Archive for July, 2006

July 27th 2006

Today’s Reading List - July 27, 2006


I am neither a prophet or the son of a prophet, but yesterday I commented in the Reading List about organization in politics and government, and lo and behold - the Heritage Foundation is thinking about it too. 

I know Hillary is still the prohibitive favorite for the Dem nod, but I’m telling you, Evan Bayh would make the best race of it.

Speaking of favorites - The National Journal’s tote sheet.

Novak has some points here, to my mind particularly when it comes to Frist’s ineptitude, but it is a huge issue.  What can a presidential candidate do?

There is no question that the Big Dig problems are thrusting Romney into the national spotlight, but I think hanging him with an appelation like “Turnaround President” would be a mistake - the presidency is about too much more than that.

micromitt.jpg

ON THE LIGHTER SIDE: Saw this ad yesterday and got visions of the Austin Powers movies running through my head.  Well, it made me chuckle.
Sphere: Related Content

No Comments yet »

July 26th 2006

Cheap Shots And Lousy Journalism


John’s reading list below refers to this article in the Associated Baptist News by Hannah Elliott. I noticed the article yesterday but did not read it carefully until today. Bottom line: This is the type of journalism conservatives would never accept from anyone writing about politics in the mainstream news media. It’s also typical of much of the information that some evangelical sources have been disseminating about Romney, so it’s directly relevant to this blog’s purpose.

As John notes, Ms.Elliott’s article begins with a nod to politics, then devotes the remaining paragraphs to aspects of Mormonism that are among the favorite hobby horses of anti-Mormon writers. And, as is usually the case in such treatments, the piece gets Mormon theology wrong, or distorts that theology by presenting it only partially or with no balance whatsoever. Through it all, there is not a single quote from a believing Mormon, much less an official spokesman for the Church. There is plenty from critics of the Church, however. This is a depressing pattern that we see all too often.

Consider these excerpts from Ms. Elliott’s article:

[Mormons] also believe that humans are now what God once was, and that humans have the potential to become what God is now, according to whatismormonism.com, a website hostile to the faith.

Why go to an anti-Mormon website to learn what Mormons believe? You might want to visit the whatismormonism.com site. It’s ferociously anti-Mormon, its only footnotes are to other anti-Mormon sources, it does not give the credentials of its authors, and it is dedicated to disproving Mormon beliefs. Is that the kind of authoritative source a good journalist uses? Even if it were, would it be good journalism to refer to The Protocols of The Elders of Zion as a source for understanding and explaining Judaism?  Conservatives would not tolerate such nonsense from the mainstream media.

Salvation for Mormons, according to the official LDS website (www.mormon.org), comes through righteous living via tests of faith. It culminates in the believer becoming a god and starting an eternal family. By virtue of the “celestial marriage” ordinance, worthy males may bring their wives to begin this family.

Well, at least Ms. Elliott cites an official Mormon site, but this is a subtle but devastating oversimplification and outright distortion of Mormon beliefs, on several levels. There is not space here to respond to all of it. First, Mormons believe “it is by grace that we are saved, after all we can do.” That is fundamental, and there is a subtlety to the doctrine that goes well beyond the Elliott article’s simple summary. As for multiple wives in the hereafter, that is something that honest Mormons will say we just don’t know enough about to be very specific. Notably, the subject is not addressed on www.mormon.org, but the context of the article leads one to believe the contrary, and that Ms. Elliott is conveying information appearing on an official Mormon site. The subject is a favorite point of attack for anti-Mormons, which makes me wonder about Ms. Elliott’s own orientation.

Next we read some commentary from Frances Beckwith, a sophisticated (and respectful) critic of the Mormon Church:

The fact that Mormonism denies the “great creeds of Christendom” and claims to have restored true Christianity through Smith, Beckwith said, causes most evangelicals to see Mormonism as devastatingly errant in its theology. He is the associate director of the Baptist school’s J.M. Dawson Institute of Church-State Studies. In 2002, he co-wrote The New Mormon Challenge: Responding to the Latest Defenses of a Fast-Growing Movement.

Beckwith’s book is intended in part to enable evangelicals to respond to increasingly sophisticated Mormon defenses of their faith. Here’s how Amazon describes the book:

Written by an international team of respected Christian scholars, this freshly researched rebuttal of Mormon truth will aid those sharing the gospel with Mormons and those investigating Mormonism on their own. It will help readers to accurately understand Mormonism through biblical, historical, scientific, philosophical, and theological discussions.

. . .

Whether you are sharing the gospel with Mormons or are investigating Mormonism for yourself, this book will help you accurately understand Mormonism and see the superiority of the historic Christian faith.

There’s nothing wrong with writing such a book, or with Elliott referring to it to establish Professor Beckwith’s expertise. He is a respectful critic of Mormonism– at least in my view. (Here’s an example of Beckwith’s writing, in which he responds to this review of his book. Both are very interesting reads.) He’s also a fine conservative thinker.

I’m not complaining about Professor Beckwith– my concern is over Ms. Elliott’s reliance on an expert critic of Mormonism, combined with the total absence of any inquiry to any official Mormon church spokesmen– or even a believing member of the Church. What happened to balance and proportion?

Moreover, in a private e-mail to me, Professor Beckwith shared one of his responses to one of Ms. Elliott’s questions:

For me, as an Evangelical, I have no qualms working with Mormons on political matters and even supporting Mitt Romney for the presidency (though I have not made up my mind yet). If I choose not to support Gov. Romney, it would be because of his politics and not his religion.

This response, which significantly changes the context and tone of Professor Beckwith’s answers, was not included in the article.

We often accuse the mainstream media of agenda journalism. One wonders whether that is what is occurring here. Would you accept such journalism from the L.A. Times, Washington Post, or Miami Herald? Of course not. It will be fascinating to see if such sloppy, biased thinking and writing will, in the end, have a real impact on Romney’s chances, or if it will simply become background noise. I’m hoping for the latter, but I’m not sure how optimistic I should be.

Technorati Tags: , , , , , ,


Sphere: Related Content

No Comments yet »

July 26th 2006

Today’s Reading List - July 26, 2006


Short and sweet:

Hotline has a broken link that should be to here. Romney does seem better organized than anyone else, at least as best as I can see. Which raises interesting questions about the “MBA presidency.” If there is anything MBA types are good at, it’s organizing. Yet in some sense politics thrives on relative chaos. (Consider the chaos of party based fund-raising alone - how many solicitations do you get from how many “committees” - can you make sense of it?) Is there a fundamental shift in how politics is done afoot?

The Baptist press looks at the LA Time/Bloomberg poll. Frankly, this is the stuff I, as an Evangelical, worry about. The article talks to some extent about politics being the issue, not theology, then delves into where Mormon theology is radically different than creedal Christianity. That’s not balance - it’s a cheap shot. Lowell: Further comments above, by yours truly.
Sphere: Related Content

No Comments yet »

July 25th 2006

Today’s Reading List - July 25, 2006


Think this is part of Hillary’s move to the center? If so, will it work? Lowell: The Clintons never do anything that is not calculated.

Looking at ‘06. Wishful thinking on the MSM’s part?

Mormons wondering about an old kinda ugly video. (HT: TallSkinnyKiwi) Is it ever useful to use words like “strange”? Lowell: This is an excerpt from an anti-Mormon movie made over 20 years ago called “The Godmakers.” It attracted quite a bit of attention at the time and is full of distortions and outright falsehoods. In a word, the movie is infuriating to any fair-minded viewer who knows anything about the LDS Church. I daresay it is downright un-Christian. I am reminded of several rules of thumb for understanding any religion, including Mormonism:

1. Ask me what I believe, don’t tell me.

2. If if you want to know what a particular faith believes, ask that faith’s representatives, not its enemies.

3. If you must criticize what I believe, then criticize my actual beliefs, not some ridiculous caricature of them.

If Romney becomes a serious candidate, there may well be a lot of this sort of falsehood all over the Web. Will it change voters’ minds to any significant degree? That remains to be seen.

Mormon humor from the Master. Lowell: Now, that is funny. And, in the interest of equal time, here’s some Presbyterian humor, from a Presbyterian publication. ;-)

At the intersection of faith and politics. Note how little theology matters in the discussion. Which leads me to this post. How much does theology matter in developing “habits of the heart”? Certainly, a significant branch of current Islamic theology builds bad ones, but can we say that about all theologies we call other?

Here’s a Letter to The Editor of the Salt Lake Trib. I leave this to Lowell to respond to - please. Lowell: I would be interested in knowing the letter writer’s current relationship to the LDS Church. He seems angry, the way a disaffected or former member would be. And he’s making statements that someone with his experience in the Church knows are false, like this one: “The fact that Mitt has a temple recommend indicates that he has already given his total obedience to his leaders in all matters.” Well, no, that’s not true at all. It so happens that I give interviews for LDS temple recommends all the time, and “total obedience in all matters” is not a requirement. Again, the letter reads like that of an angry person.

Finally, is it just me, or is this raising the religion issue without really raising it? Either way it sure is a tone unbecoming a major metropolitan newspaper. Lowell: Yes. The term “cheap shot” comes to mind.
Sphere: Related Content

No Comments yet »

July 24th 2006

Today’s Reading List - July 24, 2006


A little history.

This is what could make Romney’s Mormon faith an issue.  Bottom line is this, we cannot afford to split up the GOP on religious lines, particularly when the religions agree on the issues!  Speaking of which, here’s another way that religion in general might become an issue.  As a Christian trained in science (chemistry) all I can say is Puh-leeze!

In case you haven’t heard, there is a dog on the ballot for Governor in Alaska - That calls for a humor break.

New faith-based poli-blog RedBlueChristian continues to turn out some good stuff.  Here they link great roundtable discussion amongst some biggies.  Meanwhile, this post gives us a clue as to why Romney’s faith may not be that big a deal.  All depends on who the “religious right” really is.

Hey! We’re interviewing this guy this week.

Remember that poll?  The media-busting guys at Powerline (remember Memogate?) have figured it out.  They filled in the blanks kinda like I thought they’d be filled in.

On separation of church and politics.  Worth thinking about - if we Evangelicals discriminate against a candidate solely on the basis of his faith - how can we hope to reach people of that faith?  Why does it seem like the Mormons have figured that out and we haven’t?

A right-thinking Evangelical - A Baptist no less.
Sphere: Related Content

No Comments yet »

July 21st 2006

Preview: Upcoming Article 6 Blog Interviews


We plan to do a number of interviews here of people with important perspectives on faith and religion in presidential politics (and other politics as well). Our interview with Richard John Neuhaus was only the beginning. Within the next two weeks we expect to post interviews with two other important opinion-makers, David Barton of Wallbuilders and Mitch Davis of RunMittRun, a recently-formed “527 organization.” Watch this space!

Coincidentally, Mr. Davis got mention in today’s Opinion Journal Political Diary. That service requires a subscription, but here’s an excerpt about what Davis is up to:

Mitch Davis, a Mormon filmmaker best known for “The Other Side of Heaven,” says he is taking up the challenge so that Mr. Romney can talk about other issues. “The last thing Mitt Romney wants to be is the Mormon candidate,” he told reporters this week. “But inevitably, the issue has to be addressed. And it’s beneath Mitt Romney to do the heavy lifting on this.”

Mr. Davis hopes to make “hip, funny and smart” radio and TV ads that explain why Americans have as little to fear from a Mormon president as they did from John F. Kennedy, who became the nation’s first Catholic leader. One of his ideas is to recruit Mormon celebrities such as football great Steve Young and singer Gladys Knight to discuss their religion.
. . .

“If I believed what most Americans do about Mormons, I couldn’t vote for a Mormon either,” Mr. Davis concluded. His initial plans are to raise several million dollars for his effort, knowing full well that Mr. Romney, a Republican, will be keeping his distance from the project.

That should be an interesting interview. You can read more about Mr. Davis’ plans here and here - no subscription required!  Also, Ryan Sager of the RealClearPolitics blog comments, but I must admit his post leaves me saying, “huh?”
Sphere: Related Content

No Comments yet »

« Prev - Next »

WELL DONE GOVERNOR ROMNEY


Thank you for an incredible journey!