is the one missing from our current text. What I accept as revealed truth leads me to believe what I quoted and why. If you have a different opinion, that’s fine.
Good verses. Thanks for the post.
My internet (which is usually stable as a rock went down mid post yesterday, aparently an idiot with a skid loader can muck up even fiber!) I will be playing catch up for a bit, and I have to work while trying, DAH!
I for one do find it very strange in some respects, but you left out a few details:
"Few Mormons today can grasp the polarizing charisma of their founding prophet. Some may feel uncomfortable when confronted with the full scope of Joseph Smith's activities as youthful mystic, treasure-seeker, visionary, a loving husband who deceived his wife regarding about forty of his polygamous marriages, a man for whom friendship and loyalty meant everything but who provoked disaffection by "testing" the loyalty of his devoted associates, an anti-Mason who became a Master Mason, church president who physically assaulted both Mormons and non-Mormons for insulting him, a devoted father who loved to care for his own children and those of others, temperance leader and social drinker, Bible revisionist and esoteric philosopher, city planner, pacifist and commander-in-chief, student of Hebrew and Egyptology, bank president, jail escapee, healer, land speculator, mayor, judge and fugitive from justice, guarantor of religious freedom but limiter of freedom of speech and press, preacher and street-wrestler, polygamist and advocate of women's rights, husband of other men's wives, a declared bankrupt who was the trustee-in-trust of church finances, political horse-trader, U.S. presidential candidate, abolitionist, theocratic king, inciter to riot, and unwilling martyr (Mormon Hierarchy: Origins of Power, pp. 261-262).
Cordially,
Waht will you do with your crown, seven?
Nice try, but not exactly. We believe that God is God, and we are mortals, but have the opportunity to be joint heirs with him. Perhaps another reference would help.
Revelations 1:6 And hath made us kings and priests unto God and his Father; to him be glory and dominion for ever and ever. Amen. BTW, and on a different subject, John is speaking here long after Jesus went unto the Father, but even he still refers to Jesus and the Father as separate entities.
I’m a kettle corn man myself!
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.