a suspension of disbelief & Donald redux redux

Twice before I've blogged about the folk who attend our local megachurches yet tell me that they do not believe what they believe in those churches... here and here.  I wrote about folk who walk into a church and suspend their disbelief... that is they basically acted as if they believed what was being said for that hour in church and then wrote it off as they walked out the door.  Or perhaps they simply don't listen to what is being said.

I've been thinking about this in regards to the Donald Trump phenomenon.  I think that is going on there as well... the folk who are endorsing him are not really listening to what he is saying.  It does go further than that - and perhaps this is true in those church folk as well.  Not only are they not hearing what is said, they are projecting what they want to hear.  For example, Donald has made "Make America Great Again" his slogan.  Not once has he given even the slightest idea how he would do that and even more important, he has not defined what that means.  What are the characteristics that we have lost?  When was the time that we were great?  Those listening can fill in whatever answers work for them... and they do.

That "morals" voters would choose Donald Trump over anyone except Hugh Hefner is almost unbelievable.  That neo-cons would back his economic policies makes me scratch my head.  I guess some folk find his bull in the china shop persona attractive after Obama's measured, cautious, and thoughtful presentation on the world stage but for the life of me, I can't figure out why.  I'm sure there are some who feel so disenfranchised that they want to blow up this entire project called American democracy and replace it with... who knows what... and they aren't presenting a picture any more well formed than Somalia.  And finally there are those Republicans who have decided that since Trump will get the nomination, he must be a real Republican and is therefore worthy of their vote over any Democrat... even one whose policies are well to his right in almost every single way.  And those same Republicans continue to ignore... here is the list from that liberal bastion the Washington Post.   I get that there are folk who really don't like Hillary, the Dems likely nominee and hope that by electing Donald, they'll at least retain control over the SCOTUS and the legislative branches.  That, of course presupposes that anyone can predict what Donald would do with judicial nominees and that there are enough folk out there drinking the Kool Aid to provide shirt tails for Republican candidates down the ballot. 

And the rest of the world looks on in wonder as we Americans continue to suspend our disbelief, project our hopes and dreams, and ignore what is blatantly in front of us.  And they are realistically afraid.

Mormonism in the news and the ballot box

Let me begin with a disclaimer.  Being a Mormon (or a Muslim, an Athiest, a Unitarian, a Bahai, or whatever else) does not disqualify an individual from running for president.  At the same time a candidate's religious commitments or lack thereof can certainly be considered when an individual decides for whom they will vote.  All of that has nothing to do with this post.

A second disclaimer... while there are lots of Mormons in the area where I live and the property owned by the church I serve shares a boundary with a Mormon church, I don't have any friends who are Mormon.  I do have some acquaintances who are Mormon.  The Mormon folk I know are nice people.  As a community, the hold some values that I admire.  They care deeply about their families (even if the definition is a lot more narrow than mine).  They care for one another in community and are there for one another when there is need.  They take their faith seriously and live it... a two year commitment to mission work is a serious thing.  They do have some values that I find problematic as well.  The misogyny built into their theology, the belief in American exceptionalism, and a general secrecy about their faith that borders on and perhaps is at times dishonest all trouble me.

And an affirmation.  My personal theology is not exclusive.  I affirm the truths in other religions and deeply appreciate what they can teach me as a person of faith.  In addition to a variety of different brands of Christians, I have friends who are Muslim, Bahai, Jewish, and Hindu.  I also have friends who are agnostic and others who are atheist.  I learn from all of them and I am glad they are all part of my life.
 
Last week the Billy Graham Evangelistic Association removed Mormonism from the list of cults on their website.  It was clearly a political move as Franklin Graham, Billy's son, has been an outspoken opponent of Obama and there have been many evangelicals who have been reticent about voting for a member of a cult for president.  Remove any mentions of Mormons as a cult and perhaps remove a bit of that reticence among some evangelical voters.  Early in the campaign a PAC supporting Romney made a television ad raising the issue of Obama's ties with Jeremiah Wright and the brand of Afro-centric Liberation Theology preached at Trinity UCC Church in Chicago.  Romney quickly asked that the ad be dropped and it was.  He clearly was worried that issues of religion would cause large numbers of evangelicals to stay home on election day if they learned more about Mormonism.  Coinciding with the removal of the cult definition, Romney brought up his faith at the end of the second presidential debate.

Mormons are not Christians... at least not in any traditional use of that descriptor in spite of the fact that they call themselves Christian.  Yes, a person named Jesus is central to their faith, but that could be said about other non-Christian religions as well.  Jesus appears in Islam and is affirmed in many eastern religions but that does not make them "Christian." 

Let me just point to two different Mormon doctrines that take them clearly outside of historical Christianity.  First is a little saying "As God was, man is, as God is, man may become."   Some folk may see parallels here to the traditional Christian idea of the incarnation, but it does go far beyond that idea.  This is a Mormon idea that each man can evolve into a god and that God was once like we are now and evolved into whatever God now is. 

Second, Mormons are polytheists.  Christians have always called themselves monotheistic and placed themselves in the same traditions as Jews and Muslims.  Now, some Jews and Muslims might raise questions regarding Christian monotheism we struggle to make sense of the Trinity, but Mormons again clearly believe something beyond that.  Joseph Smith taught that the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit are three separate gods.  Other Mormon profits have affirmed numerous times that there are many gods with each world having its own god.  You can also see that theme in the previous paragraph.  If we all (men) can become gods, then there clearly are multiple gods.  Indeed, one prophet, Orson Pratt, said that there are more gods than there are particles of matter.

I do not know whether or not one should include Mormons in a list of cults.  I guess that becomes a matter of definition.  I would say that they clearly should not be included in any historical definition of Christianity. 

Should that affect your vote?  Only you can decide that.  There are Mormon politicians whom I respect and for whom I might vote - Jon Huntsman would be one.  There are politicians who call themselves Christian for whom I would never vote.  George Bush was one.  Romney?  Sure, you can consider his religion if you want, but more importantly,  look at his policies and both his expressed values and the things he has said and done in the past... vote accordingly... just don't vote for him because he is a Christian.  He isn't.  He is a Mormon.  For that matter, don't vote for Obama because he is a Christian.  He is.  Instead, look at is policies, his expressed values, his actions, and the things he has said and vote accordingly.