Jeffrey Quick's Blog

Mormonism: not so simple?

Speedzzter thinks that I'm being a bit simplistic on the Romney thing.

Well, no. To take his points in order:
1. As my mother would say, it was mighty white of Rev. Sharpton to allow that, yes, Mitt believes in God.

2. Is any criticism of Mormonism bigotry?

Speedzzter begins by submitting a bunch of Christian apologetics dedicated to differentiating Mormonism from Christianity. I don't believe that an objective student of world religions would come to the same conclusion. If this is "criticism" of Mormonism, it is so only because it assumes orthodox Christianity as the measure of truth...which is fine for the Christian, but is irrelevant at best to the secular world of politics. Hoekema on cults is drawing a technical distinction which is theologically valid, but ignores the fact that in American English "cult" means, pretty much, "any religion I don't approve of."

Then we have a discussion of Reynolds v. U.S., which is somewhat more substantive. Reynolds differentiates between beliefs and actions, in regards to religious freedom. In the specific case, it was rather broader than I would be about what is "in violation of social duties or subversive of good order". Most arguments against polygamy (and gay marriage!) are religion-based and in fact constitute an establishment of religion. One could argue that polygamy, if widely practiced, would create large number of unmarried males, which would clearly be socially disruptive. This would be an acceptable secular reason to ban legal recognition of it, though freedom of association means that people can and will have relations with whom they please.

Sharpton's critique was that, since Mormons accepted a clearly racist doctrine during the lifetime of Mitt Romney, Romney must have been either a racist or a heretic. What makes this bigoted is the assumption that an individual acts on a group identity. It would have been more substantive to argue from Romney's record in office whether he's a racist, and leave the LDS out of it. It's also valid to argue that Mormon racism is a theological problem. The theology might lead people to be prejudiced, but doesn't necessarily mean they are so. Similarly, it is not bigotry to examine the violence inherent in the Koran, but one can't assume that any individual Moslem actually believes that; I suspect that most Moslems are as heretical as most Christians. So my answer to speedzzter would be, "Criticism of Mormonism is not bigotry; criticism of people on the basis of their stated religious belief system is bigotry."

3. Is Romney's situation similar to that of JFK?
Speedzzter's argument in support of this is basically that Catholics are Christians and Mormons aren't. Not only is this argument incompatible with Article VI/3 of the Constitution, but it's historically inaccurate. The fear about Kennedy was that he would take orders from Rome; nobody has suggested that Romney would take orders from Salt Lake City. Given that few Catholic Democrats are taking orders from Rome regarding abortion, it seems that the fear was misplaced.

Disclaimer: the Quicks to whom I am related, with the exception of my paternal grandfather and his spouse and descendants, are generally members of the Community of Christ (formerly the Reorganized Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints). However, both my father and I were brought up as Missouri Synod Lutherans.