While I still have reservations about Mitt Romney for reasons having nothing at all to do with his Mormon faith, Romney did all people of faith a service by successfully confronting and answering the secularist agenda to rid the public sphere of any faith at all. The speech was moving and emotional at all the right places, yet it was not so much a defense of his Mormonism as it was an attempt to get the American people to not see him as a Mormon, but rather as a person of faith. He delivered on that point, as many Americans will come to see him now as a man of faith rather than as the member of a cult.
The theological debate, however, will ensue over whether or not Romney is correct in aligning his Mormonism with orthodox Christianity. While he stated unequivocally that he believed in Jesus Christ as his Savior, what exactly he means by that is nuanced and will be parsed by conservative Christian theologians in the days to come. Stay tuned. We’ll highlight the speech with commentary on this afternoon’s edition of The Paul Edwards Program at 4:00 pm ET heard live locally in Detroit on AM 1500 WLQV and streaming at www.godandculture.com.
Skeptimal
Wow, thank you for such kind words! I appreciate your comments!
I do like to read “anti” I find it interesting, even the history of the church, for me it shows how imperfect humans are. There are some amazing uplifting stories and there are some very sad disturbing ones. I think our church has learned from past mistakes, and has improved and progressed. I like that a church can say “we were wrong” and change!
For me I have found happiness in the LDS faith. And I wish to share that with others!
I wish you happiness also, and I thank you for such a civil/nice conversation! 🙂
Steffielynn,
My comment about reading critical literature was a suggestion. I’m sorry that it read like an assignment.
Take care…
First, you have no need to apologize for Romney. I can’t blame you for being excited about his candidacy, because I would be if I were a Mormon. Still, he doesn’t speak for all Mormons, and my hope is that people will not judge all Mormons when he missteps.
It saddens me a great deal to read your post. If I had a daughter or sister who joined the Mormons, although I can’t say I would be happy about it, I’d like to think that I’d go out of my way to let her know that I loved her just as much. It is evident from your posts that you are a caring person who wants to do the right thing, and such people are to be treasured, whatever their faith or conscience. Unfortunately, I’ve known other conscientious people whose families have disowned them over faith issues. Mine has been more gracious, but it is a sore point for them.
I hope two things for you regarding your family. First, I hope they come over time to recognize that you are the same person they always loved and get over their fear. Second is that you are able to remain generous, caring, and forgiving toward them, for your own sake. They may feel betrayed, or they may just feel their faith requires them to withdraw from you, but you can’t shut off love like a faucet. They still care about you.
I hope you’ll take this next part the way it is intended. Take some time sometime soon to read some history of LDS that is written by non-Mormons. Read some of the books critical of LDS. I make a practice of reading anti-literature for political and social groups I belong to, and it has served me well. I’m guessing you do that at some level also, or you wouldn’t be posting here.
By the way, I’m aware that Evangelical proselytizers and demonstrators gather in Salt Lake City, and I need no convincing about cruel they can be. The irony is that they would say they are doing it “in love.”
Skeptimal,
I can see how you could look into it and feel the way you do. I don’t think he meant to exclude non believers. And I am sorry that he offended you.
As for experiencing hate first hand, where to start! I had not ever experienced any kind of discrimination in my life until I joined the LDS church (2 1/2 years ago) I have been rejected by “Christians” that I had once known and loved. My family disowned me, I’ve been told I will “burn in Hell” more times then I can count. I have neighbors that will not allow their children to interact with mine (and my kids are soooo good) I used to watch kids in my home, and when the parents found out I was LDS, the parents came to my home and screamed at me, told me I was going to hell, and of course took there child out (these were the same parents who LOVED me the day before).
There are “Christian” protesters who will stand outside our conference center in Salt lake and scream at the LDS walking by. here is a link, this REALLY happens! http://www.fairlds.org/Anti-Mormons/Street_Preachers.html
Now don’t get me wrong all Christians are not like this, but there are many who are. I know Mitt has experienced this same prejudice, and this is why he ended up giving this speech. It’s so sad that people can be so awful! Mormons just want (and deserve) respect, just like you, and every other American!
Steffie,
You said: “And I agree that some people of faith can be hateful and awful to others. Romney, as a man of faith, has experienced this as well. There are people out there who hate us Mormons, and this is why he made this speech in the first place! We should all live and let live. We would all be a lot happier!”
I sincerely hope you have no personal experience with hatred of Mormons. My impression had been that even Evangelical Christians generally regarded Mormons as well-meaning but spiritually deceived. That’s just as disrespectful as being labeled arrogant and rebellious (like unbelievers), but it’s a notch or two down the hatred scale.
You said: “The speech was about religion and faith, I don’t understand why people are getting so upset, if he was giving a speech intitled “good Americans” and he named every religion but left out atheists could see why you would be upset.”
When JFK gave his speech, he was addressing Protestants who feared the pope would be making decisions for the country. His approach was that his faith was his own business, but that he believed in separation of church and state, and he stated unequivocally that he would make his decisions based on the constitution. That’s all Romney should have done.
Instead he went further. He said: “. Our greatness would not long endure without judges who respect the foundation of faith upon which our constitution rests.” Not only is he wrong that our constitution is faith-based, but I’m not sure how to interpret his statement except that non-religious judges are not fit to serve.
He also said: “Freedom requires religion just as religion requires freedom. Freedom opens the windows of the soul so that man can discover his most profound beliefs and commune with God. Freedom and religion endure together, or perish alone.”
Is there a way to interpret this that does not exclude from freedom those who do not believe in even the neutral god of American tradition?
“In recent years, the notion of the separation of church and state has been taken by some well beyond its original meaning. They seek to remove from the public domain any acknowledgment of God. Religion is seen as merely a private affair with no place in public life. It is as if they are intent on establishing a new religion in America – the religion of secularism. They are wrong.”
This was a shameless distortion of the position taken by people of faith and free thinkers who have spoken out for separation of church and state.
Romney said that no one should have to give complete doctrinal statements because to do so would imply a religious test for government. Nevertheless, he said, “There is one fundamental question about which I often am asked. What do I believe about Jesus Christ? I believe that Jesus Christ is the Son of God and the Savior of mankind”
So clearly he believes it is okay to ask a candidate if he believes Jesus Christ is the son of God, but other questions are not permitted.
All of these things taken together show that this speech supposedly defending freedom of religion was no such thing. It was an attempt to build unity between Mormons and Evangelicals at the expense of nonChrisitans.
Skeptimal,
The speech was about religion and faith, I don’t understand why people are getting so upset, if he was giving a speech intitled “good Americans” and he named every religion but left out atheists could see why you would be upset. Again as a Mormon he believes you are free to practice whatever you like, whether you have a faith or not.
I do have to compliment you on admitting your mistake, (in comment 13) It takes a very wise and humble person to admit they may have been wrong! And I agree that some people of faith can be hateful and awful to others. Romney, as a man of faith, has experienced this as well. There are people out there who hate us Mormons, and this is why he made this speech in the first place! We should all live and let live. We would all be a lot happier!
Paul, I appreciate your words, and I appreciate you allowing me to voice my opinion here!
Also in your post you said “While he stated unequivocally that he believed in Jesus Christ as his Savior, what exactly he means by that is nuanced and will be parsed by conservative Christian theologians in the days to come. ”
Now I’m not Romney, but I am Mormon, and I would be MORE then happy to answer “what exactly that means” !!!!! 🙂
Skeptimal,
Are you an atheist? Just curious…
Skeptimal,
You are correct when you say that religion and patriotism have been used to manipulate the country – without question. Romney ought to have included atheists and agnostics in his speech, as President Bush often does when he is talking about the role of religion in public life, using phrases like, “we are free to believe or not believe.” But in his defense, the speech was about faith in public life, not the lack thereof. Nonetheless, he ought to have included the nontheistic point of view.
I appreciate your contributions to this blog.
Paul,
I appreciate the gentleness of your response. After posting last night, I realized that I’ve been harsh. This is your website, and you’ve been gracious in allowing me to post here, despite my differing views. I’ll try to keep that in mind in future posts.
I also recognize that reasonable people of good conscience can disagree, and given the level of civil discourse taking place in the country these days, we’d probably all do well to cut each other some slack.
I do believe I am justifiably angry at the way religion and patriotism have been used to manipulate the country, subvert our principles, and undermine the constitiution in recent years. Frankly, I think religious people should be angrier than I am; after all, it is your faith that has been so cynically abused.
I also believe Romney’s speech intentionally set aside people whose consciences exist independently from religion. You are correct that he didn’t overtly demonize unblievers as many people do, and he had no obligation to reach out to free thinkers. I take little comfort in that.
After reading the speech again, I have to admit I was wrong in saying he opposed separation of church and state. Was it a hateful speech? Maybe not. Still, I wonder how you would feel if yours was the belief system intentionally excluded from a discussion of American unity.
Skeptimal,
Romney’s position on the importance of religious faith to the establishment of liberty is a position held by everyone of the American Founders. Christians and other people of faith do not have a “paranoid fear of unbelievers.” I welcome debate with unbelievers, and certainly allow them the freedom to not believe.
From the speech it was clear that Romney *does* support the separation of Church and State. His point was that there is a rabid secularism that supports the separation of GOD from PUBLIC LIFE, and that America cannot have religious liberty apart from God IN public life. Saying that God should be visible in the public sphere is not the same as advocating for the state establishment of religion.
Paul,
What his speech shows, and you’ve acknowledged, is that people of any faith can cling together as long as they recognize the common enemy: unbelief. I know that this will seem to you a trivial matter, but Romney repeatedly indicated that in order to be American, you have to be a person of faith. “Freedom requires faith and faith requires freedom,” and “Americans acknowledge that liberty is a gift of god.” He has played on your biases and superstition to gain your sympathy, and it has worked.
What galls me is that, were it not for your paranoid fear of unbelievers, whom you consider the greater threat, you would label this man unfit for the presidency: a heretic and a threat to Christianity. Instead, you commend him for his service to people of faith.
Romney’s Mormonism is of no consequence to his ability to serve as president, and I have no problem with a Mormon president. I *do* have a problem with any presidential candidate who does not recognize that you can not support religious freedom and oppose separation of church and state.
As far as Mitt Romney specifically is concerned there was NO hate in his speech! Mormons do not throw “Hell fire” around like some religions, our faith is centered around God, but not an angry mean God. We believe He is forgiving and kind. We also believe that those of other faiths are intitled to believe as they wish. (article of faith # 11 “We claim the privilege of worshiping Almighty God according to the dictates of our own conscience, and allow all men the same privilege, let them worship how, where, or what they may.”
You can read them all here, http://www.lds.org/library/display/0,4945,106-1-2-1,FF.html
To backup Skeptimal point from a broad perspective, religion and right wing politics thrive on fear. Look at this administration in the white house. EVERYTHING is about 911, oh you want us to disclose documents, NO since 911 we have to hide our dealings be cause of National Security. The best way to get people to comply to anything is to keep them in fear. In our faith it is fear from Hell, and judgment from God. He is always looking over our shoulder lessed we have a passing bad thought about a good looking woman. I don’t’ know anything about Romney’s speak but I do know that right wing thought best when people fear forthcoming circumstances. Point in case, I heard you Paul talking about Mike Savage and you were going on and on about how we will someday be under Islamic(Sharea(sp?)) law. IN THIS COUNTRY? No way. This country where if a presidential candidate even says he is not a man of the Christian faith there is no way he would be elected. This is a prime case of using fear to get people behind your cause, let’s call all these company’s let’s get Mike Savage’s right wing, neoconservative, war mongering messege back on the air. If not, then all these bomb strapping Islamic folks are going to be chopping off our heads in America, OK too dramatic but that is what “I” heard when you were saying that.
Where specifically, Skiptimal, is the hatred and fear in Romney’s speech? The speech was inclusive of ALL Americans, including people who choose not to follow a particular religion. Who does Mr. Romney hate and who does he fear?
Romney’s speech and the reaction to it have provided further evidence that people of faith can only truly be united by hatred and fear.
I am a Mormon!!! 🙂
Her blog is entitled “Mormons rock”. I would assume she is.
Colin,
Click on the link that is steffielynn and you will see on her blog that she is a mormon….
steffielynn,
Your a Mormon?
Great speech and I would agree with your post Paul.
Problem with Romney is I still don’t believe him on any of the issues that matter to me. Abortion, the homosexual agenda, immigration, taxes… he’s been on both sides of all these issues.
I was already a supporter, but I was worried that this speech would bring him down rather then help him. I watched it with tears in my eyes, both as a Mormon and an American! He ROCKED it!!!