Last week, Mitt Romney faded into Belmont Massachusetts having given up his multi million dollar quest for the presidency. On the face of it, one would expect he was the perfect candidate: a wealthy, handsome, fifty something, a moderate governor with a photogenic family. But instead he was unable to command a good showing except in Michigan where he was born and his dad was a three time governor.
The demise of Mitt is a good lesson in this campaign year. First, some people insist that Romney lost votes because of his religion, Mormonism. Many Republican fundamentalists do not regard Mormons as Christian, since they do not acknowledge the divinity of Christ. But neither do Unitarians, a New England religion which embraced some of the founding fathers in the eighteenth century. Advisors wanted Romney to make a speech on religious tolerance similar to John F. Kennedy's famous address to the Houston Ministers Conference. In that latter statement, Kennedy insisted that he was not a captive of the Vatican and would vote his conscience as he had done in Congress. He opposed federal aid to parochial schools, opposed naming an ambassador to the Holy See, and opposed passing his views on church and state to the hierarchy. Kennedy reaffirms the primacy of the individual's moral judgment, a view the Catholic Church did not accept until several years later in Vatican II. Most importantly, he placed the burden on the Protestants who were intolerant of him and his religion. It was a magnificent tour de force and showed the young senator at his very best. Some Catholics, fundamentalists especially, and clergy were uncomfortable with Kennedy's declaration of independence, but for many lay people it became a classic statement of freedom from clerical intrusion .
Instead of following Kennedy's tone, Romney decided to insist that freedom was founded on religion and that the great enemy was not intolerance but that bogeyman, secularism. Secularism is the new code word for modernism, commercialism, and promiscuity, but it is hard to get a secularist on television. There are of course atheists, but they are not secularists. Romney's problem was that he wanted people to stop worrying about the their perceived oddness of Mormonism and instead to see him as a fellow quasi Christian who is fighting the liberal secularist tides symbolized by the Democrats.
His dilemma was that he was never seen as a real conservative by fundamentalists; they saved that distinction for a weary Fred Thompson and later for Reverend Huckabee. Huck is the real thing for Christian fundamentalists; he even quotes the Scriptures and makes all sorts of allusions to the Gospels. Romney lost any credentials he had built up among the moderates when, just before running for elections, he moved right. In Massachusetts, he had argued that he was more pro-gay than Teddy Kennedy. He claimed that he was supportive of abortion and some sort of universal medical care. Ironically, the early Ronald Reagan celebrated as the paragon of conservative orthodoxy, signed the most liberal abortion law in the nation when he was governor, was tolerant of gays in Hollywood and on his staff, was a nonobservant as a church goer, had a mixed family life, and spent public money like a drunken sailor. Now he is a role model for conservative Repbluclians.
Romney never had a committed base, except what his fortune would buy. He tried to make his business experience a real plus, especially as the stock market declined, but he just did not catch on. Lastly, Romney had what was called a transparency problem, that is, people did not believe him to be a man of integrity the way they believe McCain and Huckabee to be men of integrity. Romney seemed to bend, not with the wind but with the zephyr. He tried to support Bush in the long war effort, but seemed to support some timetables for withdrawal, or so McCain claimed. Will the real Mitt Romney please stand up?
Besides giving a shout out to Wally Edge at Wednesday's New Jersey Legislative Correspondents Association Dinner ("As Wally always says, ... >
Everything that I admire and fear about the Democratic Party was on display this week. The compassion for creating affordable housing and the ... >
McCain announce his intention to appoint real judges, and both teh Times and the Journal muff the story. >
Let’s get this straight. Does U.S. Attorney Chris Christie think he only has a role to play when there’s a violation of US federal ... >
FOR 190 YEARS, New Jersey had no income tax and no sales tax. As recently as 1966, it had only the third-highest property taxes in the nation.
>
The budget proposed by Gov. Jon Corzine has produced myriad negative reactions, featuring various interests seeking to limit the impact of the cuts ... >
NATIONAL CARTOON: Bush sacrificed golf for the troops >
With her victory by ten points in Pennsylvania, Hillary Clinton has re emerged as a very viable candidate for the Democratic nomination. It is ... >
A hugely misguided attempt to eliminate the Department of Agriculture is the spark which has lit an angry fire which took over West State street ... >
Get your facts before you bloviate
Michael,Your comment that"Many Republican fundamentalists do not regard Mormons as Christian, since they do not acknowledge the divinity of Christ." shows a complete ignorance of even the most fundamental concepts of Mormon theology. Mormons absolutely believe in the divinity of Christ. We believe he is the Son of God. Is that divine enough for you? Simply browse the church's website for nonmembers at mormon.org. I don't understand why you would publish an article about a topic you obviously know nothing about.Jason
I had to take the time to
I had to take the time to register for this site for the sole purpose of debunking the following ridiculous statement:
"Many Republican fundamentalists do not regard Mormons as Christian, since they do not acknowledge the divinity of Christ."
A search at LDS.org gives ample evidence that Mormons do indeed acknowledge the divinity of Christ.
From Mormon Apostle M. Russel Ballard in November 2007 "we believe in the Book of Mormon and other books of scripture which support and authenticate the Bible and testify of the ministry and divinity of Christ and of God’s ongoing revelation to man.
The entire talk entitled "Five Marks of the Divinity of Christ" by former Mormon prophet Ezra Taft Benson in 1980
And many more.
I have no quibble with a statement to the effect that Mormons reject the traditional conception of the Trinity or other such breaks with mainstream traditional Christianity. But to claim Mormons don't acknowledge the divinity of Christ is patently absurd.
Romney lost because he is an
Romney lost because he is an amateur flip-flopper. The expert flip-floppers, McCain and HRC, are still running for Prez. The difference is that the media's MTV-level attention span allows McCain and HRC, career politicians, to get away with it. The media only has room for one token Republican.
To Porter and Karras,
I was not making a theological statement. I was saying that many Republican fundamentalists, Catholic and Evangelical, do not regard Mormons as Christian since they do not acknowledge the divinity of Christ. That was a statement about what the many have said and especially during the Iowa primary. Even Huckabee was asked if he regarded Mormonism as a variety of Christianity. He ducked the question. Recently, many statements from Mormon speakers have been attempts to figure their faith as mainstream Christian. Thus they speak of Christ's divinity, though their meaning of Christ’s divinity differs from that of fundamentalists. The point is that fundamentalists perceived (perhaps incorrectly) a major cultural divide and voted accordingly.
Romney lost because he's ...
... full of MITT!!!
Conservatives did not turst him
Mitt's faith had nothing to do with his demise unless it was the root of his flip-flops. He governed as a social liberal bragging that he was more pro-choice (pro-abortion) than Ted Kennedy (which was a lie because he never personally aborted a campaign worker.) He also signed the Gay Marriage Bill.
After leaving the office of Governor, he set his sites on the White House. He miraculously discovered he was wrong on abortion, wrong on gay marriage, wrong on gun control, etc. Half the evangelicals dismissed his abysmal record and fell for his rhetoric. My evangelicals are really gullable. Now they will probably vote for McCain.
As I predicted Mitt is endorsing McCain. Hail to the Chieftess!
"Men occasionally stumble over the truth, but most of them pick themselves up and hurry off as if nothing ever happened." - Sir Winston Churchill
Michael P. Riccards if you have an anti-mormon agenda tell us.
Micheal your comment below was extremely misleading.
"Many Republican fundamentalists do not regard Mormons as Christian, since they do not acknowledge the divinity of Christ. But neither do Unitarians, a New England religion which embraced some of the founding fathers in the eighteenth century."
If you really meant your above pseudoretraction or correction you would have written your statement this way.
"Many Republican fundamentalists believe that Mormons do not acknowledge the divinity of Christ and thus do not believe Mormons are Christians."
I'm going to give you the benefit of the doubt that you might have graduated maybe in the top 50% of your class in journalism school. If so then why mislead people to believe that mormons think Christ is less than divine. Obviously you've either purposefully messed up or you have an agenda. Please do a little research next time. Maybe you should start with something simple like Wikepedia?
Concerning my "anti-Mormon
Concerning my "anti-Mormon agenda," this reader should see my post calling for religious tolerance of the Mormon faith. It was posted on December 5, 2007.
No need to defend yourself, Mr. Riccards
You are neither an anti-Mormon bigot nor an agent of intolerance. You have taken issue with Catholics, Protestants and anyone else when you perceived religion influencing the political process in a manner you felt inappropriate or deleterious to the American notion of separation of church and state. As an Evangelical Protestant, I have not always agreed with your assessment. But I would never reduce myself to claiming that you are a bigot simply because you have the fortitude to step onto that philosophical third-rail.
As for my Mormon friends, there is a great deal of misunderstanding regarding your faith. This is true for every religious tradition due to the unarguable fact that even within a body of believers, some take a differing view on certain theological issues. In the Mormon faith, there are Apostles whose views, while not canonical in stature, reflect a particular view different from other Mormon leaders. The issue of whether Christ was married is an example. There are respected Mormon Apostles who posit that this is the case. This same dynamic applies in Evengelical Christian circles regarding issues such as the rapture or the role/nature of baptism.
Moreover, the use of the term "divinity" is an open invitation to debate for both Mormons and Evangelicals. To an Evangelical Protestant, the divinity of Christ is based on the concept ot the Triune Godhead - Father, Son and Holy Spirit. Christ is not simply a divinely created being, but He is God Himself. By the same token, a Mormon would consider Christ "divine" based on a concept of divinity that does not hinge on a trintiarian construct of God.
To my knowledge, Mr. Riccards has never claimed to be a theologian. What he has done is earnestly attempt to open up a dialogue on an issue that needed to be addressed given the Romney candidacy and the questions arising from his Mormon faith. His explanation regarding his comments is objectively reasonable and, in all candor, is exactly the way I understood them. To label him an anti-Mormon bigot for so doing is at best intellectually dishonest and at worst a misbegotten attempt to close off a potentially edifying dialogue between people of faith simply to avoid a subjective sense of indignation.
Keep writing, my good man. If I don't like what you write, you'll know about it post haste. But I will not stoop to calling you a bigot.
Romney
Gee! Sounds just like another guy, except this Yo-Yo was elected Governor and bought his millions with him but in the end will show that he “Can’t buy me love”.
That said, Romney lost and good riddance, because he was and still is, as McAmnesty is, a FLIP-FLOPPER, Paul is a “Wack Job” and Huckaberry is a Liberal, Taxacrat (would fit well in NJ) Illegal Alien supporter and a self claimed evangelist that received his certificate from a Saturday call in show.
The only true Conservative is no longer in the race mainly due to the lies of Huckaberry and the garbage mouth trash coming from the MSM talking heads.
You all will pay the price and I will be sitting by and laughing my Irish – German Catholic butt off.
Rome is burning and it is called the United States of America.