Mormon Coffee

On Monday 21-year-old Joseph Patrick Romero pleaded guilty to attempted aggravated assault. His crime: On January 22nd in Sandy, Utah, Mr. Romero purposefully ran his car into Chris Palomarez, a young man who happened to be wearing black pants, a white shirt, and a name badge. The victim escaped with minor injuries.

What’s interesting about this case is the way it was reported when it first happened. At the time of the assault Mr. Palomarez was with a co-worker; both young men were dressed neatly for their jobs at Radio Shack. Apparently this bit of information generated speculation. From a story in Deseret Morning News:

Was Sandy attack hate-motivated?
Victims may have been mistaken for missionaries
By Pat Reavy
Deseret Morning News

SANDY — A weekend attack in which a man was beaten with brass knuckles and then hit by a car appears prompted by the assailants’ belief he and his friend were Mormon missionaries.

To be fair, Mr. Palomarez, who is not LDS, said someone shouted, “Go back to church you [expletive] Mormons!” Perhaps this accusation fueled the idea that the attack was a hate crime. But as it turns out, it was nothing more than a run-of-the-mill fight between five young men that got out of hand.

Mr. Romero was contrite at his trial, according to Tuesday’s Deseret Morning News:

Romero was sentenced to a year in jail, but jail time was suspended and he was put on probation. He also must pay part of the victim’s medical costs and a fine totaling about $1,800, complete an anger management course, do 50 hours of community service and have no contact with the victim. He has written a letter of apology to the victim, and the prosecutor plans to forward it.

“I am really sorry,” Romero told the judge. “I wish I had just driven away.”

Thank goodness there was no serious injury to Mr. Palomarez. But I wonder why he played along with the hate crime accusations when he knew better.

And I wonder why Deseret Morning News jumped to the conclusion that these young men had been attacked just because they were dressed like Mormon missionaries. Do the people of Sandy, Utah think Mormon missionaries are the only young men who wear white shirts and black pants? Do they think a young man dressed neatly could not possibly be guilty of any act of provocation?

On the KSL News web site Tuesday it was reported:

Attempted Assault Case Was Not a Hate Crime
(KSL News) — Police feared it was a hate crime aimed at missionaries serving for The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. But now it seems that wasn’t the case.

The KSL report said police feared Mr. Romero’s assault was a hate crime, but the Deseret Morning News article published almost four months ago said that, though investigators screened it as a possible hate crime, there was not enough evidence to support such a charge. So why did the Deseret Morning News even suggest the hate crime angle?

I think this whole incident demonstrates that, unfortunately, a persecution mentality is alive and well among Latter-day Saints. Mr. Romero acted stupidly and could have really hurt someone, but he was not attacking the LDS Church or Church members.

In fact, Mr. Romero is himself a Mormon.

Last month I blogged about suicide in Utah (see Youth Suicide in Utah). In the May 12th edition of the Salt Lake Tribune, religion reporter Peggy Fletcher Stack wrote about religious questions raised by suicide. In “Searching for Solace: Suicide raises difficult religious, personal questions” Ms. Stack discusses the eternal fate of suicide victims according to various religions.

Different religious traditions understand the sin of suicide in varied ways. Some believe there is no hope of salvation for such a person; some think certain religious rites must be denied at the time of burial; and some place suicide in the same category as any other sin, fully forgivable and covered by the blood of Jesus. All seem to agree that those left behind must be treated with tenderness.

The article relates the story of Catherine Poelman, a Latter-day Saint woman who has lived with the horrible aftermath of her son’s suicide for 15 years.

“Fortunately, the Poelmans’ Mormon faith spelled out a more hopeful fate for Stephen in the afterlife. In The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints’ theology, there is no traditional hell, but three levels of heaven and the possibility of ‘eternal progression.’

“At the funeral, LDS Apostle Neal A. Maxwell said Stephen would have to ‘work through whatever Heavenly Father wants him to work through . . . and Stephen will do it. He has taken with him all his fine qualities. They are not to be rescinded. They are to be further developed.’

“But, Maxwell added, he will do the working without the ‘chemical imbalances’ that plagued him during this life.”

While my heart breaks for the Poelman family, I can’t help but be distressed over Apostle Maxwell’s remarks from Stephen’s funeral and the attendant LDS doctrine on the levels of glory. Essentially, the official LDS position as expressed above is that, since there is no hell, all will be well for Stephen after he’s paid sufficiently for his sin. He’ll work, unhindered by disease, until he’s managed to please Heavenly Father. He’ll achieve worthiness by continued development of his fine qualities and then…? Apostle Maxwell didn’t say (as far as we know from this article), but Stephen’s mother

“believes her son is ‘working out his salvation in the heavenly realm while we work out ours here.’

“Adds Stephen’s sister, Cathy Poelman Boyden, ‘I believe suicide is wrong, but that he can make it to the top “of heaven” with a lot of work . . . more than he would have had here on Earth.’”

In all of this there is one thing conspicuously absent. Where is Jesus?

The Apostle Paul said Jesus is our hope (1 Timothy 1:1).

Jesus said, “I am the way and the truth and the life” (John 14:6).

The Apostle John tells us that it is the blood of Jesus that cleanses us from all sin (1 John 1:7).

But a Latter-day apostle directed the grieving family to pin their hopes on Stephen. “Stephen will do it,” he said.

I’m not an apostle, but I invite you all to hear and trust the Word of the Lord:

Today’s LA Times ran an in-depth article detailing the horrific abuses associated with modern-day polygamy. “Blind Eye to Culture of Abuse - Children of a polygamist sect have been exploited, molested for years” takes a hard look at what women and children have been forced to endure while living The Principle.

A focus of the lengthy article is the decades of non-action by those invested with the authority to step in and help the victims. As indicated by the title of the article, legal authorities have continually turned a blind eye to the plight of the abused. For instance, the article reports,

“Charged with protecting and serving their community, Colorado City police have long had a reputation for protecting and serving church interests instead.”

The article levels the same charge at judges who heard the few cases ever brought to court. One father charged with sexually abusing his five daughters, after pleading guilty, served only 13 days in jail.

Not even the U.S. Senate is immune:

“[LDS] Sen. Orrin G. Hatch (R-Utah) once visited the FLDS church in Hildale and played the organ. He later defended the group when asked about its alleged abuses.

“‘All I can say is I know people in Hildale who are polygamists who are very fine people. You come and show me the evidence of children being abused there, and I’ll get involved,’ he told local reporters. ‘Bring the evidence to me.’

“Through a spokesman, Hatch declined to be interviewed for this story. Staff aide Peter Carr said allegations of FLDS abuse were ‘a matter for local and federal prosecutors.’”

Senator Hatch’s non-involvement is just one more example in the long line of people and institutions that do not want to get involved.

The LA Times article makes a bold move, in my opinion, when it takes on the LDS Church. I applaud the reporters for exposing the apathy of the Church:

“The Mormon Church, which banned polygamy in 1890 and excommunicates those who practice it, has been quiet in the face of reported abuses, giving little support to groups trying to help victims of the FLDS.

“The church has weighed in on gay marriage, the Equal Rights Amendment and the flat tax. It even put out a statement on the HBO fictional polygamy series, ‘Big Love,’ but has remained mostly silent on issues relating to the FLDS and real polygamy, except to say it is forbidden for Mormons.

“And the church, whose missionaries can be found in nearly every corner of the globe, draws the line at sending them to Colorado City or Hildale due to ’security concerns.’

“‘This is a problem the Mormon Church created and should stop,’ said Ron Barton, an investigator with the Utah attorney general’s office and an expert on abuse within polygamous communities.

“‘The apathy is driven by the fact that many in Utah and Arizona are descendants of polygamists. They think polygamy might come back, so they don’t want to crack down on it.’

“Mainstream Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints leaders do not see FLDS excesses as their responsibility to correct.

“‘The church cannot assume the role of government or law enforcement. It is not charged with doing the job of elected officials,’ said Michael Otterson, spokesman for the Mormon Church. ‘We would not expect such an action from any other church in American society. The church can only raise its voice and explain its concerns, which it has done.’”

This is pretty hard to swallow. As noted, the Mormon Church has taken public, vocal stands in support of–or against–legislation on gay marriage, the ERA, flat tax, and more. Just last week (May 4th) the LDS Church “asked the federal government to look for alternative options for the disposal of nuclear waste” in opposition to “the possible storage of nuclear waste in Utah’s Skull Valley area” (see this LDS News Release).

On the official LDS web site it says, “The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints has issued official statements regarding many of the social issues of today. Several of these statements are collected here. Additional topics will be addressed as statements are issued.” The topics listed:

• Abortion
• Embryonic Stem-cell Research
• Euthanasia and Prolonged Life
• Same-Gender Marriage

The social issue of polygamy is conspicuously absent.

The LA Times and dozens of other media outlets are championing the cause of the victims of polygamist abuse by raising public awareness of these atrocities.

Meanwhile, in today’s edition of LDS Church owned Deseret Morning News we find this story: “Media get a big ‘F’ for stories on FLDS - Many confuse splinter groups with S.L. church.”

And at LDS Church owned KSL TV: “LDS Church Concerned About Some Media Coverage of Warren Jeffs.”

Enough said.

This morning when I checked my email inbox I found a message with a subject line that read, “Millions of customers can’t be wrong!” The message was a spam ad for “alluring pheromones” that promise to attract women of all ages to any man who uses the product. Wow. The ad said the product is “proven to work” and “millions of men” are already using it. Thus, millions of customers can’t be wrong.

This spam ad made me think of something I hear often from members of the LDS Church. In fact, when I saw the subject line I thought it was possible that the message was from a Mormon; that’s why I opened the email. In promoting their product (Mormonism), Latter-day Saints frequently say, “There are 12 million people around the world that believe it!” They look at that fact as one piece of irrefutable evidence that Mormonism is true. I’ve even had Mormons challenge me: “Do you think 12 million people can be wrong?”

There’s a book in print, “Voices in Harmony,” which contains 100 stirring testimonials from women who find fulfillment in plural marriage. They think plural marriage today is a good a proper thing. Can 100 women be wrong?

One hundred is a far cry from 12 million, but it’s still a lot of people who carry a strong conviction about this issue.

What about the 250,000 people who belong to the Community of Christ Church? They believe that Joseph Smith was a true prophet, but think Brigham Young usurped rightful leadership of the Church from the Smith family after Joseph’s death. Can 250,000 people be wrong?

Or take the Roman Catholic Church’s position on Mormonism. In July 2001 the Vatican’s Congregation for the Doctrine of Faith stated that LDS baptisms are “not the baptism that Christ instituted.” Though the Catholic Church recognizes the baptisms of converts from most other churches, Mormon converts to Catholicism must be rebaptized because of the LDS Church’s radical (non-biblical) view of the nature of God. Can the more than one billion members of the Catholic Church be wrong?

Regardless of the sensational LDS sales pitch that Mormonism is “proven to work” and that “millions of [people] are already using it,” the question needs to be asked: Can millions be wrong?

The answer is found in the pages of scripture:

“There is a way that seems right to a man, but in the end it leads to death.” (Proverbs 14:12)

Thankfully, the way to avoid this fearful end is also found in scripture:

“But as for you, continue in what you have learned and have become convinced of…from infancy you have known the holy Scriptures, which are able to make you wise for salvation through faith in Christ Jesus. All Scripture is God-breathed and is useful for teaching, rebuking, correcting and training in righteousness, so that the man of God may be thoroughly equipped for every good work.” (1 Timothy 2:14-17)

Millions of customers can be wrong; but the Word of God reveals the truth.

Comments (1)

Last week I stumbled across an online article at the American Chronicle web site: “A Mormon President?” by David M. Bresnahan. It is written editorial-style and is about what you would expect from a Latter-day Saint hoping for the election of a Mormon president. Mr. Bresnahan wrote 1638 words praising Mormons as the salt of the earth without addressing any real issues. Nevertheless, when I read the article I thought Mr. Bresnahan’s premise was faulty. He wrote:

“Any reporter in any city or town can simply start making phone calls to ministers and within a very short time it will be easy to find one or more who will be happy to bash the Mormons. All that reporter has to do is jot down a few of the more critical comments and bingo, another negative story is born.

“There’s just one problem. The vast majority of Americans do not believe such reports for one simple reason – they are not true and we all know it.

“Mormons are everywhere, and most people have encountered them enough to know the claims that Mormons are not Christian and are actually quite evil cannot possibly be true. But it is no surprise that rival church leaders complain about a church that actively proselytes new members, which is a threat to the offering plates of the churches who lose members as a result.”

I noticed several problems with Mr. Bresnahan’s assertions, so I wanted to leave an online comment for others who might read them. But the American Chronicle does not have provision for reader comments. It does, however, have a rather strict policy against “hate speech,” a policy I believed was violated by Mr. Bresnahan.

I really think the “hate speech” policy is a bit restrictive, but it’s their policy and the only avenue open to me to voice my concerns. So I emailed the American Chronicle one of the offending paragraphs and wrote:

“I believe the following violates your Editorial Board Contributor Policy. The author brands all non-LDS church leaders–who may have valid doctrinal concerns about Mormonism–as ‘rivals’ who are concerned only about the money they will lose if people from their congregations join the LDS Church. Mr. Bresnahan’s remark is degrading and prejudicial and, I believe, may be derived from ‘ignorance, fear or anger.’ There are many legitimate reasons for the concerns some non-LDS Church leaders have about Mormonism. It is disappointing to see such a denigratory remark pass muster on your web site.

“Thank you for considering my concern.”

To my surprise, I received an email from the American Chronicle telling me that the author had agreed to “change the article.”

This morning I checked back and found that Mr. Bresnahan had indeed changed his article. Compare the new (below) to the old (above).

“Mormons are everywhere, and most people have encountered them enough to know the claims that Mormons are not Christian and are actually quite evil cannot possibly be true. But it is no surprise that some rival church leaders complain about a church that actively proselytes new members, which is a threat to the offering plates of the churches who lose members as a result.”

With the addition of the word some Mr. Bresnahan has perhaps made his article more truthful (I have never talked to a Christian minister whose concern over Mormonism was motivated by contribution receipts, but there may be some out there). However, it is not any less disparaging toward non-LDS clergy. He has still not allowed for any legitimate concerns Christian ministers may have with the Mormon faith.

At the conclusion of “A Mormon President?” Mr. Bresnahan says:

“The next time a news reporter questions whether a Mormon can be elected president, take a look at it for what it is. A lazy reporter needed a story about Romney and could not come up with anything new other than to rehash the same tired story so many others have already done. The evangelical pastors that reporters quote in such stories are quick to exaggerate. In reality the typical evangelical Christian is not much different than a Mormon.

“They both want the best for their families, and they both do their best to live according to the beliefs of their religion. Some of their doctrines are different, but their values are not. As more and more people focus on values instead of doctrines they will recognize that having a Mormon as president is just what this country needs.”

In regards to the sagacity of electing a Mormon president I decline to comment at this time. But I cannot emphasize enough the importance of focusing on doctrines when it comes to understanding Mormonism. It is, after all, a religion, not a social club or benevolence organization. The typical evangelical Christian is very different from a Mormon in at least this way: The Christian’s faith is in the One True God while the Mormon, if he follows the official teachings of his religion, is chasing after idols (according to the Bible). In my experience, the primary concern of Christian ministers is for souls, not money.

To Mr. Bresnahan I would like to say that I do not know a single Christian minister who thinks Mormons are “actually quite evil.” But I know plenty who believe Mormonism is not a Christian religion. This conviction on the part of historic Christianity is based on the very doctrines you suggest we ignore. To ignore these doctrines, Mr. Bresnahan, would require that we not “live according to the beliefs of [our] religion” since our God demands our fidelity to Him and commands we take a stand for His doctrinal truth.

Comments (1)

In two weeks The Da Vinci Code will open in theatres all around the world. It opens in the U.S. on Friday, May 19th. It’s been in the news, of course, for months, and it seems that everyone has an opinion about it whether they’ve read the book or not. The issues at stake in The Da Vinci Code controversy are pretty weighty. A couple of good articles about it all from a Christian perspective can be found at Christian Apologetics and Research Ministry and “Deciphering ‘The Da Vinci Code’” by Al Mohler.

What does this have to do with Mormonism, you ask? Well, last Friday’s Salt Lake Tribune carried a tongue-in-cheek column related to the story of The Da Vinci Code: “Living History: Debunking ‘Da Vinci Code’: Christ’s kin live in Utah” by Pat Bagley.

In a nutshell, Mr. Bagley’s column discredits The Da Vinci Code’s assertion that Jesus has French descendents. He writes,

“…everyone knows Joseph of Arimathea took Jesus’ children to England and, later, the descendants emigrated to Utah.

“Speaking in the Salt Lake Temple to a select group of church leaders on July 2, 1899, George Q. Cannon of The First Presidency said, ‘there are those in this audience who are descendants of the old 12 Apostles, and shall I say it, yes, descendants of the Savior himself. His seed is represented in this body of men.’

“Dan Brown’s novel assertion that Jesus was married with children is old news to Mormons, who suspected as much all along. Growing up in the church in California, I dutifully got up every morning during high school at 5:30 a.m. to attend seminary. It was there I first learned that the marriage attended by Jesus in Cana, where he famously turned water into grape juice, was probably his own.”

After giving a brief overview of non-Mormon legends that suggest Jesus sojourned with His wife and children in England following His crucifixion, Mr. Bagley writes,

“If you’re so disposed, one can further choose to see the mass British conversions to Mormonism in the 19th century as an exodus inspired by blood. Hence [George Q.] Cannon’s remarkable statement concerning divine lineage.

“So if you read The Da Vinci Code, now you know: it’s a lot of hokum. Jesus’ descendants couldn’t possibly be French.

“They’re Utahns.”