How Will Mitt Romney’s Mormon Speech Go?
Mitt Romney is making the religion speech, and the media is already calling up the ghost of Jack Kennedy. But this is a tougher speech, what with religion being more central in American life nowadays. Mitt’s speechwriters may not be up to the task, since there’s tons of facts about the Mormon faith Mitt Romney will not speak about at all.
First, why is Romney going to give this speech? The real reason there is that a whole bunch of evangelical Christians, the bloc of Republicans Mitt has flip flopped for on the abortion and gay rights, view Romney’s Mormon religion as a cult. Let’s be clear about that. This is different from John Kennedy when he spoke about his Catholicism. Sure, Americans of 1960 may have been hesitant and worried that John Kennedy would take his marching orders from the Pope and American Bishops and Cardinals, Americans did not view Catholicism as a cult. And while Mitt Romney may have quite the youthful look, he’s no Jack Kennedy in stature or in charisma, as many writers across the internet are pointing out (DKos, Carpetbagger, plaisted and kipsquire, to name a few). Please, folks, Mitt Romney is no Dan Quayle, either. This is going to be a crafty speech, and Mitt Romney is going to try to have the same kind of success with it that Jack Kennedy had. As such, it may be instructive to go read Kennedy’s speech.
One thing Jack Kennedy did was equate Catholicism with other religions. At one point he notes that, while Americans might be suspect about his religion, in America they have been suspect of many religions. Jack was crafty as well, placing Quakers in the list. Yeah, Richard Nixon was a Quaker. Here’s Jack Kennedy:
For while this year it may be a Catholic against whom the finger of suspicion is pointed, in other years it has been, and may someday be again, a Jew–or a Quaker–or a Unitarian–or a Baptist. It was Virginia’s harassment of Baptist preachers, for example, that helped lead to Jefferson’s statute of religious freedom. Today I may be the victim–but tomorrow it may be you–until the whole fabric of our harmonious society is ripped at a time of great national peril.
This tack is not going to work for Mr. Romney. Remember, Romney went to a great deal of trouble to flip flop on abortion and gay rights in order to appeal to the evangelical base of the Republican Party, and there’s no doubt this speech is for them. But as much as the evangelicals think they are discriminated against on issues ranging from Courthouse nativitiy scenes to the teaching of creationism, from the posting of the Ten Commandments to home schooling, my suspicion is that these folks will not want to see their Christian religion equated to Mormonism, not even in the notion that they’re both victims.
I’m thinking Mitt Romney has to define to the American people what Mormonism is, and I’m betting he only goes so far as putting up a very vague definition.
Mitt Romney will say that Mormons believe in Jesus, believe in life beginning at conception, believe in family, and believe in service. This last bit will focus on service to country, but during that part of the discussion Mitt Romney is sure to talk about the service he made during his mission back when he was young, and he’s likely to trot out the Five Brothers, touting their missions as well. But Mitt won’t say that those missions are largely about trying to convert others to Mormonism.
Romney will talk about Mormons the traditional values of the Mormon church, and he will explicitly say that these values are in tune with the more traditional Christian values. Romney will not say anything about how those traditional values have in the past not included black people, an LDS policy that has only changed in relatively recent years. He will also not say anything about the traditional view of women in the Mormon Church, though that diminished and subservient role might sell with some evangelicals — he just doesn’t want to lose the votes of women by calling attention to it.
Mitt Romney will talk about the central place of Jesus Christ in his speech, and he likely will refer to this season where Christians celebrate the birth of Christ. I’m betting Mitt Romney will not refer to Joseph Smith or Brigham Young, as too many evangelicals will think of those two as “cult founders.” Mitt Romney will absolutely not refer to the Angel Moroni. Not a chance. Will Mitt talk about the Christian bible? That’s a good question, because, of course, he’d have to talk about the Book of Mormon then, wouldn’t he? If Mitt DID talk of the Book of Mormon, would he also talk about the Golden Plates from which it comes, and the help Urim and Thummim gave in translating the Book of Mormon? Surely that wouldn’t play with the evangelicals. Really, it wouldn’t help at all. Too much emphasis there, or reference to, Jews, you know?
Mitt Romney will also blanche at the central issue Jack Kennedy had to deal with, the notion that the hierarchy of the church rules all members of the faith. Jack Kennedy allayed the fears of Americans by saying that Church leaders would not dictate to him concerning any decisions he would make in governing this country. Mitt Romney saying the same thing would mean that he has to at least obliquely reference who is in charge of the LDS, and that gets into sticky territory. How does he refer to the Council of Twelve Apostles and the First Presidency, after all, given their vast power in the LDS faith. Besides, what man aspiring to be President wants to mention that his faith is headed by a . . . President? Americans are used to priests and pastors and ministers and rabbis taking care of their spiritual needs, but I’m thinking that’s just bad PR to even mention the First Presidency as a religious leadership position. That’s going to sound too alien to the experience of evangelicals. Oh, and Gordon Hinkley’s name will not be mentioned at all by Mitt Romney.
Look, I went through a whole essay without mentioning bigamy or funny underwear! Nope, Mitt won’t mention either of these either, and I’m thinking those topics are not needed. Still, Americans tend to have some odd opinions about Mormons, and those two topics form some of the strangest parts of those odd opinions.
What good will this speech do Mitt Romney then? He’s going to get massive TV coverage for it, even though he’s going to say almost nothing about his religion. Mitt Romney will get exposure that he’s not gotten so far, and that will help him out. The question remains, however, whether the media will address the issues Mitt Romney fails to address. I’ll not put my expectations too high in that regard.
Update, 12/7/2007: My evaluation of Mitt Romney’s speech after the fact is here.
There are damn few politicians these days who aren’t puppets for somebody. Romney ain’t one of ‘em.
Jack and Bobby didn’t take shit offa nobody.
Many of the people that Kennedy was reaching out to were (as was demonstrated by the results of the election) open to hearing what he had to say.
Unfortunately for Romney, he is faced with the task of persuading a pack of self righteous ignorant bigots, and then, if he somehow succeeds, finding a way to walk out of their cesspool of hatred by November.
Carl, you are right, of course. This isn’t a civil conversation Mitt Romney is entering into. I think it odd that he thinks flip flopping will get him through with an uncivil audience.
The Church of Jesus Christ (LDS) is often accused by Evangelical pastors of not believing in Christ and, therefore, not being a Christian religion. This article http://mormonsarechristian.blogspot.com/ helps to clarify such misconceptions by examining early Christianity’s comprehension of baptism, the Godhead, the deity of Jesus Christ and His Atonement.
The Church of Jesus Christ (LDS) adheres more closely to First Century Christianity and the original New Testament than any other denomination. Harper’s Bible Dictionary entry on the Trinity says “the formal doctrine of the Trinity as it was defined by the great church councils of the fourth and fifth centuries is not to be found in the New Testament.” The Church believes in the New Testament, not the man-made Creeds.
Perhaps the reason the pastors denigrate the Church of Jesus Christ (LDS) is to protect their flock (and their livelihood). It is encouraging that Paul Weyrich, Wayne Grudem and Bob Jones III, (along with Jay Sekulow, Mark DeMoss, and Dr. John Willke, a founder and past president of the National Right to Life Committee.) have rejected bigotry and now support Mittb Romney on the basis that he is the most moral candidate with the best qualifications.
Encouraging, I suppose, Bot. But the virulent bigotry will not leave the evangelical mind until all religious leaders do just that, lead. I’m thinking no speech of Mitt Romney’s will do that.
Remember, too, this isn’t about facts, but about perceptions. People will pervieve that all of the Book of Mormon is manmade, rather than Godly inspired. I’m willing to bet even a whole bunch of Mormons have a problem believing it was found on a set of gold plates, then translated, in the 1800’s, by a couple Old Testament figures. Most Americans have a problem believing that time travel thing.
For some reason I don’t remember JFK talking much about the Inquisition, nor a about the Virgin Birth, nor about the Assumption of Mary. Pray tell what does Mr. Romney’s personal religious beliefs have to do with his abilities to be the President of the United States of America?
Unless he provides specific explanations for things like the magic underwear, shunning of non-mormons, +5 children, the vast number of corporations controlled by mormons, the baptizing of the dead, living prophets and countless other hipocracies he shouldn’t bother. There’s no way - no way - that the LDS would pass up the opportunity to influence the most powerful office in the nation (nor unfortunately would other ‘faiths’). Mitt is ‘owned’ by these people - if he truly believes otherwise - that should be another real cause for concern.
To ConstitutionalCommando,
Romney is the opne who thinks people have enough concern over his religion that he’s bmaking a speech. Personally, I’m not bothered by his religion, but by his flip flops. But he’s read the polls about how evangelicals are wary of him and his LDS faith, and as such he’s decided to speak about it. The trouble is, Americans knew about Catholicism, so Kennedy didn’t need to go into historic detail. The same is not the case concerning the LDS faith, and he’s going to blow this one, because he’s going to give no detail. Of course, giving the details will be problematic as well. He’s sunk. IF the meida presses the issue.
Steven Reynolds:
Believe me I’m no fan of Romney. His ideas about the Constitutional liberties we have in this country scare the bejesus out of me. However I would have hoped after the 47 years since the Kennedy speech we would have gone beyond the bigotry, and hate for a much misunderstood, and persecuted religion.
My personal opinion is that the Church of LDS is 19th-Century Flapdoodle. However, what church Romney was born into doesn’t bother me. His statements about Guantanamo do.