Posted on 06/02/2012 8:54:01 AM PDT by Colofornian
Two recent essays provide a new perspective on the never-ending discussion centered around the question, “Are Mormons Christian?” Mormons claim to be Christian, while at the same time denying divine authority and full legitimacy to all other Christian denominations. Consider the specific topic of rebaptism. Previously baptized Christians who join the LDS Church are required to be rebaptized by an LDS priesthood holder, which seems quite natural to Mormons. Baptized Mormons who later choose to join another Christian denomination are generally required to be rebaptized by that denomination because, in their eyes, Mormon baptism doesn’t count, which rather incongruously strikes most Mormons as wrong. We seem to think everyone else should accept our baptism as valid while we are free to reject anyone else’s baptism as invalid. Obviously, we haven’t adequately thought through this question of Christian identity and Mormon identity.
The first essay is “Romney is Mormons’ Path to the Christian Mainstream” by Noah Feldman, a Harvard law prof. Do we want to be part of the Christian mainstream? Yes, in the sense that we want to claim the title “Christian” and be part of the club. No, in the sense that we don’t want to surrender our claim to have the sole authority to perform valid Christian ordinances such as baptism and marriage. [We recognize marriages performed in other denominations as valid civil marriages in legal terms, but not as being valid in the eyes of God in the next life unless there is a later sealing performed in an LDS temple by that married couple if they convert to the LDS Church or unless, after death, such a sealing is performed by proxy in an LDS temple.] So again, we want it both ways: we want to be recognized as Christian by other Christians but, at the same time, we don’t want to grant reciprocal recognition to other denominations. We want to be Christian but also better than Christian, or at least more than Christian.
The first point that Feldman makes is that the Romney candidacy is forcing religious normalization regardless of the sectarian views of Christians:
[A]s a Mormon, Romney is a participant — indeed, he is the most important participant — in the long-term project of convincing mainstream American Protestants that Mormonism is a normal denomination like all the others. … By embracing evangelicals and being embraced by them, he is bringing Mormonism into the denominational scheme that characterizes mainstream American Christianity. … Evangelical Protestants who once believed that Mormonism was a deviant sect, not a legitimate denomination, may come to believe something very different as they prepare to cast their votes for a Romney. The practice of pluralism can come first. The beliefs can come later.
So far, so good. The second point Feldman makes is that religious normalization may bring unexpected changes to Mormons as well:
On the other hand, seen through the lens of history, entering the mainstream poses major risks. If Mormons think of themselves as another Christian denomination, the risk of defection rises. The distinctive Mormon beliefs in a new scripture and in the possibility of joining the supernal realm for eternal life will come into jeopardy precisely because they mark differences with the Protestant mainstream. If you believe you are not that different from others, there will be a tendency to downplay those practices and beliefs that suggest otherwise.
The great model for this assimilationist danger is the German political emancipation of the Jews, which directly led to Reform Judaism. Removing the perception that Jews were fundamentally outside Christian society was a tremendous sociological boon to the German Jewish community in the early 1800s. Entering the mainstream, however, encouraged Jews to adopt practices and beliefs that corresponded to the very “modern” world that was welcoming them.
Feldman is suggesting that Romney’s candidacy will produce the mainstreaming of Mormonism which will naturally, perhaps inexorably, result in the emergence of Reform Mormonism. Not so fast, I hear you say.
LDS blogger and historian Christopher Jones replied to Feldman in “The Limits of Mormon Assimilation.” Jones stresses that Mormonism is not “just another denomination” and is unlikely to become so:
Even as Mormons participate in interfaith dialogue with evangelical Protestants and seek to find theological common ground, they remain distinct, and intentionally so. Recognition of a shared commitment to Christ is not, for Mormons, the end goal. Rather, it is a starting point for Mormons to then explicate the ways in which their own teachings build on the biblical foundation of Protestantism.
Jones agrees with Feldman that Romney’s candidacy is an external force that will move Mormonism toward the mainstream, but emphasizes the internal dynamic of Mormonism that will resist assimilation or the emergence of anything like “Reform Mormonism.” Like corporate executives managing their brand, LDS leaders carefully and actively manage LDS identity to the extent they can do so, the “I’m a Mormon” ad campaign being just one of many examples. While “I’m a Mormon” sounds an assimilationist note, the overall push imparted by LDS leaders over the last two generations has been in the direction of separatism, not assimilation. Right now, that means they are swimming against the current.
So will the currents unleashed by an LDS candidate at the top of the ticket force assimilation upon the Church? Or will LDS leaders dig in their heels and stay the separate course? I am confident Mormons twenty years from now will still be saying, “I’m a Mormon,” but what kind of Mormon will they be?
From the blog: Mormons claim to be Christian, while at the same time denying divine authority and full legitimacy to all other Christian denominations.
Well, ya gotta understand...Joseph Smith Had to do that...elsewise there was absolutely no need for a so-called Mormon "restoration."
The "bottom line" that is "Mormon ground zero" for any interfaith discussion MUST be to evaluate every Christian denomination through their filter of apostasy...
Why is that? Because to the Mormon, the "restoration" is always a hand-in-glove concept with a supposed total apostasy...hence, why we Christians (ALL of us) are regarded by Mormons as so-called "apostates."
How did the Mormon "restoration" come to be so closely linked with so-called complete Christian apostasy?
(1) No "restoration" can occur minus the complete loss of the original church. (The Mormon founder needed to take a scorched-earth approach to Christians, otherwise he -- and his restoration -- was 100% superflous. Either he was unnecessary, or the Christian church was...so Smith chose the Christian church to be! He essentially tossed all Christians into one gigantic graveyard, and tried to erect a new religion on top of it.)
(2) Let's face it, if Smith's "diagnosis" of Christians was wrong, that all did NOT commit apostasy, then no need existed for him or his restoration-from-scratch. [Even all the Lds Bible verses they come up with on the apostasy (a) proves it wasn't to be "universal"; and (b) actually contradicts it...verses like Eph. 3:21 and 1 Tim. 4:1]
Hence, this article's blogger -- Dave Banack -- is only telling "half" (at best) the tale as to how Mormon leaders treat Christians!
For example: Let's assume a Mormon who...
...has the absolute BEST manners, best attitude, best tone,
...and then cites Lds-specific "scripture," saying...
..."Yea, oh, yea, this is God's opinion of you spoken in the canonized word throught the 'prophet' Joseph Smith -- You, oh, Christian are ALL...
...'corrupt professors' saith the 14 or 15 yo Joseph Smith as spoken to the Mormon God...
...thee are 100% wrong creedally...
...and NONE of your churches are worth joining,
...and you lack any true power...
...oh, and BTW, you are ALL apostates, too."
You know what? I'd rather have...
...a Christian of another true Christian denomination condemn me to hell in word, tone, and attitude...
...than a Mormon who is exemplary in tone, attitude & manner -- yet labels me with this huge kind, nice, smiley-face grin a...
...corrupt,
...powerless,
...abominable apostate heart-drifter...
...who teaches only human precepts...
...and is ALL wrong.
AND EVERY TITHING MORMON HAS ENGAGED IN THIS LABELING...
...And exactly how have they done that?
...BECAUSE THEY HAVE PAID FOR HUNDREDS OF TRANSLATIONS OF THIS 'SCRIPTURE' AND CURRICULA AND ENSIGN MAG ARTICLES AND MISSIONARY LESSON PLANS AND OFTEN MISSIONARIES THEMSELVES to go 'round the world to spread this slander and libel!!!!
Scroll down to comment #11 from Manuel -- and you'll see:
I definitely see what Dave is saying and the problem with reciprocity. I however, did not grow up in the US Mormon safeheaven, rather, I grew up as a young Mormon having converted from Catholicism in Mexico, where there are still heated confrontations regarding the legitimacy of Catholic Priesthood vs the legitimacy of LDS Priesthood (which we claim was restored since it was lost due to a “Great Apostasy.”
Growing up among Mormons in Mexico, I heard countless times from Mormons the Catholic Church was de facto the “Great and Abominable Church” spoken of in the scriptures.
I cannot possibly believe the people here claiming they have never known a Mormon as described by Dave in the OP. I am having a real hard time believing that and that little frustration of the “all is well in Zion, we are such good and belevolent people who are simply mistunderstood by others unwillingness to understand us” pathology really starts to seem like a creepy problem among Mormons.
At the same time, now living in UT, I realize there are in fact places where Mormons remain completely isolated from certain aspects of our interaction with other faiths, and thus many of them simply ignore what really goes on, how we ourlseves attack others. Assuming that their view is the general reality of our interfaith relations seems quite a bit presumptuous (and ignorant of course).
The language we Mormons use against other denominations is definitely strong (even Richard Bushman has noted this). We claim to have the restored Priesthood, we claim no other denomination has such priesthood therefore, no other denomination has the legitimate authority to celebrate sacraments in the name of God with true validity.
We make claims “the Lord” stated the denominations found in the time of Joseph Smith are “an abomination” to Him.
We do seem to completely forget (or completely conveniently ignore) these things though when we cry and moan that other denominations don’t aknowledge us as Christians, and we paint ourselves as a benevolent group trying to be good buddies with others with parallel beliefs.
See it’s easy to play victim, but we really aren’t. We are vicious at playing the name calling game and making strong claims of our own Christian legitimacy vs other denominations’ Christian illegitimacy. We play the game and we play it good. I am with Dave on this one that it appears as if we have not thought things through.
Boy, did Manuel the Mormon-from-Mexico-now-living-in-insulated Utah hit it on the head! People who don’t see the problem of reciprocity do need to think things through, study and perhaps get a bit more acquainted with actual interactions between regular LDS members and their non LDS peers.
That said, I will still vote for Romney. I am only voting for him for president, not pastor, which is a more important office.
As long as Romney doesn't use the presidency to peddle distinctive Mormon false doctrines--and I don't think either Governor Romney did--then his LDS heresy doesn't stop me from voting for him.
Besides, Obama doesn't belong to any church now, and his previous Rev. Wright church did not teach Christian doctrine, either.
Scroll down to comment #11 from Manuel -- and you'll see:
********************
We make claims “the Lord” stated the denominations found in the time of Joseph Smith are “an abomination” to Him.
We do seem to completely forget (or completely conveniently ignore) these things though when we cry and moan that other denominations don’t aknowledge us as Christians, and we paint ourselves as a benevolent group trying to be good buddies with others with parallel beliefs.
See it’s easy to play victim, but we really aren’t. We are vicious at playing the name calling game and making strong claims of our own Christian legitimacy vs other denominations’ Christian illegitimacy. We play the game and we play it good.
**************
Yes, indeed...As this Mormon concedes, "We are vicious at playing the name calling game...We play the game and we play it good."
So what about "boundaries" 'tween Mormons and Christians. How do we tend to draw those lines distinctively?
#1 Jesus draws the line at Himself. Mormons? They draw the line at places like Joseph Smith and the Lds Church!
Example A – Brigham Young: "...EVERYevery spirit that does not confess that God has sent Joseph Smith, and revealed the everlasting Gospel to and through him, is of Antichrist..." (Discourses of Brigham Young, p. 435)
(Does that sound very “civil” to you – for Mormon “prophets” to label us all as “of Antichrist”???)
Example B – Spencer W. Kimball, Lds’ 12th “prophet”: "Presumptuous and blasphemous are they who purport to baptize, bless, marry, or perform other sacraments in the name of the Lord while in fact lacking his specific authorization." (Teachings of Spencer W. Kimball, p. 494)
Now with this quote you need to understand that Lds teach ALL authority for this priesthood ability rests ONLY in the Mormon church. Therefore, they label ALL Christian pastors and priests who ”baptize, bless, marry, and perform …sacraments” as engaging in “blasphemous” behavior. See how skewed doctrinal believes leads to “uncivil” accusations?
Example C – Lds leaders: "Since whoever does not belong to 'the church of the Lamb of God' belongs to 'the church of the devil,' as Nephi announced then all systems of worship outside of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints would be classified as 'the church of the devil' by Nephi's definition (Kent B. Jackson, "Watch and Remember" etc. from publication By Study and Also by Faith: Essays in Honor of Hugh W. Nibley on the Occasion of His Eightieth Birthday, 3/27/90, vol. 1, p. 87)
We can see how it’s not exactly “hospitable” for the Mormon claim that all other churches are part of “the church of the devil”? I suppose you may next simply say, “Well, hey, if all they are doing is teaching what their word says, how can that be deemed as ‘uncivil?’ For one thing, most Christians seem to own up to the implications of John 14:6 (or, at least, they one time did). Mormons don’t EVER want to seem to own up to the implications of D&C 1:30, 1 Nephi 14:9-10, and JS – History, vv. 18-20.
In other words, they like to play “victim” and say “woe is us” – look at how Mormons are being treated – not realizing that the same thing (only often worse) has been coming right out of their tithing $ paying for the Lds publishing expenses on these accusations.
See it’s easy to play victim, but we really aren’t. We are vicious at playing the name calling game and making strong claims of our own Christian legitimacy vs other denominations’ Christian illegitimacy. We play the game and we play it good.
Professors @ BYU confirm this viciousness on the part of insular Mormonism in Utah.
In 2001 at the BYU Women’s Conference, James A. Toronto, a BYU associate professor, was invited to speak. His title: “No More Strangers and Foreigners” This was published by BYU the following year under the title “Ye Shall Bear Record of Me.”
BTW, did I "get this" info from some "anti-Mormon" site? (No. I own the book)
Allow me to quote Dr. Toronto:
p. 35 of No More Strangers and Foreigners: ”As adviser to several non-LDS student groups on BYU campus and a teacher of world religions, I have had many opportunities to interact with those whose ethnicity, religion, politics or lifestyle places them outside the BYU mainstream…Unfortunately…those of divergent backgrounds among us hae felt excluded, demeaned, or diminished…I have wondered what leads us to exhibit sometimes intolerant, unkind attitudes toward others. Why does society at large perceive us as a community characterized by insular attitudes toward outsiders?”
Toronto then adds some are “mistreated” and “have difficulty being accepted.”
p. 36 of book: ”I have also observed that doctrinal misunderstandings often lie at the root of intolerant behavior and attitudes sometimes exhibited by Church members. Three prominent examples will illustrate. First, sometimes Church members…refer…only to the seemingly exclusivist language of certain scriptural passages…we unwittingly portray a sanctimonious, holier-than-thou stance that…is offensive to nonmembers. In my comparative world religions course, I deal with this problem in the first minute of the first class period each semester. I begin the discussion by reading some scriptures familiar to all Latter-day Saints: The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints is ‘the only true and living church upon the face of the whole earth’ (D&C 1:30); the leaders of other faiths ‘draw near to me with their lips, but their hearts are far from me’ and all their creeds are an ‘abomination’ in God’s sight (Joseph Smith-History 1:19)…”
p. 37 of book: ”We reinforce the erroneous idea that all other religious are completely false and dead and that our community does not value the spiritual experience of others.”
On p. 39 of book, Dr. Toronto also mentions ”how a skewed understanding of doctrine can lead to unkind attitudes and behavior…”
So, to sum up Dr. Toronto, a BYU prof in a book published by BYU:
(1) He said: ”…doctrinal misunderstandings often lie at the root of intolerant behavior and attitudes…” (p. 36)
(2) Lds communicate to the Christian world that we “are completely false and dead” (p. 37) and are creedally valueless as Lds “scripture” teaches that Christians don’t have a single creed that honors God.
(3) He also blamed ”…a skewed understanding of doctrine” as what was behind …”lead[ing] to unkind attitudes and behavior…”
It's this last point I want to close my comment upon. You see, it's not simply, I believe, lack of Mormon graciousness...lack of Mormon charity...etc. that has resulted in what Mormons and especially Mormon leaders have said about Christians for 180 years. I think Dr. Toronto is on to something when he says: "...a skewed understanding of doctrine" has overwhelmingly contributed to fueling "unkind attitudes and behaviors..."!!!
Oh sure...discernment doesn't have anything to do with being THE leader of the free world...
...gullibility doesn't have anything to do with being THE leader of the free world...
...being vulnerable to deception doesn't have anything to do with being THE leader of the free world...
/sarc
Jefferson literally cut the New Testament to pieces.
Before you make the claim: As long as Romney doesn't use the presidency to peddle distinctive Mormon false doctrines--and I don't think either Governor Romney did--then his LDS heresy doesn't stop me from voting for him.
You might be wise to learn what mormonism is and how at the level the Romney family is in the SLC lds corporation they have promoted their cult.
You see, Lds parse it all to either...
...strip us Christians of our entire identity,
...or simply play theological games where they ignore what their leaders have said about us ...But, alas the Mormon "we're oppressed & persecuted victim" sob story doesn't sell very well once it gets out all the different labels with which they've slandered the worldwide Church of Christ!
That's where the game of Clue comes in as an illustration...
...it just doesn't seem to click with Mormons that unless...
...Joseph Smith...
...killed Rev. Green...
...in the Hall...
...with a monkey wrench [Note: in the UK version of "Clue," "Mr. Green" is known as "Rev. Green"],
...then no restoration...
...no new prophet...
...no new authority...
...no new keys of the kingdom...
...no new church...
...were needed!
(It 'twas entirely ALL superflous and unnecessary).
And there goes the entire Mormon structure tumbling down the wayside!
What a "tough" way to go then for the contemporary Mormon. He can either join in with Mormon leaders and engage in all that nasty vicious name-calling of ALL of "Christendom" --
-- or he/she can recognize the Lds church was entirely superflous and unnecessary!
There's no "middle ground."
Gracers....
“Whores of Babylon....”
“Stupider pack of lies.....”
But he can still do some good in the civil realm. There are lots of non-Christians who have been good citizens and public servants. And I think he'll be a heckuva lot better at president than Obama.
An excellent example of mormon attitude was posted yesterday at exmormon.org
****************************
--------------------------------------
Note how Benjamin consistently denigrates others while whining about "persecution"...If there need be an organization such as yours, it should be toward ignorance of christianity as a whole. Mormons don't think they are better than anyone else, its the fact that we have more.
His whole statement reeks of the mormon attitude of superiority and arrogance very much in the way Romney's does.
You use the word "theologically" like a few too many Concordia types...boxed...compartmentalized...
Theology is the study of God as applied to our ENTIRE world...including...
...politically...
Let's just start with a real simple primer here...
If you've ever seen the TV series "24"...they had an African-American president enduring some real super-crises...
I would like to know that if our country had a real super-crisis going on, that our prez would at least know which "God" -- which "batphone" to pick up, if you will -- to communicate with to help with immediate counsel, direction, guidance, discernment, wisdom...not to mention IMMEDIATE delivery of His Resources and Power to that given situation!!!!
And you seem to tell us with your compartmentalized "theology" nonsense that it doesn't matter which god the POTUS prays to? It's "OK" that the Mormon god who was a man and a sinner who died gets the collect call from Romney in the middle of the night as his personal "consultant?"
What has our country come to?
Surely you've studied kings in the Old Testament.
Are you going to tell us with a straight face that you could interchange any king with any other king in the Old Testament and it wouldn't have mattered what happened in those situations??? Oh, sure some of those kings were more "theologically" savvy than others; but, hey, what's a few loose "theological" screws?
I don't know of many presidents I would look up to as religious exemplars.
In this case, Obama vs. Romney, I don't look up to either, as far as their religion, or lack thereof, is concerned. I judge on political grounds.
SIGHHH....it appears that "discernment" doesn't have anything to do with the ignorance of voters. I have yet to see anyone, mormon or not who will guarantee to me that this vow that Romney took in the mormon temple will not override his oath of office as POTUS. Not a single guarantee. It appears that a change of masters over the country to the mormon leaders and power brokers is perfectly acceptable.
Mormons consider it a religious duty to trace your ancestors (so they can be posthumously baptized). What if Romney gets elected and makes everyone do their genealogy? Just in case, the Ancestry.com people ought to be pumping money into his campaign.
How sad for Ben, even, my lds family refer to me as “primitive” because as they say “you just don’t get it”.
They probably are since they are owned the the SLC lds corporation.
Well, notice what happened when a mere supporter of Gov. Perry -- not somebody on his campaign team, but a supporter (a pastor), called Mormonism a "cult."
A LOT of Mormons got up in arms about that.
Somehow, it was reflected that Gov. Perry -- unless he address every single worldview of every supporter he has -- wouldn't be very "inspiring" to Mormon voters as "their" candidate.
Yet when we now reverse that...And when we look @ the entire "catalog" of things that the temple Mormon Mitt Romney believes about Christians...
...That we're not part of the...
... "only true living church on the face of the earth" (D&C 1:30) [No, that apparently belongs to Mormons alone]
& that the rest of the churches are under Satan's umbrella (1 Nephi 14:9-10)
& that those churches should not be joined 'cause they are "ALL wrong" (Pearl of Great Price, Joseph Smith - History, vv. 18-19)
& they are "ALL wrong" cause 100% of their creeds are an "abomination" to their God (ibid)
& that their professors are "ALL corrupt" heart-drifters who lack power...(ibid)
How is this suddenly "inspirational" for Christians to vote for a man who has spent literally $MILLIONS to get the above message out about Christians worldwide?
The whole lot who doesn't see the obvious discrepancy here are religious hypocrites!
What gets me is that those heavily funding this world-wide slander and libel of Christianity have themselves initiated an "enemy" role of the cross and have treated Christianity as a hostile faith.
Yet their self-initiated enemy role of the cross and Christianity is suddenly ignored and negated by Christians and its leaders alike.
What does God think of that?
What does God think of Christian leaders who go about endorsing a man who is a supposed "divine-in-embryo"?
Is God neutral toward Christians who elevate idols?
Mormonism is going to be forced to address these issues, or continue its melt down in membership.
Either the ‘orthodox’ mormonism wins out - then the emphasis on them being ‘christian’ will die down with greater emphasis on separation. Or the professors at byu will win out and dilute fundamental mormon doctrines such as the alleged factual history of the bom to be substituted as an allegory or spiritual story. More acceptance of the Christian doctrine of grace displacing traditional works based salvation.
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.