Ed FirmageMitt Romney and The Mormon Question
In response to Richard Warnick
Just for historical reasons, I’d bet that neither pary will nominate anybody from New York or Massachusetts. Religion is a side issue. BTW, did you watch Senator Harry Reid on ABC News with George Stephanopoulos yesterday? He dealt with the “Mormon question†deftly, like the practiced pol he is.
Yes, but the reality, not just the public perception, that Mormons take orders from on high, and I don’t mean god, is too true. The ‘’Mormon question†persists, beyond the point of the religious bigotry, du jure. I do not see this as a PR problem, as Stephanupoulos would. I profoundly believe that the Mormon leadership see their challenge as producing yet more slick public relations. I believe that Mormon leadership only see public relations “spin,†where I see huge ethical lapse. On any issue of meaning. Any issue of human and civil rights. Public relations is after all, the training my friend Gordon B. Hinckley brings, along with a vast amount of very good church service he’s given, over time. That’s what he was doing, that is, PR, when we met. And in a sense, sadly I believe, now. As we speak.
Utah, and the Great Basin grandpa Brigham settled, are hugely Republican. Only 14 percent of Mormons are Democrats. In the entire United States. And that’s not because Mormon theology mandates that. Quite the contrary.
Mormon theology, all the ‘good books’ in Mormonland, the bible, the book of mormon, the doctrine and covenants, and the pearl of great price (except for some racist babble), give a social gospel message as consonant with the great liberal political gospel of compassion, as if it came directly and conclusively from the bible alone (which in fact, it largely did).
BUT the “church,†choosing people like themselves, namely, the most reactionary leadership in the Americas, are simply mirroring each other, cloning each other. It has absolutely nothing to do with biblical or textual precepts. This, not sexual incest, this intellectual and spiritual incest, is much more damaging to the Mormon people.
Not being stupid, they pay absolutely no notice to the meaningless drivel that comes each election time: “the Mormon church does not support any particular political party.†Horseshit. they do it every time they clone another Mormon version of George the Less, to preside over this mission or that; or as stake president; or as a member of any body of general authorities.
We pattern ourselves after human beings, not theology, per se. That’s why religions often incarnate at least one diety. Jesus, I can try, hopelessly short, to pattern my life after; and st. Paul, et al. Or, my friend, the Dali Lama. But God, as such, I don’t get. I just have faith. Mormons look to their leaders. And try to follow. And they’re all, essentially, playing out of the same antique ultra-conservative, almost John Birch-like hymnal.
So: it’s not just that the country must grow up. So must the Mormon Church.
A world-wide religion must contain comfortably within its tent people of every race, color, and political creed (short of those preaching hared and violence). People of starkly different cultures must find the structures of their religion welcoming and need-fulfilling. A church may be an international church and be very far from universal. That is, it may well simply demand of foreign members of the church that they jettison their own social ways for that of the metropolitan community. That may be an imperial church, but it is not universal. The Pauline vision of such an organization has been lost.
It would be my hope that the presidential campaign of Mitt Romney might force the Mormon church to examine itself in this regard, and they see Mitt sweating out the results of polls showing that one-third of his countrymen would not be inclined to vote for a Mormon. And again I repreat: this is NOT a public relations problem at the center. It is a matter of ethics and vision. Are we a universal church, or merely just one more imperialistic multinational corporation? Who knows? Mitt’s real contribution to the country in running for the presidency might be to shed so much light on Mormon practice that a modest liberalization might take place. Don’t bet the North Forty on that, but it’s not any more of a stretch than the Republican Party enlarging their tent to accomodate women, homosexuals, and people of color.
Edwin Brown Firmage (website, bio)
Samuel D. Thurman Professor of Law, Emeritus
University of Utah College of Law Salt Lake City, Utah
December 19th, 2006 at 8:05 pm
Hey Ed,
You seem to be the religious guy here. I have a deep theological quesiton that you’ve undoubtedly heard before so I am sure you can give me a good answer (no one else has).
Q: Can God make a rock so big that he can’t pick it up?
December 19th, 2006 at 8:24 pm
Ed, wow, that was a lot to digest. I’m not sure if I am quite so worried about Mormons in high places, it happens all the time without bringing down the Republic. Senator Reid is a good example, I believe, of someone who does not think his faith extends into the realm of public policy although I’d like to think his personal character has been improved through religion.
In terms of the 2008 presidential race, I think Massachusetts and New York are unlikely to produce nominees from either party because of the whole “red state/blue state” thing. John Kerry, Mitt Romney, Hillary Clinton and Rudy Giuliani are out of luck– their “negatives” are part and parcel with perceptions of the states they represent. John Edwards speaks “southern” and I expect he’ll do well. John McCain might get nominated, too.
Perhaps Romney hopes that carrying a religious banner will help him with the “red states.” I’d guess it will help him with the LDS faithful and not much beyond that. One man’s opinion. Peace be with you, too.
December 19th, 2006 at 8:25 pm
Hey Corn Person, I beg you to use a less offensive screen name - ideally your real name.
As for your question, it is a clever one and speaks to the irrationality of the concept of God. Faith is the antithesis of reason. Your question is grounded in reason.
December 20th, 2006 at 7:23 am
romney doesn’t have a prayer. In the east where tolerance of illegal aliens is waning and the states back there taking matters into their own hands, fact is that romney had illegal aliens working on his estate in Mass for years . He claims he didn’t know. So once again we have a guy with limited credibility. Against illegal immigration while they in his yard. Being a Christian apostate heretic in a largely Christian nation won’t help either.
http://thinkprogress.org/2006/12/01/romney-illegal-immigration/
December 20th, 2006 at 8:09 am
Cliff and the Great Bush imitator (how’s that?) God has no difficulty whatsoever lifting any sized rock higher than the highest. His problems all occur when trying to keep them down. Thanks. As for Romney’s rising to the top…(or Mccain for that matter), surely in this vast nation we got better’n that. Fie on thier likes. Ideally the next president would be dragged from among our ranks, kicking and screaming into the Whitehouse. Rocky comes to mind.
December 20th, 2006 at 8:55 am
If Yoda can do it, God can do it. Use the Force!
December 20th, 2006 at 9:40 am
Ed, Sing it sista! I think this exact sentiment, so eloquently expressed, is the thing that so many of the rest of us so long to say out of our own mouths, but can’t formulate the reasoning, or don’t have the platform. Kudos to you.
Why can’t we elect people whose religion is a secondary, lower case, identity? It’s because the country’s pulpits (of almost any religion) have turned into the favorite haunts of political hopefuls looking to resonate. All churchs should be paying taxes as a result of this new paradigm. That having been said, the two pools (church/state) are already too mixed, and it’s a mess.
December 20th, 2006 at 11:26 am
[...] Ed Firmage: Mitt, the Question, and Perceived Authority By ginny One Utah » Blog Archive » Mitt Romney and The Mormon Question My frustration, like so many who have faced their church of birth, is that in my own mind only, obviously not in reality; but in my own pain, is that if I inhale hugely, the structure trembles, and threatens either to kill me or to collapse; and if I exhale, I blow it away, so much so that it can’t help me, and I really need it’s help; and I can’t help them, since I’ve tried so very hard to do so, and I’ve had success only once, in MX. [...]
December 20th, 2006 at 1:16 pm
Poor Ed, my sympathies, there’s nothing for it but a good dose of disbelief.
Nothing new about the whole dynamic anyway. You could change the names and religions and it could be virtually any theocracy at a given time in human history.
December 20th, 2006 at 6:47 pm
Ed,
I have a question for you regarding the McCarthy’s and the Tribune sale. I am not intimately familiar with the transaction or the law, so perhaps you can help me understand something. Did the McCarthy’s have a written agreement with the new owners of the Trib (wasn’t it a cable company?) that it would be returned to them or was it an understanding?
Thanks in advance.
December 22nd, 2006 at 7:28 am
[...] Ed’s original post had to do with Mitt Romney running for President and some of the ways he feels the LDS Church needs to change and “mature” along with the nation before a Mormon President is feasible. Â Â While I don’t agree with every jot and tittle of what Ed says, he is dead on correct about the need for more transparency on things like Mountain Meadows Massacre and other 19th century issues. [...]