Meridian Magazine : : Print

Dishonesty and Sloppy Rhetoric
By Lowell Brown

After a week off visiting Nauvoo with my family, I’m glad to be back at Article VI Blog and here at Meridian, commenting on the more interesting events in the world of presidential politics, Mitt Romney, and Mormonism.

Coincidental note of the week: While doing research at Nauvoo on my great-great-grandfather Phineas Young, I reviewed the Nauvoo Temple Endowment Register for December 1845. On the same page of the document that displayed the date Phineas was endowed, also appeared the name of none other than Miles Romney, Mitt’s great-great-grandfather, who received the ordinances one day earlier. Is the Mormon world small, or what?

NPR Goes Wild

The esteemed radio network ran two stories in one day on Romney and his faith. Both of them were awful. The first is an attempt to understand Mormonism. About the first story my Evangelical co-blogger John Schroeder noted:

I must comment that the ebb and flow of the piece, essentially a Q&A with Richard Bushman, is of the interviewer digging up misconceptions and Bushman knocking them down. In other words, the interviewer is a bit disrespectful, having apparently done no research other than rumor-mongering prior to the interview, and just trying to make trouble and play to stereotypes.

As I also commented, Prof. Bushman is an outstanding academic and a de facto unofficial spokesman for the Church. (He always makes it clear that the views he expresses are his own.) I suspect that if the truth were known, Bushman would be revealed as a moderate Democrat. Regardless, he is very clear, honest and effective in explaining and clarifying Mormon doctrine, history and culture. On top of that, he's an eminent historian.

How Much of the Problem Is The News Media’s Doing?

The second NPR piece more directly relates to Romney and The Question and it is entirely and utterly anecdotal. It cites a few "on-the-street" interviews and the Reverend Al Mohler. “Mohler,” John notes, “is showing up increasingly in pieces that seem to want to demonstrate that Romney has an Evangelical problem.

But to anybody that tries to tap into all of it, as we do here, it is apparent that Mohler is the only one so showing up. That should tell people something. And where is the counterbalance, where is Richard Land, or Mark DeMoss, or any of the other, and far more numerous Evangelical leadership that does not see Romney's faith as an issue?

Jim Geraghty at National Review Online noticed the news media’s fixation on the Church and Romney:

Have you noticed the sudden interest in Mormonism in the mainstream media, and the less-than-flattering portrait, emerging just as Romney appears on the national stage? It’s easily forgotten that the protagonists of HBO’s Big Love are part of a breakaway sect, not members of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. (The Boston Globe’s Alex Beam did his part to blur the distinction.)

PBS’s special on Mormonism made sure to mention “celestial marriage,” and the AP has already helpfully pointed out that one of Romney’s ancestors was a polygamist, as if we regularly took the character of a candidate’s great-great-grandfathers into account when selecting a president. In August, September Dawn comes to theaters, telling of the Mountain Meadows massacre, when Mormon militiamen attacked and murdered a wagon train of emigrants of more than 120 men, women and children on (COUGH) September 11, 1857.

After eight months of covering a Romney campaign, the mainstream media will make the Mormon Church resemble Wahhabism without the melanin.

I think many of us wonder and worry about what kind of violence the secular-leaning news media will say about the things we hold sacred. My fear is that Geraghty will be proven right; my hope is that enough people will denounce any distortions and bigotry to neutralize them.

In Iowa, Romney was heckled about religion again. The story was picked up by the Associated Press and traveled like wildfire. It is yet another example of how the news media love the story of other Christians (including Evangelicals) are a potential problem for Romney, The piece begins:

Many conservative Christians are quietly nervous about Romney's religion ...

John and I both had some suspicions:

If they are "quietly nervous" about it, how does the reporter know it is a problem for Romney? Or is it possible that the reporter wants it to be a problem and is therefore trying to make it so, either out of political partisanship, or the simple need for what is perceived to be a "great story"? We could not find any information on the heckler, but she did go to the press with comments after her confrontation with Romney. We wonder whether she was more interested in coverage or in getting real answers.

What exactly did the heckling entail? The AP report describes it:

Mary Van Steenis asked Romney how he would ponder important decisions as president and which source of inspiration he would seek.

"Where would the Bible be in that process?" she asked. "Would it be above the Book of Mormon or would it be beneath it?"

I hardly knew where to begin in analyzing this story. Has any other presidential candidate been asked whether he would seek inspiration from scripture when deciding important matters as president? I don't know the answer; I'm just asking the question. What if Romney had simply answered, "I always ask for God's help, and I'll seek inspiration from Him?" Or was any Romney answer even relevant? Once Ms. Van Steenis asked the question, wasn't that all the story the news media needed?

John couldn’t resist a wisecrack:

Besides, I want to know if Ms. Van Steenis holds the Westminster Shorter Catechism or not. Apostle's Creed, Nicene Creed, or both? Get my point? The question itself is a trip so deep into theo-nerdville as to put to sleep seminary students.

Speaking of Al Mohler…

…the Reverend was all over the Christian press last week because of a direct statement that he has been making that Mormonism is not Christian. What John found most fascinating was “that in the piece, which was syndicated, there is this little gem:

“We are not talking here about the postmodern conception of Christianity that minimizes truth,” Mohler wrote. “We are not talking about Christianity as a mood or as a sociological movement. We are not talking about liberal Christianity that minimizes doctrine nor about sectarian Christianity which defines the faith in terms of eccentric doctrines.

“We are talking about historic, traditional, Christian orthodoxy,” the theologian stated.

“The fact,” John added, “that Mohler has to work so hard to identify which Christianity he is talking about is extremely informative. In his statements, Mohler is defending something quite specific and something much narrower than the common societal understanding of Christianity. When he makes his statements they are purely ecclesiastical in nature, by Mohler’s is own admission. He does the nation no service in placing his personal boundaries out there in this fashion.

“We have discussed before that the very definition of "church" in America makes religious authority an entirely separate, and in the course of American legal history, subordinate, source of political authority to the civil government. Asserting ecclesiastical definitions in this fashion, Mohler comes dangerously close to crossing that line.”

All I can say is, Amen and amen!

Actually, that’s not all I can say. As long-time readers of Article VI Blog know, this definitional argument drives me absolutely nuts. The biggest problem: Someone like Mohler says, "Mormons are not Christian," and most listeners (especially the religiously illiterate members of the news media) hear, "Mormons do not believe in Christ." Then that idea gets disseminated widely among the public, and Romney and 13 million other Mormons are unfairly tarred with a brush that really doesn't exist.

What Mohler is really saying is, "Mormons are not part of historic, traditional, Christian orthodoxy." There is a huge difference there. Mormons happily and readily agree that they are not part of traditional orthodox Christianity — that's actually fundamental to our faith, which we believe is restored Christianity. But to suggest we do not believe in Christ is offensive in the extreme, simply dishonest at worst, and terribly sloppy rhetoric at best. Mohler is a smart man and really owes everyone a more intelligent presentation of his views.

More than one reader has expressed concern (and more) over my speculation above about Richard Bushman's political affiliation. One thing is clear: I failed to express myself clearly. I have no knowledge of Professor Bushman's partisan leanings, if indeed he has any. What I meant to say was that if he is a Democrat, Bushman is probably more credible than a Republican Mormon might be in defending the Church in a political context - including responses to questions about Mitt Romney. I regret any confusion my "shorthand" comment may have caused.

That’s all for this week. Questions? Comments? Complaints? Visit Article VI Blog and let us know.

Click here to sign up for Meridian's FREE email updates.