Better To Be An Adulterer Than A Mormon

[BCSpace]

During the drive from Salt Lake to Provo after I had conducted my workshop on Catholic Social Thought, my friend and host, Robert Millet (an LDS Professor at BYU), shared with me a story that I will not easily forget. He told me of a Mormon friend who in conversation with an Evangelical Protestant had asked him whether a Christian who committed adultery would lose his salvation. The Evangelical answered, “No.” The Mormon followed up with this query, “What if the Christian had murdered someone? Would he then lose his salvation?” The answer, again, was “no.” Then the Mormon asked, “Well, what if he had become a Mormon?” The Evangelical answered, “That’s a good question. I don’t know.” I joked with Bob, “Perhaps your friend should have asked what would be the state of the person’s salvation if he had murdered, or committed adultery with, a Mormon?”

...............

But in another sense–tying a believer’s eternal fate to overt cognitive assent to a set of doctrines without regard to whether in fact the believer’s life reflects Christian virtue–seems not very Christian at all. It, ironically, reflects an acquiescence to the flip side of the spirit of the age: it treats the human person as a bifurcated being consisting of an all-important mind that consents to doctrine and an unimportant body that is alien to the “true” self.

This is why I am not at all surprised–as my fellow Patheos blogger, David French, reports–that a group of Evangelical leaders who met privately to discuss which presidential candidate to endorse did not even consider Mitt Romney. Apparently it was a contest exclusively between Newt Gingrich and Rick Santorum, with the former Pennsylvania Senator receiving the nod with an 85-29 vote. Amazingly, Gingrich was in the running, despite the former Speaker’s propensity to engage in questionable conduct when in the pursuit of political power. It seems, then, that a Mormon Newt without the history of moral foibles occasioned by political ambition would have received the same lack of consideration these Evangelical leaders gave Governor Romney. Consequently, the message that our Mormon friends will hear from this is the same one heard by Bob Millet’s friend: better to be an adulterer than a Mormon.

http://www.patheos.com/blogs/returntorome/2012/01/better-to-be-an-adulterer-than-a-mormon-evangelicals-gingrich-and-romney/

[frankenstein]

But in another sense–tying a believer’s eternal fate to overt cognitive assent to a set of doctrines without regard to whether in fact the believer’s life reflects Christian virtue–seems not very Christian at all.

Hmmm, have those two read the Bible lately ?

"Many will say to me in that day, Lord, Lord, have we not prophesied in thy name? and in thy name have cast out devils? and in thy name done many wonderful works?"

So even those who profess Christ or put on airs of Christianty will not be accepted. Perhaps those two should understand the Bible before they claim something about being Christian.

But since people need to peddle romney I can see why those same people would tell Christians not to follow their religious belief.

[CQUIRK]

Well, Romney lost the South Carolina Primary.

I think the main factors why he did has more to do with the fact that he needs to do better in the debates- looking polished and acting perfect isn't going to win you votes, rather it may actually turn people off.

And perhaps the biggest factor is that HE NEEDS TO RELEASE HIS FLIPPIN' TAX RETURNS!

The Mormon issue wasn't that big of a factor in this primary I believe. Romney still got second place and did better in SC then he did in 08'.

Hope anybody with the Romney staff reads my posts; because with the way Mitt has been speaking and campaigning the past week and a half, I wonder if the Romney campaign got hit suddenly with the stupid stick.

[thesometimesaint]

CQUIRK:

It isn't just SC he is falling nation wide. While there is no legal requirement for anyone to release their tax returns. When running for such high political office if someone doesn't release them it makes them look like they are hiding something nefarious.

[CQUIRK]

NO kidding!

He better change both his strategy AND demeanor quick if he wants to get back on top.

[blackstrap]

Releasing his tax returns is a two edged sword. Huckabee said he released his and it was a huge mistake.It gave the media a pile of ammunition.It would be more so with Mitt.

[blackstrap]

Perhaps Mitt should say that he will release his when the top 10 media pundits do,as they are definitely some of the 1% ers

[Ron Beron]

Well, Romney lost the South Carolina Primary.

I think the main factors why he did has more to do with the fact that he needs to do better in the debates- looking polished and acting perfect isn't going to win you votes, rather it may actually turn people off.

And perhaps the biggest factor is that HE NEEDS TO RELEASE HIS FLIPPIN' TAX RETURNS!

The Mormon issue wasn't that big of a factor in this primary I believe. Romney still got second place and did better in SC then he did in 08'.

Hope anybody with the Romney staff reads my posts; because with the way Mitt has been speaking and campaigning the past week and a half, I wonder if the Romney campaign got hit suddenly with the stupid stick.

Given the complexity of trying to understand my meager tax returns can you imagine the lack of understanding of the vast majority of Americans who can grasp the complexities of his returns? Or do can simply allow a progressively left leaning media to explain it to us? Either way it is not an easy choice.

[Whiskeypete]

Well, Romney lost the South Carolina Primary.

I think the main factors why he did has more to do with the fact that he needs to do better in the debates- looking polished and acting perfect isn't going to win you votes, rather it may actually turn people off.

And perhaps the biggest factor is that HE NEEDS TO RELEASE HIS FLIPPIN' TAX RETURNS!

The Mormon issue wasn't that big of a factor in this primary I believe. Romney still got second place and did better in SC then he did in 08'.

Hope anybody with the Romney staff reads my posts; because with the way Mitt has been speaking and campaigning the past week and a half, I wonder if the Romney campaign got hit suddenly with the stupid stick.

Actually the religion factor was quite high: 60% said that it was important that a candidate share their religious beliefs and only 20% of those supported Romney.

How much does it matter to you that a candidate shares your religious beliefs?

GINGRICH PAUL PERRY ROMNEY SANTORUM

A great deal/Somewhat (60%) 46% 12% 0% 20% 22%

Not much/Not at all (40%) 32% 16% 1% 39% 8%

Read more: http://www.cbsnews.c...R#ixzz1k9pRKR5n

[frankenstein]

It seems that misdirecting Christians about the Bible is quite ok so long as the misdirection is done to promote romney, sigh didn't realize dishonesty for political gain was acceptable.

Elder Oaks gave a talk essentially laying out how, and why we are to judge.. he quotes "by their fruit you shall know them" . Whether reasonably or not some see negative fruits from the Lds faith/peoples. And given what I have already posted not every one who claims the Lord will be accepted of the Lord.

What I do not understand is why it is acceptable for person A to tell and almost demand that person B set aside or ignore his own religious beliefs so that person A can reap a benefit from B setting aside his beliefs. At Stake meeting in Austin Texas Elder Bernard stated that it is good to work with other faith groups so long as we LDS do not sacrifice the Doctrines/teachings of the LDS church.

So why shouldn't Christians use religion as a basis for who gets their vote

[Ron Beron]

It seems that misdirecting Christians about the Bible is quite ok so long as the misdirection is done to promote romney, sigh didn't realize dishonesty for political gain was acceptable.

Elder Oaks gave a talk essentially laying out how, and why we are to judge.. he quotes "by their fruit you shall know them" . Whether reasonably or not some see negative fruits from the Lds faith/peoples. And given what I have already posted not every one who claims the Lord will be accepted of the Lord.

What I do not understand is why it is acceptable for person A to tell and almost demand that person B set aside or ignore his own religious beliefs so that person A can reap a benefit from B setting aside his beliefs. At Stake meeting in Austin Texas Elder Bernard stated that it is good to work with other faith groups so long as we LDS do not sacrifice the Doctrines/teachings of the LDS church.

So why shouldn't Christians use religion as a basis for who gets their vote

If we are first a constitutional republic then we should not use religion as a litmus test to determine our president no more than we should use color (Obama), looks (Lincoln), etc. as predeterminatives to public service.

[frankenstein]

If we are first a constitutional republic then we should not use religion as a litmus test to determine our president no more than we should use color (Obama), looks (Lincoln), etc. as predeterminatives to public service.

What does being a constitutional republic have to do with? If we are not to use religious affiliation then political affiliation should be a wrong test as well.

Skin colour or looks are quite different than religion, religion is a choice that oftener drives one opinions on subjects.

[Calm]

Looks like you will get your wish, it has been announced he will release them on Tuesday.

http://abcnews.go.co...eturns-tuesday/

After days of stalling on questions about his tax return and a drubbing in the South Carolina primary, Republican candidate Mitt Romney says now he will make his 2010 tax returns public this week. “I will release my tax returns for 2010. I’ll do that on Tuesday of this week,” Mitt Romney said on FoxNews Sunday this morning.

He also said he would release an “estimate” of his taxes for 2011 this week, online. But then he says he will close on the issue of tax releases – there won’t be a “drip, drip, drip.” But Romney conceded the tax returns issue had hurt him .

“We made a mistake for holding off as long as we did.” He also made the point that this release will mean he has made more information public about his own taxes than any of his Republican rivals have so far. “We pay full, fair taxes, and you’ll see it’s a substantial amount.”

[thesometimesaint]

frankenstein:

Being part of a small religious minority does have certain disadvantages. IF followers of the differing religions/sects could only vote for members of their own religion/sects LDS would be hard pressed for any representation outside of Utah.

[Stargazer]

If we are first a constitutional republic then we should not use religion as a litmus test to determine our president no more than we should use color (Obama), looks (Lincoln), etc. as predeterminatives to public service.

I'm ambivalent about this, and rather in agreement with frankenstein on this. I believe everyone has the right to use whatever criteria they wish in deciding who to vote for. If they don't like Romney because he's a Mormon (and especially if they prefer him over the deceitful betrayer Newt Gingrich), well, I believe they are entitled, but it says something about them, and nothing positive. But argue with their right to do so? Not on your life. To repeat a frequently repeated formula, I would fight for their right to do so.

[Stargazer]

What does being a constitutional republic have to do with? If we are not to use religious affiliation then political affiliation should be a wrong test as well.

Skin colour or looks are quite different than religion, religion is a choice that oftener drives one opinions on subjects.

Amen and amen.

[CQUIRK]

Given the complexity of trying to understand my meager tax returns can you imagine the lack of understanding of the vast majority of Americans who can grasp the complexities of his returns? Or do can simply allow a progressively left leaning media to explain it to us? Either way it is not an easy choice.

But he obviously has to do it, nevertheless.

And he also needs to be more down-to-earth in the debates. Looking polished and perfect doesn't help him one bit; its obvious that he won't attract voters acting like a soft-spoken LDS missionary.

Actually the religion factor was quite high: 60% said that it was important that a candidate share their religious beliefs and only 20% of those supported Romney.

Yet besides that one particular pastor that supported Santorum, was there any visible Mormon-bashing in SC like there was in 08'?

I think the issue of Romney's ideology & performance was a way bigger factor of why he lost, then just the Mormon issue.

And BTW, Gingrich is a Catholic.

[Mark Beesley]

It looks like Governor Romney may start attacking Gingrigh directly. See http://firstread.msnbc.msn.com/_news/2012/01/22/10212687-new-state-new-strategy-as-romney-comes-out-swinging

There is enough dirt on Gingrich that he can probably be destroyed when the primaries move to states where character matters more than religion. (Calista Gingrich better hope she never gets seriously ill.) But in the end, it would not surprise me to see Santorum rise to the top as voters will lash out at Romney for playing dirty.

[Calm]

It looks like Governor Romney may start attacking Gingrigh directly. See http://firstread.msn...es-out-swinging

......voters will lash out at Romney for playing dirty.

Do you think voters will see it as playing dirty if the attacks are limited to what was given in the article you linked to (nothing in his personal life, rather attacked his record on ethics in the House and his work as a lobbyist)?

[Bill “Papa” Lee]

NO kidding!

He better change both his strategy AND demeanor quick if he wants to get back on top.

He just not play well on TV...nothing he can do about that.

[Calm]

He just not play well on TV...nothing he can do about that.

He could take some acting lessons or something else that teaches him how to present himself on camera better.

[Nofear]

I thought this was (sadly) hilarious:

[Mola Ram Suda Ram]

Given the complexity of trying to understand my meager tax returns can you imagine the lack of understanding of the vast majority of Americans who can grasp the complexities of his returns? Or do can simply allow a progressively left leaning media to explain it to us? Either way it is not an easy choice.

You know, I really don't care about his tax returns. I highly doubt that he broke any laws. And if he did well, can we not remember Obama's administration and all of his tax cheats?

[Mola Ram Suda Ram]

What does being a constitutional republic have to do with? If we are not to use religious affiliation then political affiliation should be a wrong test as well.

Skin colour or looks are quite different than religion, religion is a choice that oftener drives one opinions on subjects.

I am sorry, did you say something?

[Mark Beesley]

Do you think voters will see it as playing dirty if the attacks are limited to what was given in the article you linked to (nothing in his personal life, rather attacked his record on ethics in the House and his work as a lobbyist)?

I think a lot of voters will use whatever excuse they can find to move away from Romney, and if that means accusing him of playing dirty because he raises ethics questions about Newt, then yes. I just wish Romney would quit pandering to the far right and the teabaggers (those who claim allegience to the so-called Tea Party), and return to the moderate politics he espoused as Governor.