Mitt Romney’s Mormonism: What Does It Mean? Why Should We Care?         Back to Articles

How does an individual’s profession of faith in Mormonism affect their daily decisions and what are the implications of having a Mormon in any political office, especially that of Commander in Chief? My concerns are in the areas of loyalties, LDS prophecies, decision making, and preferential treatment.

To understand what it means to be loyal to Mormonism and how it differs from loyalty to Protestant Christianity-- or Catholicism, as in the case of John F. Kennedy-- we must examine the significance and role of the Temple in the lives of Latter-day Saints (a.k.a. LDS, Mormons). Not even the Pope or Protestant leaders require unquestioning allegiance. Only the most worthy of Mormons are allowed in the Temple. They must pass two interviews; the first by the bishop (ecclesiastical leader of the congregation) of the ward the member attends, and the second by the Stake President (leader over a Stake, which generally consists of five to ten wards). There are fourteen questions the church member must answer to the satisfaction of local leaders. Six of them pertain to moral conduct within personal and business relationships and eight deal with commitment and loyalty to LDS beliefs and practices. I'll cover the latter category of questions.

What this means in Mormon-speak: God the Father was once a human man who earned his right to become a god through good works and adherence to the Mormon gospel on another planet. He now has a glorified body of flesh and bone and resides with his many wives on a planet "nigh unto Kolob" (a star somewhere in the galaxy) fathering spirit children that will someday be born as mortal humans on this or another earth.

Jesus of Mormonism is our older spirit brother and spirit brother of Lucifer. He volunteered to pay for our sins if we keep all the commandments of the Mormon gospel. According to several LDS prophets and apostles, Jesus was conceived through sexual relations between God the Father and Mary, who is not only one of his spirit daughters, but also one of his eternal wives.

The Holy Ghost is the third personage in the Godhead in Mormonism. He has a body of spirit, but cannot be in more than one place at a time, although his influence may be felt everywhere. The Father is a god; Jesus is a god; and the Holy Ghost is a god. While they are the only gods for the particular part of the galaxy we live in, there are many other gods ruling other solar systems and galaxies.

What is a “firm testimony of the restored gospel?” It is an unwavering belief that the Mormon Church is the only organization on earth through which mankind can be saved. It is the staunch belief that Mormonism alone offers the authorized ordinances (rites and rituals) necessary for reconciliation between God and man. It is the resolute conviction that—as John Taylor, third President of the Church, wrote, "Joseph Smith, the Prophet and Seer of the Lord, has done more, save Jesus only, for the salvation of men in this world, than any other man that ever lived in it" (Doctrine &Covenants 135:3).

The significance of Romney having a testimony of Mormonism is that he believes the LDS Church is God’s kingdom on earth. As a devout member he would support and defend it at all costs. As a hypothetical example, if the prophet got a new revelation saying polygamy (or whatever) was to be practiced again, President Romney would be expected to do all in his power to make it legal. The LDS people would believe "heavenly Father" placed Romney in office at the just the right time so the eternal principle of plural marriage could restored to this promised land in preparation for the Second Coming of Christ, at which time there is to be a "restitution of all things."

That the doctrine of plural marriage being reinstituted would result in many people leaving the LDS Church is a topic for another day; however, I personally know many Mormons who are prepared to live that principle if it were asked of them by their leaders. How many LDS assemblymen, lawyers, judges, congressmen, and senators are also prepared to move forward and act on what they consider divine revelation given to the Church through its prophets?

• Do you sustain the President of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints as the prophet, seer, and revelator; and do you recognize him as the only person on the earth authorized to exercise all priesthood keys?

When Mormons sustain the President of the Church they are stating they uphold, support, and regard him as the only authorized spokesman for God on the earth. For a temple-going Mormon, to sustain the president of the Church means to commit to carrying out all his instructions and commands. Consider these statements by Mormon leaders:

"Any Latter-day Saint who denounces or opposes, whether actively or otherwise, any plan or doctrine advocated by the 'prophets, seers, and revelators' of the Church is cultivating the spirit of apostasy....Lucifer...wins a great victory when he can get members of the Church to speak against their leaders and to 'do their own thinking.'...

"When our leaders speak, the thinking has been done. When they propose a plan—it is God's plan. When they point the way, there is no other which is safe. When they give direction, it should mark the end of controversy (Improvement Era, June 1945, p.354).

The following are excerpts taken from a speech by then-Mormon apostle Ezra Taft Benson, who shortly afterward became president of the Church (“Fourteen Fundamentals in Following the Prophets,” BYU Devotional Assembly Tuesday, February26, 1980);

Our marching orders for each six months are found in the General Conference addresses which are printed in the Ensign magazine…

Wilford Woodruff, fourth president of the LDS Church, stated:

"I say to Israel, the Lord will never permit me or any other man who stands as president of the Church to lead you astray. It is not in the program. It is not in the mind of God." (The Discourses of Wilford Woodruff, pp.212-213.)

President Marion G. Romney [to whom Governor Mitt Romney is related] tells of this incident which happened to him:

"I remember years ago when I was a Bishop I had President (Heber J.) Grant talk to our ward. After the meeting I drove him home ... Standing by me, he put his arm over my shoulder and said: 'My boy, you always keep your eye on the President of the Church, and if he ever tells you to do anything, and it is wrong, and you do it, the Lord will bless you for it.' Then with a twinkle in his eye, he said, 'But you don't need to worry. The Lord will never let his mouthpiece lead the people astray.'" (Conference Report, October 1960, p.78.)

Said Brigham Young, "I have never yet preached a sermon and sent it out to the children of men, that they may not call scripture." (Journal of Discourses,13:95)

There will be times when you will have to choose between the revelations of God and reasoning of men--between the prophet and the politician or professor…

Said Brigham Young: "Some of the leading men in Kirtland were much opposed to Joseph the Prophet, meddling with temporal affairs... In a public meeting of the Saints, I said, 'Ye Elders of Israel, ... will some of you draw the line of demarcation, between the spiritual and temporal in the Kingdom of God, so that I may understand it?' Not one of them could do it...

"I defy any man on earth to point out the path a Prophet of God should walk in, or point out his duty, and just how far he must go, in dictating temporal or spiritual things. Temporal and spiritual things are inseparably connected, and ever will be." (JD10:363-364.) [Editor’s note: ellipses in the above statements by Brigham Young were included in President Benson’s speech]

...The Prophet May be Involved in Civic Matters. When a people are righteous they want the best to lead them in government. Alma was the head of the Church and of the government in the Book of Mormon; Joseph Smith was mayor of Nauvoo and Brigham Young was governor of Utah. Isaiah was deeply involved in giving counsel on political matters and of his words the Lord Himself said, "Great are the words of Isaiah." (3Nephi 23:1.) Those who would remove prophets from politics would take God out of government…

If Mitt Romney or any devout Mormon separated politics from religion, they would be going against the very grain of Mormonism and living contrary to their temple covenants.

Some people might wonder what difference it makes that a now-deceased Mormon leader said or taught something long time ago when leaders are not teaching it over the pulpit now. That would be a reasonable observation if it involved many other institutions or organizations with long histories. Mormonism is unique, however, in that its foundation is built on the words of its prophets, who are considered by members to be the mouthpieces of God. If current leaders now said that the words and teachings of former leaders were wrong or uninspired, the whole foundation crumbles! This is why so many of the books, teachings, writings, and diaries of early LDS prophets and apostles have been archived in vaults and are no longer published or open to public scrutiny.

In addition, some of the books (including LDS scripture) have been changed over the years with each new edition; not just grammatical changes, but doctrinal ones. The Book of Commandments, now known as the Doctrine and Covenants, is one of these. The Church is just biding its time as the older generation dies off, while the rising one and converts have no memory of aberrant doctrines of the past or of significant changes as late as the early 1990’s.

• Do you sustain the other General Authorities and the local authorities of the Church?

The General Authorities operate under the direction of the twelve Mormon apostles and the seven men serving as the presidency of a quorum called “The Seventy.” Local authorities are those in charge of wards, stakes, and missions, among other smaller levels of leadership. Members are counseled to submit to local ecclesiastical authorities or face the stigma of “murmuring against the brethren” or possible disciplinary action. In order for Romney to maintain his church standing he must be submissive to the counsel of his local leaders when they speak with priesthood authority. LDS leaders may give counsel in any area, not just in religious or spiritual matters.

 "You must sustain the General Authorities and local authorities of the Church. When you raise your arm to the square when these leaders’ names are presented, you signify that you will sustain them in their responsibilities and in the counsel they give you.

"This is not an exercise in paying homage to those whom the Lord has called to preside. Rather, it is recognition of the fact that God has called prophets, seers, and revelators, and others as General Authorities. It is a commitment that you will follow the instructions that come from the presiding officers of the Church. Likewise you should feel loyalty toward the bishop and stake president and other Church leaders. Failure to sustain those in authority is incompatible with service in the temple." (Howard W Hunter, “Your Temple Recommend,” New Era, April 1995, p 6)

• Do you affiliate with any group or individual whose teachings or practices are contrary to or oppose those accepted by The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, or do you sympathize with the precepts of any such group or individual?

If Romney were elected president, would he uphold the constitutional rights of evangelical Christians and other individuals or groups that speak out against Mormonism? Would doing so compromise his worthiness to attend the temple? How could he sympathize with or support in any way ministries that reach out to questioning or disenfranchised Mormons? If the First Amendment rights of these individuals or groups were being violated, would he step in to protect those freedoms without question or hesitation, or would he be constrained by his loyalty to the Church to shut these groups down?

• Do you earnestly strive to do your duty in the Church; to attend your sacrament, priesthood, and other meetings; and to obey the rules, laws, and commandments of the gospel?

What if the rules, laws, and commandments of the LDS gospel (which are as fluid and changing as a politician’s stance in the strong wind of public opinion) become at odds with what is best for the country as a whole? Would Romney privately rationalize that what is best for the LDS Church is also best for the nation, only non-Mormon Americans “just don’t know it yet?”

• If you have received your temple endowment do you keep all the covenants that you made in the temple?

While some of the oaths made in the temple deal with personal purity, others are disturbing. Romney first went through the temple before the latest changes in the ceremonies took place. At that time, Temple patrons were instructed to bring their right arms "to the square" (Masonic symbolism) and put themselves under the "law of sacrifice...which is that you do sacrifice all that you have, including your own lives, if necessary, for the building up of the kingdom of God on the earth;

"You and each of you do covenant and promise before God, angels, and these witnesses at this altar that you will keep the law of sacrifice as contained in the Old and New Testaments, which has been explained to you. Each of you bow your heads and say yes."

At another point in the ceremony patrons are put under the "law of consecration," to which an oath is taken after listening to the officiator state;

"You and each of you do covenant and promise before God, angels, and these witnesses at this altar that you will keep the law of consecration as contained in the book of Doctrine and Covenants [scripture unique to LDS], which is that you do consecrate yourselves, your time, talents and everything with which the Lord has blessed you or with which he may bless you to the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints for the building up of the kingdom of God here on the earth and for the establishment of Zion. Each of you bow your head and say yes."

When Mormons speak of Zion, it has nothing to do with Jewish Israel, but with the Mormon political kingdom; a theocracy they believe will rule the earth during the millennial reign of Jesus Christ. Lest any Mormon dissemble and say the oaths are nothing more than allegorical submission to spiritual authority, or whatever other explanation they use to make the temple appear innocuous and devoid of any real power or meaning, consider how serious LDS Church leaders believe temple vows to be. Prior to 1990, when Romney took his vows, the voice of the ceremony narrator intones;

"...we desire to impress upon your minds the sacred character of the First token of the Aaronic priesthood, with its accompanying name, sign, and penalty, together with that of all the other Tokens of the Holy Priesthood, with their accompanying names, signs, and penalties, which you will receive in the temple this day. They are most sacred and are guarded by solemn covenants and obligations of secrecy to the effect that under no condition, even at the peril of your life, will you ever divulge them, except at a certain place that will be shown you hereafter. The representation of the penalties indicates different ways in which life may be taken." [Emphasis mine]

Even more disturbing is the point in the ceremony during the film, in which the character of Satan looks directly into the camera and warns, “I have something to say concerning this people; if they do not live up to every covenant they make at these altars in this temple this day, they will be in my power!

We must ask ourselves if we really want a president in office who has made an oath to live up to all the Mormon commandments or subject himself to Satan’s power!

• Do you consider yourself worthy in every way to enter the temple and participate in temple ordinances?

Beyond what the Church demands of individuals holding temple recommends, church members must evaluate themselves regularly to ensure they remain temple-worthy. Temple worthiness is serious commitment; not intended to be just lip service. If Romney considers himself a devout Mormon, he takes the oaths made in the temple very seriously and is obligated to carry them out with all their attendant duties and obligations to The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. If he does not take them seriously, he is a pretender.

Woven into Mormonism are threads of prophecy; some of it authoritatively proclaimed by LDS prophets and apostles and some of it disseminated through oral tradition. Prophecies abound of worldwide political rule and dominion by The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, under the authority of Christ himself. There are prophecies of the collapse of the United States government and the role Mormon elders will play in restoring the U.S. Constitution.

Most intriguing are the prophecies regarding the End Times and how America’s borders will be overrun by millions of “Lamanites” as they come up from South and Central America to plunder and destroy all in their path. The term “Lamanites” (pronounced lay’ man ites) refers to the dark-skinned peoples of the Americas descended from the wicked characters of Laman, Lemuel, and their followers in the Book of Mormon. LDS doctrine identifies Native Americans, Hispanics, and Polynesians as Lamanites. This belief does not mean that Mormons think of modern-day “Lamanites” in a racially bigoted way. It just means that those of Hispanic and American Indian descent have a significant part in LDS end-times prophecy. Because of this, one cannot minimize the influence of these beliefs on foreign relations with Mexico were Romney to be elected president.

How would Romney’s belief in Mormon prophecy shape his foreign policy? If elected, will he be committed to securing our borders or will he do all he can to assimilate illegal aliens into our culture to facilitate their prophetic calling in the restructuring of a new America; the New Jerusalem?

I've made reference to a New Jerusalem, but where does Romney stand on the old one? According to Mormonism all non-Mormons are Gentiles, while true Israel is the Mormon people. This belief could be considered the LDS counterpart of Replacement Theology, which “essentially teaches that the church has replaced Israel in God’s plan. Adherents of Replacement Theology believe that the Jews are no longer God’s chosen people, and God does not have specific future plans for the nation of Israel.” (http://www.gotquestions.org/replacement-theology.html) Will Romney’s Middle East policies be determined by the Church’s teachings that it's the Mormons, and not the Jews, that inherit all the promises of the kingdom?

What of prophecies regarding the Midwest? What influence will they have on Romney’s domestic policies? One of many Mormon prophecies regarding the state of Missouri predicts that it will be the center place around which the New Jerusalem will be built. In the Doctrine & Covenants, section 57, verses 1-3, Joseph Smith wrote;

Hearken, O ye elders of my church, saith the Lord your God, who have assembled yourselves together, according to my commandments, in this land, which is the land of Missouri, which is the land which I have appointed and consecrated for the gathering of the saints.

Wherefore, this is the land of promise, and the place for the city of Zion.

And thus saith the Lord your God, if you will receive wisdom here is wisdom. Behold, the place which is now called Independence is the center place; and a spot for the temple is lying westward, upon a lot which is not far from the courthouse. (Emphasis added. Note: “saints” refers to the LDS people)

In an article touching on the future of Jackson County, Missouri from a historical perspective, a Mormon Institute teacher wrote;

But more than a refuge against calamity, Zion was to become headquarters for the millennial government of Christ, wrote [W. W.] Phelps. He identified it as “the mountain of the Lord’s house” prophesied by Isaiah, from which “shall go forth the law” (Evening and Morning Star, Jan. 1833, p. 1; Isa. 2:2–3). He printed Joseph Smith’s revelations of Enoch (see Moses 6–8) including the prophecy that Enoch’s righteous people would return and mingle with the Saints in Jackson County. Furthermore, the Ten Tribes of Israel would return with “their rich treasures” to the New Jerusalem where they would be “crowned with glory” (D & C 133:30, 32). Thus, the Saints gathering in Jackson County could rightfully feel the worth of their labors and the immense importance of that location. (Max H Parkin, “Missouri’s Impact on the Church,” Ensign, Apr 1979,57) (Emphasis added)

Will Romney show favoritism toward Missouri by approving federal funding for extra projects above and beyond what the state would normally receive? Maybe he would and maybe he wouldn’t, but the possibility is there, based on the traditions and teachings of his religion.

Another area of concern is just how far will the preferential treatment of Mormons and the LDS Church go? It is reasonable to expect some favoritism; after all, individuals of all religions, nationalities, value systems, and political parties like to surround themselves with and give preference to those who are of like minds, beliefs, and culture. It is only natural for people to feel that way and act accordingly. The question is to what degree will preference be given?

For example, would Mitt issue an executive order criminalizing any speech considered “anti-Mormon,” including books or articles that disagree with Mormon teachings or practices? What about polygamy? What if the LDS prophet got some new revelation that select devout priesthood-holders were to take on additional wives? This may seem farfetched or preposterous to non-Mormons, and indeed it would be were it not for Mormon doctrine and prophecies which millions of LDS believe with all their hearts. In addition, the LDS Church has a history of saying one thing publicly, but doing another privately. Past LDS leaders have demonstrated a pattern of “lying for the Lord” and showing contempt for the government by defiantly practicing polygamy in violation of state and federal laws. Why would they do this? Because the leaders were following what their scripture told them was right;

And now, verily I say unto you concerning the laws of the land, it is my will that my people should observe to do all things whatsoever I command them. And that law of the land which is constitutional, supporting that principle of freedom in maintaining rights and privileges, belongs to all mankind, and is justifiable before me. Therefore, I, the Lord, justify you, and your brethren of my church, in befriending that law which is the constitutional law of the land; And as pertaining to law of man, whatsoever is more or less than this, cometh of evil. I, the Lord God, make you free, therefore ye are free indeed; and the law also maketh you free. (D & C 98:4-8)

Simply put, Mormon leaders held fast to Joseph Smith’s revelation that any law not deemed Constitutional by the Church or its members did not have to be upheld and they would be justified before the Lord. Laws limiting marriage to one man and one woman were not considered Constitutional; therefore LDS leaders had no problem defying Federal and State laws against polygamy. Why was the practice of polygamy so significant within Mormonism?

The introduction to D & C 132 gives us some insight;

Revelation given through Joseph Smith the Prophet, at Nauvoo, Illinois, recorded July 12, 1843, relating to the new and everlasting covenant, including the eternity of the marriage covenant, as also plurality of wives

1-6, Exaltation is gained through the new and everlasting covenant… 15-20, Celestial marriage and a continuation of the family unit enable men to become gods…

Plural marriage, in this life or the next, is foundational to worthy LDS men becoming creator-gods of their own worlds in the eternities. In the United States today we not only have groups that want to legalize same-sex marriage, but groups that are actively seeking the legalization of polygamy. The concern is not so much the reintroduction of polygamy or polyandry, but the ease with which a Mormon in office could break laws, lie about it, and feel justified in doing so. There are thousands of fringe Mormons (individuals and groups) who do not pay taxes for this very reason. They are “living off the grid” in some rural communities because of their strong convictions that they are not obligated to obey what they believe are unconstitutional laws. While it’s true that Mormons found by their leaders to not be paying income taxes are usually excommunicated or otherwise disciplined by the Church, the rationale for this noncompliance is inherent in LDS doctrines.

One event that comes to mind in regard to Romney and rule-breaking is his wedding. For worthy Mormons nothing is more desirable than Temple marriage. The wedding takes place inside one of the Temples where a man holding the office of the Melchizedek priesthood “seals” (binds) a couple together as husband and wife for all eternity (not a bad proposition if you like your spouse. If not, you’re stuck. If you’re a man and you’re not happy with who you’re married to you can always have a few more wives added to your eternal family in the life to come. If you’re a woman and you’re not too crazy about your husband, you’ll be too busy being pregnant and raising millions of spirit babies to care). In any case, only worthy members of the Church are allowed to attend Temple wedding ceremonies. In situations where the bride or groom’s parents are not Mormons or don’t hold temple recommends (little cards stating they met the criteria for worthiness), the parents must wait outside the temple during the ceremony. According to Church policy a couple marrying outside the temple (a civil ceremony) must wait one year before being able to go through the temple to “get sealed” and be put on the path toward exaltation (godhood). Countless numbers of non-Mormon or “unworthy” parents are grieved each year because they have to miss their son or daughter’s wedding. Couples are strongly discouraged from having a civil ceremony to accommodate non-Mormon family members because of the official waiting period required by the Church.

Guess who had an exception made to this rule to accommodate the bride’s non-member parents? Mitt and Ann Romney. They were allowed to have a civil ceremony first so Ann's parents could attend the wedding. Right after, the Romney’s left for the Temple where they could forgo the waiting period and immediately be sealed. While “rank and file” Mormons must abide by the rules, exceptions are often made for affluent members who are part of the inner circle of the Church; in other words, those with monetary, political, or social influence. Is this type of favoritism and rule-bending something we can expect to continue throughout Romney’s life and political career?

Another question we should ask ourselves about any political candidate, Mormon or not, is how much confidence can we put in his (or her) integrity in light of the belief system or worldview he holds?  You cannot separate a person’s actions from his beliefs on a consistent basis because of a phenomenon known in psychology as “cognitive dissonance.” In short, cognitive dissonance is the tension that results when a person’s actions are not in harmony with their beliefs. In order to lessen the discomfort, people either modify their beliefs to accommodate their behaviors, or they adjust their actions to fit their belief system. Naturally, people live out their worldview. Obviously, if a person holds the view that life begins after birth, he is going to be much more supportive of abortion and embryonic stem cell research than someone who believes life begins at conception. To expect any candidate to separate himself from his beliefs is unreasonable, regardless of their religious views.

It’s clear that Mormonism is more than just the belief that a boy in 1820 saw a vision in the woods or later retrieved golden plates (thin golden sheets with engravings bound together by three metal rings) from a stone box in a hillside in New York. It’s more than believing God has a body of flesh and bone or that worthy Mormons can progress in eternity future to become gods themselves. Mormonism is an exclusive culture centered on the conviction that it alone holds the keys to all authority on earth and in heaven through its priesthood. This includes the authority to grant salvation, a decision which must pass the approval of Joseph Smith Jr, who, according to Church doctrine will judge the world alongside of Jesus Christ.  

In terms of decision making, we must examine how devout Mormons make decisions about the important things in life.

But, behold, I say unto you, that you must study it out in your mind; then you must ask me if it be right, and if it is right I will cause that your bosom shall burn within you; therefore, you shall feel that it is right. But if it be not right you shall have no such feelings, but you shall have a stupor of thought that shall cause you to forget the thing which is wrong; therefore, you cannot write that which is sacred save it be given you from me. (D & C 9:8-9) (Emphasis mine)

Lest a Mormon say that the above method of obtaining answers to prayers applied only to the work of translating the gold plates, from which the Book of Mormon purportedly came, LDS leaders teach otherwise;

This guidance about prayer given to Oliver Cowdery can also aid you: “Behold, … you have supposed that I would give it unto you, when you took no thought save it was to ask me.

“… You must study it out in your mind; then … ask me if it be right, and if it is right … your bosom shall burn … ; therefore, you shall feel that it is right.”

Then the answer comes as a feeling with an accompanying conviction. The Savior defines two separate ways: “I will tell you in your mind and in your heart, by the Holy Ghost.”

Answers to the mind and heart are messages from the Holy Ghost to our spirits. For me, response to the mind is very specific, like dictated words, while response to the heart is generalized, like a feeling to pray more.

Then the Lord clarifies, “But if [what you propose] be not right you … shall have a stupor of thought.” That, for me, is an unsettling, discomforting feeling.

Elder Scott goes on to say;

Some misunderstandings about prayer can be clarified by realizing that the scriptures define principles for effective prayer, but they do not assure when a response will be given. Actually, He will reply in one of three ways. First, you can feel the peace, comfort, and assurance that confirm that your decision is right. Or second, you can sense that unsettled feeling, the stupor of thought, indicating that your choice is wrong. Or third—and this is the difficult one—you can feel no response. (Ellipses in original article. Bold words are my emphasis) (Exceprts from article by Richard G. Scott, “Using the Supernal Gift of Prayer,” Ensign, May 2007, 8–11)

Another LDS apostle also emphasizes subjective experiences;

This burning in the bosom is not purely a physical sensation. It is more like a warm light shining within your being.

Describing the promptings from the Holy Ghost to one who has not had them is very difficult. Such promptings are personal and strictly private!

The Holy Ghost speaks with a voice that you feel more than you hear. It is described as a “still small voice.” And while we speak of “listening” to the whisperings of the Spirit, most often one describes a spiritual prompting by saying, “I had a feeling …” (Boyd K. Packer, “A Message to the Youth of the Church: Personal Revelation—The Gift, the Test, and the Promise,” New Era, Jan 1995, 4)

These are just a few of numerous references on seeking answers to prayer in Mormonism. As every faithful Mormon does when facing an important decision, so, too, will Mitt Romney; pray. Of course, this would be expected of any person of any faith. People from all religions pray or seek supernatural guidance for their lives; this is nothing new. Some people who claim no religious affiliation look to astrology, fortune-telling, Ouija Boards, or Tarot cards for answers. It would be disturbing to think a president was consulting his daily horoscope or getting a Tarot card reading to plan his agenda for the day. Likewise, it is somewhat troubling to think the foremost leader of the free-world could be deciding on whether or not to launch a nuclear attack pending a warm feeling within his breast or experiencing a stupor of thought!

This article has covered several aspects of how Mormonism plays out in the daily lives of its devotees. Mormonism is entwined in every aspect of a follower’s life; one cannot be considered a good, faithful Mormon without submitting to Church leadership and being compliant to their teachings. Mormons may insist they voluntarily comply with and sustain “the brethren,” but the bottom line is this; if their public speech and actions do not conform to the instructions of their leaders, they are considered to be in rebellion. Social pressure is intense within the LDS Church to conform.

Mitt Romney may indeed be extremely likable, family oriented, and patriotic. The way his sons spoke about him on a television interview surely indicates he is a wonderful father. However, the issue is not how great a father he is, but how his religious beliefs shape everything he does. He is bound by the oaths and covenants he made in the temple, swearing “before [the Mormon] God and angels” that he would consecrate everything he has to The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. Remember, in order to be considered worthy enough to go to the temple, Romney had to confess before two priesthood leaders that he sustains the president of the LDS Church as the only authorized man on earth to hold the keys of the kingdom. In the Mormon context, to sustain is to obey. Romney cannot separate politics from religion if he is truly a devout Mormon, so it appears he is not being entirely honest when he says his religion will not affect how he would govern as Commander in Chief.

One last thing to consider—and this would apply when considering any candidate of any religion; how rational is their faith and how will it affect their ability to govern? Obviously, we cannot “prove” to everyone’s satisfaction God exists or that Jesus is God incarnate. We can’t “prove” there is life after death. We cannot “prove” to everyone that the Bible is truly God’s inspired word; infallible and inerrant. However, there is overwhelming evidence that these things are so. Of all the religions, Christianity is indeed a rational faith, which is beyond the scope of this article. But suffice it to say, archaeological, historical, scientific, and exegetical evidence supports its veracity. None of this evidence exists for Mormonism.

No evidence exists for the Book of Mormon (the golden plates from which it was derived was allegedly taken to heaven by the angel “Moroni”) and no archaeological, historical, scientific, linguistic, nor any other evidence support its claims. To the contrary, there is much evidence that the book is 19^th-century literature. Faith often goes beyond reason, but it should not go against reason. If Romney is  willing to keep believing in the Book of Mormon and in the Mormon Church in spite of the evidence against its truth claims, I am led to wonder just how objective and rational he would be when presented with serious issues involving the welfare of this country. Would he be gullible? Would enemies of freedom and democracy be able to persuade him that “all is well in Zion” (to borrow a Book of Mormon phrase) while quietly subverting our Constitution?

Romney, like all devoted Latter-day Saints, filters everything through the presupposition that Mormonism is true. This predilection causes LDS to say in essence, “Don’t confuse us with the facts; we’ve already made up our minds.” If Romney doesn’t even investigate his own religion to see if its claims are tenable, will he have the fortitude and insight necessary to look beyond appearances in order to protect and defend our nation?

The purpose of this article is not to tell anyone who they should or should not vote for. My purpose is to reveal the hidden aspects of Mormonism that are not known to the average non-Mormon. It’s imperative to be informed in order to base our decisions on facts rather than feelings. Obviously, we all have biases; there’s no getting around that. But having a bias does not discount any evidence. I heard someone use an illustration similar to this; suppose the mother of a gold medal winner proclaims her son is the best gymnast in the world. Is she biased? Yes, of course. Because he is her son, she will naturally have a bias toward him. Does this change the fact that he is a world-champion athlete? Not at all! People naturally have a bias for the things they care about, regardless of which side of an issue they are on. So, before discounting everything negative that is said about Mitt Romney or Mormonism, consider the facts on which it is based.

Examine the evidence. Dig beneath the surface. Be as the Bereans of whom the apostle Paul referred to in Acts 17:11, who received the message with gladness, but then searched the scripture to see if things were really as they were being told. Regardless of who a candidate is or which political party is represented, don’t be swayed by persuasive, well-crafted speeches. Seek to know if there is substance beyond the rhetoric. What we learn may surprise us indeed, turning us from folly.

Perhaps the most compelling reason evangelical Christians should give pause putting a Mormon in the White House is the ripple effect that would legitimize Mormonism as another denomination of Christianity and result in the loss of many souls. The lines of demarcation between the true biblical gospel of Christ and the false gospel of Mormonism are already being blurred by ministries such as Greg Johnson’s “Standing Together,” based in Utah. In addition to Johnson’s efforts, we’ve got influential celebrities like Joel Osteen who, without any discernment or knowledge of Mormonism at all, declare Mormons to be Christians. In regard to Osteen, this so-called “shepherd” of the Christian flock had the temerity to say he’s “not the one to judge the little details of it.”

A pastor is a shepherd; a “watchman on the wall;” if he doesn’t judge the details of a person’s claim to be a Christian does he think his defenseless sheep will be able to? Even more alarming is when seminary professors, theologians, and respected scholars team up with Mormon apologists for the alleged purpose of bridging the gap in an effort to evangelize the Mormon people. Contrary to their theories of new and improved methods of reaching the lost (as if Jesus and Paul were “behind the times”), they are contributing to the lost being kept in darkness. Examples of this are the Reverend Greg Johnson co-authoring a book with Robert Millet (foreword by Dallas Theological Seminary professor Craig Blomberg) called, “Bridging the Divide: The Continuing Conversation between a Mormon and an Evangelical.”

With Romney as president, Mormons will be further convinced their gospel is true. Media coverage over every detail of Mitt and Ann Romney’s lives will interest and influence the masses; when they go to the temple, attend LDS Church General Conference (held twice a year in Salt Lake City), and when Grandpa Mitt gives priesthood blessings to his newborn grandbabies. Curiosity about Mormonism will almost certainly be generated, which will be a great boon to the LDS Church’s proselytizing programs and missionary efforts to gain converts. So much more is at stake than having someone in office whose beliefs are unorthodox. The ramifications reach into eternity. The choices we make today will affect generations, both here and in the life to come. We cannot separate the spiritual from the temporal. In every aspect of our lives, especially regarding the church house or the White House, we must ever be mindful of what God told the Children of Israel; “I have set before you life and death, blessings and curses. Now choose life, so that you and your children may live” (Deut 30:19).