Perry's Pastor Jeffress Steps in It
Pastor Jeffress and the C-word
At the Values Voters Summit in Washington where the GOP candidates & some supporters spoke, First Baptist Church of Dallas pastor Robert Jeffress introduced Gov. Perry, calling him a “genuine follower of Jesus Christ & born again, and that’s what we want.” This is unmistakable code among especially Evangelicals who apparently call every self-proclaimed Christian creed except Mormons Christians. Just think back to Huckabee’s “Christian candidate” signs & TV ads in 2008. We’re savvy to that subterfuge. But Perry-supporting callers to shows continue to use it. “He later told reporters that Christians have a “duty” to vote for a “competent Christian” over an equally-competent person of another faith. Specifically, he said Evangelicals should pull the lever for Perry over Mitt Romney because of Romney’s Mormonism, which Jeffress said is “a cult”. And now, we have a media-hyped brouhaha over religious bigotry in the Republican Party.” [from “The “Duty of a Christian”on http://sirmons.wordpress.com/2011/10/08/the-duty-of-a-christian/]
Bill Bennett spoke just before Romney the next day, and told the crowd “Do not give voice to bigotry”, and addressed Jeffress personally: “"you do your candidate no service, sir, in what you had to say." Romney graciously said next basically, "How about that Bill Bennett? Quite a guy, isn't he?" He also said that poisonous language doesn’t solve problems.
“[What Bennett said is] undoubtedly true, considering how the mainstream media are treating the flap, and I suppose Bennett was right in wanting to clear the air. A Catholic himself, Bennett emphasizes that conservatives and supporters of traditional values must make common cause, regardless of their theological orientations. It’s awfully hard to disagree with that, even if I were inclined to, which I’m not.”
Finally, Perry did nothing in his address to distance himself from Jeffress’ remarks, implicitly endorsing them. And certainly his campaign selected the introducer. Basically, they appear to be acknowledging their own desperation (and lack of confidence in their own competence) in resorting to such tactics.
Every other candidate has also condemned Jeffress’ remarks. Dick Morris said there is basically no difference between being anti-Mormon, anti-Jewish, anti-Black, etc. – bigotry is bigotry. Greg Gutfeld said “If Mormons are a cult, sign me up – they look healthy, attractive, happy families, great values, etc.”
It’s noteworthy that Jeffress made some key assumptions. One, that Perry is equally competent with Romney – that has hardly been established, and can only be by examination of records and by open minds in political debate – not theological. Second, significant only to those who put more weight on theology than competence (and values), his clear implication was that Perry, and not Romney, is a genuine follower of Jesus Christ, and born again. And of course the assumption that Mormonism is a cult.
Are Mormons, and Romney, Christian?
To be honest, I know more about Romney’s personal life than Perry’s, but feel confident in any comparison. Romney was baptized in the name of Jesus Christ, into the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints, and was ordained to the priesthood of Jesus Christ in the name of Jesus Christ. He followed the calling of Jesus Christ (to “preach in all the world”) by serving a 2 year mission abroad preaching the gospel of Jesus Christ, including the teachings of Jesus Christ in the New Testament, and including revelations from Jesus Christ given in the Restoration of the original Church of Jesus Christ (particularly the Book of Mormon, “Another Testament of Jesus Christ”).
He has made and kept gospel covenants and upheld values and integrity beyond baptism that anyone who knows much at all about Mormonism knows are utterly Christian, and closer to the Christian ideal than many Christians live. This requires great faith, sacrifice and integrity. Upholding these high values, he has continued to sacrifice in the Christian spirit of service as a lay bishop and stake president over several congregations for several years – all in his spare time while supporting his family in exemplary professional and public service. His family is a testament of his faith and values. As Christ said, “by their fruits ye shall know them.” He has repeatedly testified of his faith in Jesus Christ as his personal savior. And he addressed the importance of faith in America in an important national address in 2007.
If Mitt Romney, and Mormons in general, are not Christian, are not true followers of Jesus Christ and born again, then I would like to know who is (“....He that is without sin among you, let him first cast a stone...”, John 8:7). If Governor Perry is so distinctly more Christian than Gov. Romney, I would like to see the evidence. And more than merely being a member of what Jeffress defines as a “theologically correct” Christian congregation that holds certain beliefs in their heads, and occasionally talking the talk. “Not every one that saith unto me, Lord, Lord, shall enter into the kingdom of heaven; but he that doeth the will of my Father which is in heaven.” (Matthew 7:21) That is Christian doctrine.
Apparently Rev. Jeffress’ definition of Christian is, among other things, a belief in the Nicene Creed that was the subject of intensive debate hundreds of years after Christ. A creed that was decided by a committee (or the non-Christian emperor) of a church the Baptists/Evangelicals don’t even believe continued to be valid (I understand that technically they do believe Catholicism by their definition to be a cult, although perhaps they are more careful voicing it due to relative numbers – easier to pick on the little guy). That creed is incomprehensible and so hardly definitive, and still debatable. Mormons believe in the Father, Son and Holy Ghost as described in the Bible, as they have revealed themselves to man.
The other distinctive beliefs of Mormons so often objected to are not without substantiation in the Bible – not necessarily absolutely definitive by human interpretation, but neither are they scripturally disprovable. But that is true of so many theological differences among various Christian faiths. Why the Baptists or Evangelicals are so preoccupied with Mormon “unorthodoxy” to the apparent exclusion of all others is somewhat a mystery, unless they feel relatively threatened or insecure in their theology or faith. Every Christian faith views itself as having the correct interpretation of the Bible, and if not, they would not be so distinct.
A Misguided Radio Talk Show Host Chimes In
On my way home from work yesterday, I was listening to Mike Gallagher on the radio. Some months ago I heard him make a truly condescending, demeaning remark about Mormon theology, so I was not surprised at what he was now saying. Nor was I surprised that Romney declined coming on his program. Gallagher was going along with an article that defended Jeffress, saying it is technically true because they don’t believe “core Christian doctrines: trinity, etc.” And that it is a valid subject for political debate, rather than being politically correct and sweeping it under the rug. Mike went further to say we need to air such things and that it’s even hypocritical for the GOP to attack Obama on rev. Wright but give Romney a pass on Mormonism because we can’t discuss it.
The Wright analogy breaks down first of all because Wright’s liberation theology and anti-American rhetoric have clear political and practical ramifications if believed in – which Obama easily could have being in the congregation some 20 years. The points of doctrine Gallagher and this author refer to are purely theological, with no bearing on a president’s office. They may be fair game in a religious debate, but not a political one. Certainly Article VI of the Constitution certainly precludes a religious test for public office.
In fact if anything, Mormon beliefs are highly supportive of constitutional government and laws, electing good men to office, and public service – you won’t find anything akin to Wrights comments, and in fact Mormon leaders are hyper-cautious to avoid any partisan statements or endorsements (hence Reid and Romney are, apparently, both in good standing in the Church – although curiously Reid gets no grief for his religion – the Left seem to tolerate those who interpret their religious values to their liking). One evidence of this (on both sides of the political spectrum) is Mormons’ disproportionate representation in the presidential field of candidates (2 Mormons), the Senate majority leader, Harry Reid, others like Senator Orrin Hatch, etc. And commentators like Glenn Beck.
Either Gallagher was asleep during the last presidential race, when Romney’s theology was dealt with ad nauseum, and he gave his nationally televised “Faith in America” speech, or he feels we just can’t get enough of dragging Mormon theology through the mud, for the entertainment of his audience (he does moonlight on Broadway) or some sort of religious crusade. There’s something wrong there, one way or the other, although he apparently sees himself as the one who is right, in the face of every other GOP candidate and respected commentator.
Wise up, Gallagher, and quit kicking against the pricks, to the detriment of the country. Do you realize how petty you and Jeffress appear? Bill Bennet didn’t want to dismiss such talk out of hypocracy, political correctness, or any of your other assumed vile motives, but out of decency, raising the level of discourse (& focusing on more important and relevant issues) and simply recognizing the correct venue for such discussions. Once you start going down that path, believe me, people can and will find equally strange things to dredge up about any and all religion, including yours. That path leads to descent into the things like the Sunni-Shia feuds in Iraq. And I’m more than happy to engage in the theological debate – separately. I can assure Mr. Gallagher he may not be on such firm theological ground as he seems to think. But that sort of realization of course takes an open mind, not an ignorant, closed and bigoted one.
At the Values Voters Summit in Washington where the GOP candidates & some supporters spoke, First Baptist Church of Dallas pastor Robert Jeffress introduced Gov. Perry, calling him a “genuine follower of Jesus Christ & born again, and that’s what we want.” This is unmistakable code among especially Evangelicals who apparently call every self-proclaimed Christian creed except Mormons Christians. Just think back to Huckabee’s “Christian candidate” signs & TV ads in 2008. We’re savvy to that subterfuge. But Perry-supporting callers to shows continue to use it. “He later told reporters that Christians have a “duty” to vote for a “competent Christian” over an equally-competent person of another faith. Specifically, he said Evangelicals should pull the lever for Perry over Mitt Romney because of Romney’s Mormonism, which Jeffress said is “a cult”. And now, we have a media-hyped brouhaha over religious bigotry in the Republican Party.” [from “The “Duty of a Christian”on http://sirmons.wordpress.com/2011/10/08/the-duty-of-a-christian/]
Bill Bennett spoke just before Romney the next day, and told the crowd “Do not give voice to bigotry”, and addressed Jeffress personally: “"you do your candidate no service, sir, in what you had to say." Romney graciously said next basically, "How about that Bill Bennett? Quite a guy, isn't he?" He also said that poisonous language doesn’t solve problems.
“[What Bennett said is] undoubtedly true, considering how the mainstream media are treating the flap, and I suppose Bennett was right in wanting to clear the air. A Catholic himself, Bennett emphasizes that conservatives and supporters of traditional values must make common cause, regardless of their theological orientations. It’s awfully hard to disagree with that, even if I were inclined to, which I’m not.”
Finally, Perry did nothing in his address to distance himself from Jeffress’ remarks, implicitly endorsing them. And certainly his campaign selected the introducer. Basically, they appear to be acknowledging their own desperation (and lack of confidence in their own competence) in resorting to such tactics.
Every other candidate has also condemned Jeffress’ remarks. Dick Morris said there is basically no difference between being anti-Mormon, anti-Jewish, anti-Black, etc. – bigotry is bigotry. Greg Gutfeld said “If Mormons are a cult, sign me up – they look healthy, attractive, happy families, great values, etc.”
It’s noteworthy that Jeffress made some key assumptions. One, that Perry is equally competent with Romney – that has hardly been established, and can only be by examination of records and by open minds in political debate – not theological. Second, significant only to those who put more weight on theology than competence (and values), his clear implication was that Perry, and not Romney, is a genuine follower of Jesus Christ, and born again. And of course the assumption that Mormonism is a cult.
Are Mormons, and Romney, Christian?
To be honest, I know more about Romney’s personal life than Perry’s, but feel confident in any comparison. Romney was baptized in the name of Jesus Christ, into the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints, and was ordained to the priesthood of Jesus Christ in the name of Jesus Christ. He followed the calling of Jesus Christ (to “preach in all the world”) by serving a 2 year mission abroad preaching the gospel of Jesus Christ, including the teachings of Jesus Christ in the New Testament, and including revelations from Jesus Christ given in the Restoration of the original Church of Jesus Christ (particularly the Book of Mormon, “Another Testament of Jesus Christ”).
He has made and kept gospel covenants and upheld values and integrity beyond baptism that anyone who knows much at all about Mormonism knows are utterly Christian, and closer to the Christian ideal than many Christians live. This requires great faith, sacrifice and integrity. Upholding these high values, he has continued to sacrifice in the Christian spirit of service as a lay bishop and stake president over several congregations for several years – all in his spare time while supporting his family in exemplary professional and public service. His family is a testament of his faith and values. As Christ said, “by their fruits ye shall know them.” He has repeatedly testified of his faith in Jesus Christ as his personal savior. And he addressed the importance of faith in America in an important national address in 2007.
If Mitt Romney, and Mormons in general, are not Christian, are not true followers of Jesus Christ and born again, then I would like to know who is (“....He that is without sin among you, let him first cast a stone...”, John 8:7). If Governor Perry is so distinctly more Christian than Gov. Romney, I would like to see the evidence. And more than merely being a member of what Jeffress defines as a “theologically correct” Christian congregation that holds certain beliefs in their heads, and occasionally talking the talk. “Not every one that saith unto me, Lord, Lord, shall enter into the kingdom of heaven; but he that doeth the will of my Father which is in heaven.” (Matthew 7:21) That is Christian doctrine.
Apparently Rev. Jeffress’ definition of Christian is, among other things, a belief in the Nicene Creed that was the subject of intensive debate hundreds of years after Christ. A creed that was decided by a committee (or the non-Christian emperor) of a church the Baptists/Evangelicals don’t even believe continued to be valid (I understand that technically they do believe Catholicism by their definition to be a cult, although perhaps they are more careful voicing it due to relative numbers – easier to pick on the little guy). That creed is incomprehensible and so hardly definitive, and still debatable. Mormons believe in the Father, Son and Holy Ghost as described in the Bible, as they have revealed themselves to man.
The other distinctive beliefs of Mormons so often objected to are not without substantiation in the Bible – not necessarily absolutely definitive by human interpretation, but neither are they scripturally disprovable. But that is true of so many theological differences among various Christian faiths. Why the Baptists or Evangelicals are so preoccupied with Mormon “unorthodoxy” to the apparent exclusion of all others is somewhat a mystery, unless they feel relatively threatened or insecure in their theology or faith. Every Christian faith views itself as having the correct interpretation of the Bible, and if not, they would not be so distinct.
A Misguided Radio Talk Show Host Chimes In
On my way home from work yesterday, I was listening to Mike Gallagher on the radio. Some months ago I heard him make a truly condescending, demeaning remark about Mormon theology, so I was not surprised at what he was now saying. Nor was I surprised that Romney declined coming on his program. Gallagher was going along with an article that defended Jeffress, saying it is technically true because they don’t believe “core Christian doctrines: trinity, etc.” And that it is a valid subject for political debate, rather than being politically correct and sweeping it under the rug. Mike went further to say we need to air such things and that it’s even hypocritical for the GOP to attack Obama on rev. Wright but give Romney a pass on Mormonism because we can’t discuss it.
The Wright analogy breaks down first of all because Wright’s liberation theology and anti-American rhetoric have clear political and practical ramifications if believed in – which Obama easily could have being in the congregation some 20 years. The points of doctrine Gallagher and this author refer to are purely theological, with no bearing on a president’s office. They may be fair game in a religious debate, but not a political one. Certainly Article VI of the Constitution certainly precludes a religious test for public office.
In fact if anything, Mormon beliefs are highly supportive of constitutional government and laws, electing good men to office, and public service – you won’t find anything akin to Wrights comments, and in fact Mormon leaders are hyper-cautious to avoid any partisan statements or endorsements (hence Reid and Romney are, apparently, both in good standing in the Church – although curiously Reid gets no grief for his religion – the Left seem to tolerate those who interpret their religious values to their liking). One evidence of this (on both sides of the political spectrum) is Mormons’ disproportionate representation in the presidential field of candidates (2 Mormons), the Senate majority leader, Harry Reid, others like Senator Orrin Hatch, etc. And commentators like Glenn Beck.
Either Gallagher was asleep during the last presidential race, when Romney’s theology was dealt with ad nauseum, and he gave his nationally televised “Faith in America” speech, or he feels we just can’t get enough of dragging Mormon theology through the mud, for the entertainment of his audience (he does moonlight on Broadway) or some sort of religious crusade. There’s something wrong there, one way or the other, although he apparently sees himself as the one who is right, in the face of every other GOP candidate and respected commentator.
Wise up, Gallagher, and quit kicking against the pricks, to the detriment of the country. Do you realize how petty you and Jeffress appear? Bill Bennet didn’t want to dismiss such talk out of hypocracy, political correctness, or any of your other assumed vile motives, but out of decency, raising the level of discourse (& focusing on more important and relevant issues) and simply recognizing the correct venue for such discussions. Once you start going down that path, believe me, people can and will find equally strange things to dredge up about any and all religion, including yours. That path leads to descent into the things like the Sunni-Shia feuds in Iraq. And I’m more than happy to engage in the theological debate – separately. I can assure Mr. Gallagher he may not be on such firm theological ground as he seems to think. But that sort of realization of course takes an open mind, not an ignorant, closed and bigoted one.
Comments
Post a Comment