Can a Mormon get to the White House?

One point of clarification the author omitted. The LDS church released a statement which contradicts Mr Glenn Beck's previous comments. In January 2010 the church released a statement which included the following text:

The so-called 'White Horse Prophecy' is based on accounts that have not been substantiated by historical research and is not embraced as Church doctrine.

The Mormon Church is by-and-large a real estate development company. They average building a new chapel every day somewhere in the world, currently have six temples under construction, are the largest nut producer in the US, own more land in FL than anyone else, are one of the top ten cattle ranchers in US, currently oversee a $3 BILLION commercial development underway in downtown Salt Lake City to include major department stores and million dollar condos, have plans underway for a large Marriott conference center and subdivision in Oahu, Hawaii, etc. This is all made possible because of their lay ministry.

Mormonism strayed from the founder's concepts in the early 1900's. They are a capitalistic enterprise today, operating behind the veil of secrecy afforded by their nonprofit religious status. Anyone who studies Mormon history in-depth will soon understand that they have the equivalent of caliphate aspirations for the Christian world. Their temples will become government centers and their leadership will reign over the world at Christ's direction. That is what their founders believed and taught. Today's membership is blind to the details. They are sheep. Followers. The Mormon PR machine has carefully crafted a new and sanitized image of Mormonism but the true intentions are well understood by those who have left . . .

'How plausible is it that a semi-literate man in upstate New York should find golden plates written in “reformed Egyptian” and translate them, while burying his face in his hat, to reveal the tale of a family who left Israel in 600BC and ended up in North America? Then again, to be fair, how plausible are the miracles and resurrection of Jesus?'

Of course all religions require faith to accept certain claims. But still then, reason in the context of philosophy (this is bigger and encompasses empirical science) is a purifying discipline to which even 'myths' should be subjected.

Just to add some other difficult historical claims without even going into the theological ones:
-Brown people in America are brown because they were dammed by God.
-There was civilization of white people in America that have left no archeological trace.

The things Mormons believe are no less plausible than beliefs of other religions. Anyone who argues differently is ignorant.

These types of articles will invariably bring out all those former Mormons who can "leave the Church but can't leave it alone." Too bad they show by their hasty derision that their decision to leave the Church is still eating at them and compels them to seek out and comment on articles such as this. If they are really at peace with their decision to leave, wouldn't they walk away with their heads held high and simply dismiss the Church from their lives?

Articles like this will also bring out the (mostly "Christian") Mormon haters who just can't understand why such a "kooky" religion continues to retain and attract a disproportionate number of highly educated people. Could it be that the Church truly has something of value to offer its members?

And to answer the subtitle of the article, yes.

Mormons in a tizzy over Romney and Huntsman being possible candidates? Hardly. Opinions about both men vary widely among Latter-day Saints, and there are a lot of LDS who would rather forgo the asinine and usually ill-informed comments that result. Nothing new here -- Orrin Hatch ran in 2000 and Romney, of course, ran in 2008.

As a long-time observer of both politics and religion, my experience is that the only people "in a tizzy" over Mormons running for President are a subset of conservative Evangelicals and a subset of secular humanists -- possible the sole topic which those two groups agree.

@sfcanative

Really? Mormonism is a capitalist enterprise? The Mormon church has no paid clergy. My father was a bishop and chose to put in 20 hour weeks to strengthen his ward and never earned a single cent for his work and he did so happily. The only people that actually make money for their callings is the President of the Church and a handful of people in the Church Headquarters and they only make subsistence wages.

As for your concern that the Church is setting up a system similar to a Caliphate, I won't even dignify that with a response.

my comments:

Sure, most religions have strange beliefs but few today take them as literally or have such a millennial bent as Mormonism. The faith's 19th century roots are still apparent in it's teachings but especially in the deeper doctrines. The LDS Church is easily one of the most authoritarian of America's religions, expecting and celebrating complete obedience of the priesthood leadership by members. Children from the youngest age are taught to "Follow the Prophet." Many outside the faith find this virtually blind obedience a little scary— especially in a group w/ political aspirations. Despite the very real desire of the Mormon Church to be mainstream they struggle to actually be mainstream. I think much of the difficulty comes from trying to hang onto 19th century teaching of Joseph Smith and his successors.

Speaking of which, the White Horse Prophecy, while disputed by some has also been accepted and taught by many others including prophets (BY, Journal of Discourses etc.) In fact it has been quoted over 40 times by JS and 6 successors have used the thread metaphor or something like it. At the same time they teach these ideas some leaders reject other parts of the prophecy as it is recorded. The teaching though has no less credibility in Mormonism than many of Smith's other un-canonized teachings that are accepted.

Summary: While the prophecy is not official, the idea of the Constitution hanging by a thread and being saved by the LDS elders was taught by Smith and successors/Prophets up till at least the 1960s. The prophecy as written by Rushton has been rejected by some LDS leadership likely because it didn't come through proper channels.

@scrappy001-
Incorrect. Many Church leaders above the level of Stake President receive stipends in relation to their callings. Mission Presidents, GAs, etc. For many this is actual far less than they made in the private sector but they do receive money. To say they do not is inaccurate. They also receive health insurance, some retirement etc. I've talked to people relatives in the 1st Qu. of 70 and in 2002 they were making about 50K. I don't know if seniority affects the amount. Certainly the 12 and 1st Pres would be getting more.

Another source says his Stake Pres was called as a GA in 2009 started out making 70,000. He was a partner in law firm before so it was a downgrade.

Add in the book deals though and maybe it's not too bad.

Before 1990 GAs sat on boards of corps owned by the Church— more symbolic than anything— and collected salaries for it. Hinckley ended that.

@scrappy001

A bishop's son? Well, those familiar with the inside world of Mormonism know what that means . . . As for your denial of capitalistic pursuits by the LDS Church, how else does one explain the multitude (100+) corporations run by Salt Lake City? It starts with the Corporation of the President which runs your church. Mormonism has bought into the American Dream: show prosperity, wealth and growth at all cost. Might I add that the 10% tithes and offerings going to SLC to fund this development company parading as a religion is also robbing the government's treasury through schedule A deductions on member's tax returns?

As for your denial of the 'brethrens' long-term intentions, let's take this system of profitable businesses and temples to its logical conclusion. The Mormon temples are there to conduct ordinances for the dead and living. Have you even done the math to determine how redundant the entire undertaking actually is? Every known living person in the computer system used to generate "names" for the temple work has been baptised, washed, anointed, endowed and sealed dozens of times 'cuz there ain't enough names to go around. Get it? It's busy work for you folks. And, once everyone has been baptised, washed, anointed, endowed and sealed, what purpose will the temples then serve? Seems rather obvious to me what the 'true' church has in mind for Jesus' return! He'll need infrastructure to reign, no? Mormonism teaches that their Jesus will return to earth and enter his temple(s) through the east door which is why all temples have an east door which are never used. Yes, it's exactly that. The Mormon version of a caliphate, pure and simple.

"But other aspects of Mormonism have liberal, even socialist, elements. Joseph Smith had an egalitarian vision. The church demands, for example, that Mormons pay 10% of their income as a “tithe” to the church"

How is this a liberal or socialist elements?? Don't all churches, temples and mosque demand money from their follower?? How is this any different?

Can a Mormon get to the White House?

Er, no. America so far only produced four non-Protestant presidents out of 44 in total, one Catholic, one deist-agnostic-atheist and two irreligious. And of the last two, it isn't entirely sure whether they were simply unaffiliated Christians or had some other beliefs of their own.

God Save America, it certainly needs rescuing.

A pity god doesn't actually exist.

No one seems to mention the principle of separation of church and state. Hopefully that still trumps any church allegiance.

For a presidential candidate, being a Mormon probably hurts as much as being a memeber of any other minority, be it black, atheist, or gay. Mud slingers will always pounce on those, but in the end enlightenned minds will dominate the debate.

@ SN Dream

Google "United Order" and you'll see how early Mormonism was basically a theocratic socialism.

Joseph Smith had something like 55 wives, so yes if each Mormon had say 25 wives and ten children by each then within a matter of a few generations a Mormon could have the votes HE(no Mormon woman could every run for office) needed for the white house! 

This article begins with the following statement:
"THE Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, also known as the Mormon church, is in a tizzy now that not one but two of its members, or “saints”, seem about to vie for the Republican nomination for president of the United States. Mitt Romney and Jon Huntsman (see article) both seem determined to try to test the limits of discrimination."

However, as the reader continues to read this article, he or she discovers that there is nothing to back up such an inflammatory statement. In fact, if the article had been objectively written, it would have reported the fact that the Church, almost annually, issues an official statement re-affirming that it does not support any political candidate or party.

As a member of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, I have not decided who I will vote for in next year's Presidential election. I know very little about Jon Huntsman and have some concerns about Mitt Romney's previous positions on abortion and health care reform. However, what is clear is that we have not seen the entire slate of candidates. While it is good sport for journalists to raise issues for debate, I would hope that the Editors of The Economist would demand for its readers that its journalists provide accurate information rather than information that violates the rules of journalistic integrity.

No.

Latterday Saints are quite diverse. There is no set policy that the members must adhere to. Look for instance at the diversity of Harry Ried and Glen Beck and then consider Huntsman and Romney. Not one of these four has too much common ground with any of the others. As a latterday saint I would be personally upset were anyone come from the Church or anywhere else and command me to vote one way or another. On some moral issues however, we may find a consesus of opinion. Morality and sinfulness are cause for concern as they tend to cause deterioration of righteous thoughts and actions which does: no matter how persons of this demeanor may misscast this fault; weaken and degenegrate society. Honor and honesty are the cornerstones of any society. What is honor or honesty is what makes a society grow or deterioate. If a society honors a person for killing rather than teaching a child then that society leaves nothing to be desired. When a society honors a liar or cheater or teaches great rewards will come to one whom deceitfully kills others whom are innocent of any wrong doing to the killer or anyone afilliated to the killer, then that society cannot claim any gain for mankind.

I would like to clarify that The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints does not subscribe to the "White Horse Prophecy." There are members, I've encountered them myself as a member, whom believe in that but it is not an official church doctrine.

I think largely Mormons are accepted. We get into awkward situations. I consider myself to be more of a secular Mormon. I am more politically conservative than Gov. Huntsman, but I'm not going to push my children into the church. At age 8 they'll decide if they'd like to baptized or not.

I'm always confused by religious people. Yes, they are the vast majority in most of the world, but I'm still confused by them. I stopped having imaginary friends years ago.