When I blogged about this controversy last night, I realized the story would cut at least three ways:
- Gingrich would be hurt by association with a “controversy.” Most people would just hear a blurb about it on TV or radio and absorb the notion that Newt was somehow connected to what would appear to be an unfair attack on his chief rival’s religion.
- Romney would be hurt, because the “controversy” would remind a certain number of conservative Christians that Mitt is a Mormon and, yeah, many people have categorized Mormonism as a cult.
- Gingrich would be hurt — and here’s the weird two-bumper carom shot — because some conservative Christians would see Newt as a gutless sellout for firing a guy who (in their view) had the courage to speak the truth about “the cult of Mormonism.”
Cui bono? Rick Santorum, of course!
But some friends last night on Twitter pointed out that fired Gingrich staffer Craig Bergman — speaking in an Iowa focus group last week, the day before he was hired as Newt’s Iowa political director — hadn’t said that he personally believes Mormonism to be a cult. Rather, Bergman was merely describing the beliefs of “a lot of the evangelicals.”
These are two vastly different things. It’s the difference between saying, “Let’s go burn a mosque to celebrate Tim Tebow leading the Broncos to victory over the Patriots” and saying . . .
Well, maybe that’s not the perfect example. But you get the point, and the point is amplified today by the Iowa Republican, the Web site that co-sponsored last week’s focus group:
The controversial comment came in regards to Mitt Romney’s prospects, if he captured the GOP nomination. “There is a national pastor who is very much on the anti-Mitt Romney bandwagon,” Bergman said. “A lot of the evangelicals believe God would give us four more years of Obama just for the opportunity to expose the cult of Mormon…There’s a thousand pastors ready to do that.” . . .
As co-moderator of the focus group, TheIowaRepublican.com believes Bergman was not making a statement that reflected his own views of the Mormon religion, but was relaying what he heard from the “national pastor” referenced in his comment.
In other words: Bergman got screwed.
He wasn’t saying that he has a problem with Romney’s religion. He was saying that many evangelicals — including “a national pastor,” whom he did not name — have a problem with Mormonism, and who can deny that Bergman has acccurately stated a fact?
Furthermore, having studied the subject some years ago, I can attest that many Christian theologians agree that Mormonism should be categorized as a cult. In defense of Mitt Romney, however, I’ll say that liberalism is also a cult, and it’s liberalism that’s taking America to hell in a hurry, so you can judge for yourself which cult poses the greater danger in 2012.
Look, if a Protestant like me can support a papist like Rick Santorum — “papist” being the kind of slur you don’t hear very often in our politically correct age — clearly the crisis is upon us.
In a contested Republican primary, everybody’s got their most favorite and least favorite candidates. For me, Newt Gingrich is down near the bottom of the list — worse than Ron Paul, but better than Jon Huntsman — and your mileage may vary, but I think we can all agree that Obama’s worse than any of the Republicans.
Except maybe Huntsman, who could be the Anti-Christ for all we know.
UPDATE: It was rather surprising to me that the very first comment — alas, from our loyal commenter Joe! — was to the effect that it is “offensive” to call Mormonism a cult. (Y’know, if you’re easily offended, this blog will give you a half-dozen reasons a day to be offended, at a minimum.)
Ask yourself this: Why are we required to tolerate atheists, who insist that all Christians are ignorant and deluded propagators of implausible superstition, and yet orthodox Christians are shouted down if they feel obliged to identify heterodox faiths as “cults”?
Why is that so, huh?
Answer: Because we have been, as the apostle Paul said, “conformed to this world,” and have adopted the widespread popular opinion that the greatest danger in American society is posed by those dangerous right-wing Christian theocratic extremists, that’s why.
The faults and failures — both real and imaginary — of traditional Christians have been magnified in the public mind over the course of the past several decades, so that the Christian who merely defends the basic beliefs of his faith is automatically accused of aspiring to “impose his beliefs” on others, among much other mischief and malice attributed to Bible-believers.
Look around you, my fellow Americans. Does it really seem to you as if the greatest danger to our nation is that right-wing Christians might suddenly seize control of government and start imposing their beliefs on society? I think not.
You see that I have attached to this post Amazon links for three books by Christian writers who are critics of Mormonism. Their characterizations of the LDS belief system, and the evidence they adduce, may be perused by any of you, and accepted or rejected as you see fit. I’m not trying to “impose” my own beliefs on anyone, but merely stating that there are — as Craig Bergman was fired for saying — many Christians who categorize Mormonism as a cult. And this categorization is perhaps only important to Christians who consider it their sacred obligation to proclaim the Way, the Hope and the Light.
Secularists are under no such obligation, and I understand that they may be offended by the evangelical impulse. But proclaiming the Gospel is not as “offensive” as, for example, flying jetliners into skyscrapers or strapping plastic explosives to your body and detonating yourself in the middle of a crowded disco. So stop whining about being “offended,” or I’m likely to do something genuinely offensive like posting photos of Helen Thomas.
And you wouldn’t want that, would you?
As far as politics goes, Mitt’s Mormonism bothers me less than RomneyCare. And if you want a Republican presidential candidate who stands solidly for religious freedom, Lisa Graas has a suggestion.
UPDATE II: Linked by Da Tech Guy, Lisa Graas and Daily Pundit — thanks! — and now a Memeorandum thread.
Let’s face some cold hard facts here, for once. No matter how much you want stuff like this to help Santorum, wishes can be bitches when they don’t come true. The person who is benefiting, albeit slowly as of now, is Bachmann, who has been endorsed by a group of evangelical Christians and whose support in some polls is now in double digits.
Huntsman is actually the angel Moroni, sent back to help Romney by making him look better in comparison.
In other words, it sounded to me like Bergmann was encouraging that line of attack on Romney by pointing out a receptive audience.
You read that on the Golden Tablets, didn’t you?
I am not a follower of LDS. But I find calling it a “cult” offensive. Sorry. I hope Gingrich fired this guy because he disagreed with what he said and not out of some PC political basis. If you want to think LDS is a cult, you are free to do so. I just disagree. When we start attacking religions, where does it end?
The line of cults and religions is not the easiest to define (if you are Christopher Hitchens all religions are cults). I think most of us know a cult when we see it. I have been around enough Mormons to say I do not see a cult when I see LDS practices today, just a another religion that I am not a member of. I am not troubled. Since I am not a believer, how does someone who believes Joseph Smith’s version of events affect me? Truth is it doesn’t, at least not any more than any one else’s personal beliefs. Provided those beliefs are not imposed on me, I am for live and let live.
Bergmann hasn’t gotten any more of a raw deal than any other campaign staffer that said something that’s politically foolish.
Oh, and Walter Martin agrees with you, Stacy, about liberalism being a cult. I remember hearing a lecture of his some 25+ years ago appropriately called The Cult of Liberalism where he goes through how liberalism fits all the major characteristics of non-Christian cults.
Well, words have meanings, Joe. It’s like “racist” in that sense: Some people use accusations of racism as a cheap way of demonizing their opponents. On the other hand, there is such a thing as racism, and sober discussion of the topic is possible.
Of course, my main point is that Jon Huntsman’s identity as the Beast of Revelation13 is a possibility that cannot be ruled out entirely.
I do not need seer stones to know Obama is a bad president and we need some change.
Speaking of cults: Vanuatu.
IYKWIMAITYD.
I seriously doubt Bachmann or Santorum will make any significant progress to challenge Romney or Gingrich at this point. Ron Paul is the most serious challenge and he is (sorry if you disagree) unelectable. That is unfortunately where we are, with a choice of two rather flawed candidates. And I do not considered Romney flawed because of his faith, but his behavior as a poltician. And the same for Gingrich. And both of them have major flaws.
By all means support Bachman or Santorum or Perry in the interim. Never say never. Maybe Santorum will surprise us all with a strong showing in Iowa. Maybe Bachmann will do so too.
I hope Gingrich fired this guy because he disagreed with what he said and not out of some PC political basis.
We’ll just have to wait and see how Newt reacts when word gets out about all of Mitts secret teenage wives. That will tell the tale right there.
Thanks for the helpful links. I had encountered Martin’s teaching before, but appreciate the reminder.
Also: “25+ years”? Nice to meet another grizzled elder on the Innertubes. These kids, they don’t know nothing.
He certainly wasn’t discouraging such attacks.
I’m starting to wonder if they are all unelectable. Maybe this is a contest to nominate the person who will do the least amount of damage. Frankly, as much as I want to see Obama defeated, I’m every bit as much as concerned with retaking the Senate and if possible expanding our majority in the House. And then there are all the many state and local races to ponder. If Obama does win it doesn’t have to be a total loss. We might even be able to impeach his ass over Fast And Furious, and who knows what else will come up by then.
But then again, Republicans seem to me like they are determined to lose this election. They are bound and determined to “do what’s right”. Unfortunately, doing “what’s right” will benefit Obama.
And who knows, maybe I’m wrong. Maybe we will win the Presidency. Maybe even Mitt can win, and may even succeed in the long-cherished Mormon dream of establishing New Jerusalem in St Louis Missouri.
Not that that would mean Mormons are a “cult” or something.
Paul has to be at the bottom for me. Even Huntsman has more real experience and a realistic world view. Paul’s isolationism inevitably ignores foreign threats until it is too late. It is insanely stupid, or stupidly insane.
No matter how much I like the idea of closing down several federal departments, having a lean and limited government won’t amount to a bucket of warm spit when Putin and the Chinese divide the world’s resources and squeeze us to death.
You’re quite welcome. Thanks to my parents, I spent a lot of my teenage years listening to the likes of Dr. J. Vernon McGee, Pastor Chuck Smith of Calvary Chapel Costa Mesa, and Walter Martin. And next September will mark 25 years of being on the Internet for me, a concept that still boggles me.
Indeed. Anyone not putting Ron Paul at or very near the bottom needs to contemplate that Andrew Sullivan has endorsed Ron Paul.
One of the main distinguishing features of a religious cult is that it encourages — even demands — of its adherents that they separate themselves from non-believers and only associate with members of the One True Faith.
Mormonism fit that bill at the beginning, to the point of fleeing west as a group. Some of that was certainly due to external pressure/persecution, but it tended to be self-reinforcing.
These days, though, LDS is very much the opposite.
Mormons are generally engaged in the community around them, and actively discourage e.g. shunning your family if you convert and they don’t. When I joined the church, I was 18 and far away from home. They flat refused to baptize me until I talked to my (non-Mormon) parents about it. That’s just not cult behavior.
I concur. I’ve worked closely with Mormons for years, and I generally find them to be pleasant, outgoing people. As a secular individual, I see nothing wrong with the LDS.
Certainly they are very supportive of the community, regardless of your religion. I’ve witnessed that personally.
I think the analogous situation would be a Hilary Cinton staffer working with the union vote saying: “A lot of my union guys would give us four more years of Bush if we nominate Barack Obama. There’s a thousand union organizers ready to do that.”
Could the staffer then say, “No, I’m not racist I’m just stating the fact that other union guys are racists.”
Jon Huntsman does not have the gravitas to be the Beast of Revelation or anything of any political, moral or historical signficiance whatsoever. His only claim to fame is he was a Republican who worked for Obama. A useful idiot for Team Obama, but that is about it.
Okay, tell me about Mitt’s secret teenage wives. Or are these the equivalent of Joe’s not so secret past girlfriends (before I met and married Mrs. Joe).
That is my observation also.
For what it is worth, I think that about Baptist too.
BTW, I never had a Mormon accuse me (as a Roman Catholic) as being non-christian, but a few Baptist have done that.
Jackson County, MO, actually — Kansas City area. All the way across the state from St. Louis.
Some people use accusations of racism as a cheap way of demonizing their opponents.
And Newt fired a new employee because he disagreed with how that employee referred to LDS.
I believe the first amendment gives us the right to say what we want. I also believe we should have the right to fire someone because of what they say.
And once President Romney consolidates his power, he’ll restore polygamy, then we’ll all have three or four wives to nag at us every day.
You see the danger.
I do not know what Bergman actually said. I was not there. If he said Mormonism/LDS is a cult, well then Newt should fire him. If he said other people believe that–well that is obviously true. It really depends on context. And if Newt threw Bergman under the bus for political advantage, by all means trash Newt.
We both know Newt threw Doug Hoffman under a bus once. He could do it again.
Given what a shit hole St. Louis is, anything would be an improvement!
You are the living breathng John Frum. Bring some cargo to the poor Vanuatuans. Someone better hit your tip jar first. Maybe you can convince Amazon to sponsor your personnal ministry.
Andrew Sullivan likes Huntsman too. Especially if he grew a beard.
Quote: ” But proclaiming the Gospel is not as “offensive” as, for example, flying jetliners into skyscrapers or strapping plastic explosives to your body and detonating yourself in the middle of a crowded disco.”
Woot! All hail the future Ambassador to Vanuatu!
Some people need ’em real bad, I guess, and others don’t.
I prefer “mackerel snapper” when referring to those anti-christ worshiping Catholics.
Was about to state that Dr. Martin couldn’t work for Newt or Mitt, but you beat me to it. 😀
Just thinking of the credit card bills has my head spinning!
Yep, yet another reason that Huntsman and Paul are for me what I’ve taken to calling ‘below the Romney line’: any candidate worse than Mitt Romney is worth no other consideration.
About those golden tablets, the rent was due, my wireless bill was due, the car was in the shop again… you’ll just have to take my word for it…
I liked Hunstsman until Buster Crabbe kicked his ass in the serial.
[…] the Christian Tebow another prominent writer has apparently overcome his issues with a gentleman of a different faith: Look, if a Protestant like me can support a papist like Rick Santorum — “papist” being the […]
Newt is famous for throwing Conservatives, Tea Partiers, and wives under the bus….now he is doing it to his own staff!
If you post pics of Helen Thomas, you are going to a life sentence in Aldan Siberia with pics of the beaches in Vanuatu laminated to your cell walls. Such an act would be a crime against humanity worthy of a one way trip to the ICC’s Khabarovsk branch.
I’ve been around a lot of Mormons during my time in Boy Scouts. The subject of religion is a very sensitive subject with them. They know they are vulnerable on the matter and their organization has made a lot of effort to try to position themselves as part of the Christian mainstream. Not of it has worked however.
I have friends among both Roman Catholics and Mormons. I can accept Roman Catholics as nominally Christian, but not Mormons. Mormons theology marks them as Christianized pagans at best (biblically, Christ is not a created being, but God who is eternally existent). The God of Mormonism is a created being, therefore Mormonism denies the very core of Christianity.
And Joe, very few Evangelicals will accept a Roman Catholic as a Christian. There are too many abberations from the core of Christianity to accept it as such. Sorry.
In America, Mormons should have a right to practice their religion and say it’s not a cult, and people who think it’s a cult should have the right to say so. It’s really not that hard, if you think about it. Then again….maybe it is for some folks.
This cartoon explains the situation:
http://www.sltrib.com/sltrib/opinion/53117076-82/bagley-cartoon-facebook-lake.html.csp
Here are the
characteristics of a cult:
• Small? The Church of Jesus Christ (LDS) has 14 million members in 132
countries. In America, there are more Mormons than there are Presbyterians or
Jews.
• Excessive devotion? Mormons are devoted to the Savior, but in appropriate
measure He would approve of.
• Unethical techniques? Ask the pie-throwers to name one.
• Control by isolation? Even if Mormons wanted to, this would be impossible
with 14 million members in 28,000 congregations throughout the world.
• Control by threats? Again, evidence? Mormon missionaries may be exuberant,
but do not threaten.
• Dependency on the group? The Church of Jesus Christ (LDS) is just the
opposite. Mormons want members to be self-reliant and independent so they in
turn can help others.
• Powerful group pressure? Only if that’s the way the critics prefer to define
love.
• Strange? Guilty as charged. Mormons plead guilty to all the strange things
that were done by Christians in New Testament times that were lost during the
great falling away in the aptly named Dark Ages, among them temple worship,
vicarious baptism for the dead, definition of God, Jesus Christ, and the Holy
Spirit as separate but united in purpose, salvation requiring both grace and
obedience to commandments, prophets and apostles, unpaid clergy, and continual
revelation to guide His Church.
[…] The Other McCain But some friends last night on Twitter pointed out that fired Gingrich staffer Craig Bergman – speaking in an Iowa focus group last week, the day before he was hired as Newt’s Iowa political director – hadn’t said that he personally believes Mormonism to be a cult. Rather, Bergman was merely describing the beliefs of “a lot of the evangelicals.” […]
If Obama is The Antichrist, then Huntsman is most definetly one of the Beasts, maybe not THE Beast that Stacy refers to.
Yikes!
Ain’t the Golden Tablets the menus at McDonald’s???