Posted on 02/19/2008 4:46:10 PM PST by Zakeet
In his pursuit of the presidency, Mitt Romney held fast to his Mormon faith, though his religion remains controversial with evangelicals and some other Christians. But his determined (and ultimately futile) wooing of evangelicals led him to make some statements that didn't quite square with Mormon beliefs and culture. And the effort itself may have deepened the impression of him as inauthentic—even to some fellow Mormons.
Early in his presidential bid, Romney was asked what he thought of polygamy. Prompted by what they considered a divine revelation, the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints discontinued the practice more than a century ago, and the church distances itself from polygamist "fundamentalists." But Romney went one step further, saying he couldn't "imagine anything more awful than polygamy." Many Mormons were privately taken aback. Mormons believe that, in its time, "plural marriage" was a commandment from God, and they are, as a group, fiercely proud of their ancestors, hundreds of whom practiced polygamy. (Romney's own great-grandfather had five wives.) LDS church members loathe the polygamy stereotypes and jokes bandied by outsiders. But hearing Romney—the most recognizable face of their faith these days—disavow it in those terms was mildly unsettling to LDS insiders.
Others were puzzled to hear Romney say he reads the Gideon Bible—a version popular with evangelicals: Mormons uniformly study the King James version, in a Salt Lake edition that is cross-referenced to all other Mormon scripture. "Seems like he just figured he had to say the safest, most Protestant thing he could think of—that was kind of annoying," says Russell Arben Fox, a Mormon professor of political science at Friends University in Wichita, Kans.
(Excerpt) Read more at newsweek.com ...
Welcome to FreeRepublic.
More crapola from the left. I guess you now worship the leftest media.
Colorcountry
I expected more intelligence and sincerity on this board.
No, there are thousands of current and past stake presidents. He does not speak for the church. That being said, I don’t take issue with anything he has said.
The anti Romney people here just can’t let it go.
It’s a good thing Romney’s out. Now we have Huckabee, a “true” evangelical to vote for. Not a phony bone in his body. Go Huck!
From the article, this sums up Romney very well;
“Rather than the individual little comments that may have startled Mormons, I think what troubled [fellow LDS members] was a sense that he was pandering,” says Bushman.”
It is easy to see that this article is purely a fabrication in the mind of the reporter. It shows no attempt to ascertain the facts from a credible source.
Bingo!!! I agreed
At least Romney was telling the TRUTH.
I voted for him as well as the rest of my family about 30, not because he is a Mormon or a Christian but because he is a moral well qualified individual.
“At least Romney was telling the TRUTH.”
About what?
What?
Okay, you’re not welcomed. Is that better?
1st I’ve heard of this BS — Did the writer of the article talk to more than 2 malcontents?
The article is pure bunk on this...
““How Mormons Saw Romney — In wooing evangelicals, he made some fellow LDS members uneasy”
These questions are also brought up in this 2005 article about Romney’s presidential ambitions in a Mormon magazine.
http://www.sunstoneonline.com/magazine/issues/139/139-52-54.pdf
This is just another article where the author knows nothing about his subject.
What else would you expect from Newsweak?
The guy was getting 90% of the Mormon vote. Whatever problems his church had with him, it couldn’t have been too severe.
Right.
However, I spoke too soon about not consulting credible sources. Then I read the rest of the article in the link. There is no one more credible than Bushman and Oman. However, it is clear she is not listening to what they had to say.
>> Romney was a bishop and a stake president in the LDS church for 12 years. So he certainly is, or should be, a spokesman for his religion.
http://www.csmonitor.com/2007/0809/p01s01-uspo.html <<
Isn’t there a Bishop for every congregation? I’ve read that’s more or less a lay pastor. Do you know what stake president is? That’s not a term I’ve heard.
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.