|
|
|||
|
|
OPEN
LETTER TO A MORMON LEADER: By R.B. Scott Boston, Massachusetts Dear Brother Smith: Last Thursday a few callers solicited my take on whether Mormon President Gordon B. Hinckley endorsed plans to use various groups affiliated with the Church and Brigham Young University as vehicles to promote Mitt Romney’s possible campaign for the Presidency, as reported by the Boston Globe. I insisted that President Hinckley would not likely endorse such schemes and would be quite put out if any church leader – especially an apostle -- supported dodgy if legal work-arounds that transgress the spirit of Federal tax laws. Sunday’s Globe, goaded by the church’s public communications office, produced the “smoking” documents – both were e-mails from my friend Don Stirling, a key Romney fundraiser who over the summer left his job as President & CEO Massachusetts Sports & Entertainment Commission (he'd previously been marketing director for the 2000 Winter Olympic Games in Salt Lake) and returned to Utah, to Sherri Dew, the publisher of church-owned Deseret Book. The memos confirmed Stirling’s presumption that President Hinckley had been advised the scheme. Presumption is the operative word. One prospective target group is the BYU Management Society -- a national business group organized in the mid-1970s for BYU alumni and other LDS business people. There are chapters in most major U.S. cities. Another target group is people who buy church books from Deseret Book, including Dew’s hefty biography of President Hinckley. These things are clear: First: Someone really does not like Don Stirling and Sheri Dew. Second: Stirling’s call reports are way, way too detailed. This is big time, dirty pull politics for heavens sake and the first article of faith is “leave no paper trail.” Third: the media are finally beginning to acknowledge that the “networking” skills and resources of Mormons and their church are considerable. Fourth: Some Mormons have gotten really, really good at implying that their cause or their candidate or their flimsy business proposition has the support of the brethren. Cue the heraldic trumpets and heavenly voices. When this latest bit of Mormon intrigue made headlines, I was just getting over last Sunday’s gay-bashing telecast from the Tremont Temple-on-the-Boston Common. There was Mitt, Olympic torch in hand, and the Joe Wirthlins of Lexington, the Mormon family suing the school district because it uses same-sex-marriage- friendly books, sharing the dais at an event promoted by Mormon vehicles like Legacy Law Foundation, Meridian Magazine and its Family Leader Network, of which Dick Wirthlin, the Republican pollster and Mormon leader emeritus and granduncle of the Wirthlins of Lexington, was an agent provocateur. Only a cynical reporter would make something of this remarkable coincidence. Then in rushed Thursday’s coincidence that Romney operatives met with Elder Jeffery Holland who, allegedly, suggested they ought to use "vehicles" loosely affiliated with BYU, which was followed by Sunday’s report implying that Sheri Dew and Elder James Faust, a member of the First Presidency of the church, may be scheming too. Listen up Meridian, Family Leader Network, Legacy Law and look-alikes. Once Romney announces his candidacy, every cynical "vehicle" that violates the spirit of the law will be scrutinized under high-powered microscopes. Count on it! Here's some additional advice. It's time to get real. It is past time for name-calling. Journalists that write critically about Mitt Romney's Mormon connections are not necessarily anti-Mormon or anti-Mitt Romney. Nor are they "Hillary-loving, Ted Kennedy apologists… or liberals," as Romney's cleverly turned, if dismissive and over-worked, one-liner asserts. The facts are: 1) Mitt Romney was once a very young stake president (bishop too) of a stake known for producing more than its fair share of general church leaders; 2) He has a very big church name and legacy; 3) He saved the “The Mormon Olympics.” We both know that Mitt may be just one election loss away from a call to serve as a general authority or even apostle of the church. Journalists have become aware that Mormon networks helped scuttle the Equal Rights Amendment back in the 80s. They know it drove the effort in California to pass The Defense of Marriage Act just six years ago. The command and control structures built into the Mormon organization are unmatched by all other religions. They can seem quite intimidating. Journalists from the Boston Globe, The New York Times, Time Magazine and, especially, The Deseret Morning News (especially because it is owned by the church) should ask tough questions about the origins and operations of these vehicles and networks. Just how close to the church are these Mormon-run organizations that sow divisiveness and hatred, anyway? We both know that Mitt has been a regular visitor to Temple Square –more precisely to the granite-columned home of the First Presidency and Quorum of Twelve on East South Temple Street. No problem: if I were trying to make up my mind on an important matter, I too would seek advice from people I knew well and trusted. If he’d see me, Gordon Bitner Hinckley would be the first and last person I would consult. It is, however, disingenuous to pretend that Mitt’s relationship with the Prophet and members of the Quorum of Twelve is as remote as John Fitzgerald Kennedy’s was with the Pope and College of Cardinals. For instance, had he lost the election, JFK would not have been in the running to become the next U.S. cardinal. In 1960, I was a politically attuned high school sophomore in Utah. Concern ran high in LDS communities that should the nation elect John F. Kennedy, the Pope would soon be running America. These times are no different except that the pinching shoes are on Mormon feet. Such anti-Catholic fears of 1960 were as ill founded as the current one that Romney would be but a puppet for the president of the church. Nevertheless, as much as Latter-day Saints decry anti-Mormon prejudice, they and their scheming and vehicles are giving critics plenty of reasons to be wary. What Mitt needs is a savvy, street-smart, cigar-chomping, kick-butt-and-take-names campaign bully and press agent who can convince him and his well-meaning if naively enthusiastic supporters that this is no time to get stupid and act silly. Sometimes Mormons are their own worst enemies. I would volunteer for the job, but I don’t care for cigars.
BOSTON GLOBE EDITORIAL ROMNEY'S
MORMON ALLIES WHEN JESUS, as quoted in Matthew's Gospel, said, ``Render unto Caesar the things which are Caesar's, and unto God the things that are God's," he was stressing the need to separate the civil and religious realms -- a message that has resounded across the centuries, and that churches and political leaders often have been tempted to ignore. The Mormon church and Mitt Romney should make sure that the church stays out of his nascent presidential campaign. Sign up for: Globe Headlines e-mail | Breaking News Alerts The Globe reported last week that a top church official held a meeting with Romney's son at church headquarters in Salt Lake City to discuss a fund -raising initiative among Mormons. This would involve alumni of the business school at Brigham Young University , a church affiliate. The First Amendment , with its injunction that Congress shall make no law restricting religion, carries an implied corollary that churches should not meddle in politics. In response to the Globe story, the Mormon church affirmed its neutrality in the presidential race last week and instructed two business school deans to stop sending e-mails on Romney's behalf. The church also ought to make sure that all its leaders, including Jeffrey R. Holland, who organized the meeting, stop helping the campaign. As one of the 12 Apostles, advisers to church president Gordon B. Hinckley, Holland's involvement is tantamount to a Mormon endorsement of the candidacy. Romney defended his campaign, saying: ``Clearly I'm going to raise money from people I know, and that includes BYU alums, people of my church, people of other churches." His lack of concern about the issue raises doubts about his ability to keep church and state separate should he move to the White House.
THE
OLD GLORIES OF THE FLAG
By Michael
Appleman As the 2006 World Cup soccer tournament opens, I would like to apologize publicly to my dear friend and editor of The Muss, RB Scott. For the last twenty years, I have been trash talking U.S. soccer., pointing out everything that I felt was wrong about the way the game was coached, organized, promoted, and played in my native country. He patiently disagreed, soccer coach that he was and devotee that he is. Looking at the way things have evolved, I'm ready to eat my shorts. American soccer has finally reached a level of credibility that it never had before. In Europe, American players, Major League Soccer (MLS), and the U.S. national team are treated with respect, and everyone involved with the sport from youth league coaches up to the pros deserve credit for doing things "the hard way." I still see comments on American chat forums accusing soccer of being boring and slow. Let's face it, that argument is meaningless. If you've never played baseball, what drama is there in a batter fouling-off a half dozen pitches? We endure boring American football game, waiting patiently for that one explosive run or spectacular pass. No, it's not about action or scoring, the problem with soccer's credibility in the U.S. is that for decades this game has had the image of being a "sissy sport." When I was in junior high, (in Lexington, Massachusetts in the mid 70's) I was one of the bigger (and fatter) kids in my grade. Every fall my name would appear on the gym teachers' list of "students we'd like to see go out for football." No way:I was a committed soccer player. IWhy? Because my father, the son of European immigrants, played semi-pro soccer in the 1930's in New York's ethnic club leagues. I grew up playing "sand-lot" soccer with friends who came from South America and Europe. Soccer is in my blood. Of course, the fact that I played the violin and was a good student also meant that I was a nerd. Until recently, there were only two kinds of soccer player in America: immigrants and nerds. It certainly seemed that the North American Soccer League (which ran from 1968 until 1984) catered to those groups. The teams recruited Superstars in their dotage like Pele, Johan Cruyff and Franz Beckenbauer . At the same time teams would recruit players based on local ethnic populations. The New England teams signed Eusebio and other Portuguese players, hoping to cash in on the large Portuguese immigant community throughout the region. At that time, European leagues had limits on how many foreign players could be on the field. In most countries, the number was just three. I remember thinking that without more young American players given a chance to play in the pros, soccer would never take hold in the States. With the NASL folding in 1984, professional soccer basically disappeared in America for twelve years. With the 1980's came the great American soccer boom, and proud suburban parents proclaimed from the tailgates of their Volvos that the most popular youth sport in America was soccer! I felt then that American soccer was doomed. With "nice" kids learning the game from parents whose only soccer knowledge came from cheesy coaching manuals, how was America ever going to produce decent players? Two decades later, American players are on the rosters of more than a dozen European teams. Some of them, like Kasey Keller and Brian McBride are standouts on major teams. The United States has a stable professional soccer league (Major League Soccer) that develops and showcases American players and is attracting investment from major European teams. After its close quarter final loss to Germany in the last edition, the U.S. national team is returning to the World Cup with the status of a solid team that deserves to be there. Yes, I was wrong to denigrate the efforts of suburban parent-coaches like Ron, who actually coached nearly 25 years ago in the New England soccer stronghold of Westpot, Connectituct. It has taken a full quarter century efforts of a lot of people --soccer moms and dads included -- to develop up the sport. Now there's a real pyramid, with a serious pro league on top, an audience base on the bottom, and high schools feeding universities feeding the pros. The U.S. national team has launched a slogan with their sponsor based on our revolutionary heritage, "Don't Tread on Me." Since the Europeans are taking us seriously, I figure the slogan is appropriate for those Americans who still think soccer is just for nerds. By the way, here in France, soccer is played by the bruisers and the tough kids. Want to know what the nerds play? American football. I have a friend who is a cardiologist who finds soccer brutal and dumb. He thinks American football is an intelligent game because of all the plays and tactics. A chaqu'un son goût... CRYING
FOR THE BLUES: By RB
Scott
WESTPORT, CONNECTICUT -- For the past three years many of the 10-year-old boys who made-up the team known as the Westport (Connecticut) Blues played together every Fall, Winter, Spring and Summer. In the process, they have become close friends, often veritible brothers.
On the pitch, they instinctively anticipate each other’s moves, displaying the confidence of a team that knows what its about. What this team has been about these past seasons is winning, despite playing against teams that were generally a year or two older. The record speaks loudly: 58 wins, three losses (two in overtime, one to nemisis Ridgefield, the other to the Reds, then the senior Westport team).
This autumn, with age and experience fully in its favor for the first time, the Blues seemed destined to win not only the Fairfield County championship but title for the entire State of Connecticut as well.
The only squad that had a chance was Ridgefield, which has established a soccer rivalry with Westport that is every bit as lively as Yale's with Harvard, Utah's with Brigham Young and Everyman with Nebraska.
Not only would the two teams go at it twice during regular league play, but they would likely come face-to-face in the semi-finals of the state tournament. The winner would be a shoo-in for the title. Parents groused that it was a shame the best two teams in the state were forced to face-off in a semi-final match, victims of dumping all teams from the same region in one bracket.
This season was of special significance to the four players who planned to move to move to new homes, far from Westport. One boy departed mid-season. At his last practice, he seemed cocky and cool. He talked of the swimming pool at his new home, its proximity to the sandy beaches of Malibu and the manicured soccer pitches at nearby Pepperdine University. Then, in the nick of time, he fled inside his mother’s car, obscuring the flood of tears that followed.
Friendships as strong as these are not easily abandoned. They have played together in pouring rain, on fields so muddy and badly rutted that the smaller boys often seemed to disappear in the trenches. They have endured haphazard officiating (often not without complaint), bruising collisions, battered shins, anxious parents, long weekend trips to important tournaments and twice-a-week practices.
Their coaches, who didn’t know a sweeper from a striker three years earlier, growled whenever they got out of position as if they knew what they were talking about. They were nagged to quit playing like a bunch of 10-year-olds, which despite the fact that they were, they very rarely did.
And, they eagerly came back for more.
They persuaded their parents to send them off to soccer camp in the summer. In winter they played six-man indoor soccer. On inclement days they could be found outside, inside kicking anything that was round and moveable.
So when this Fall– the Fall of ’78 – finally dawned, they were primed and eager. Age was finally in their favor and wouldn’t be again for two years. Like children possessed they charged through the regular season undefeated, allowing only one goal to be scored against them—by nemesis Ridgefield. The county title belonged to the Blues.
As expected, they breezed through the early rounds of the state tournament. So did nemesis Ridgefield, as expected. Last Sunday afternoon, there they stood on a sodden, lumpy field in neutral Wilton ready to go at it for a third time this season. This time: winner take all. At the end of the half, the score was nil-nil. It mattered little that Westport kept Ridgefield on the defensive through most of the period. The Blues seemed sluggish and uninspired. By contrast Ridgefield, having been thrashed by the Blues two weeks earlier, were just the opposite. Thus it wasn’t particularly surprising that Ridgefield ran off two quick goals in the second half and hung on to win 3-2.
A long-faced
group of Blues, most with tear-streaked cheeks gamely shook the hands
of the victors, then sadly walked to their parents cars for the long
ride home. Spying one particularly distraught youngster, the coach draped
his arm around the boy's shoulders:”You played well,” he consoled.
“We had a fine, fine season. Be proud of that,”
Next season and the next and next will come for most players on the Westport Blues. Each of the 19 boys can now play a sport they knew little of just three years ago. Soccer will be their game, an instinctive part of them all their lives. Throw a ball his way, a Blue will likely control it with his chest or thigh, or redirect it with a header or instep volley. And, should it fly into the back of the net, he will collapse to his kness in celebration, arms outstretched to the heavens. Tthat evening on the jet carrying him to his new home in the Rocky Mountains, the coach who put this team together replayed such scenes in the stop-action, instant-replay corners of his mind. He lifted a glass in silent tribute to his lads, the Blues of Westport. And, then he cried too.
WHEN
POLITICS AND RELIGION MIX : BY RB Scott June 5,
2006
-30-
LOU
DOBBS BLUSTERS ABOUT MORMONS AND MEXICO
BY RB Scott May 25,
2006 CNN's Lou Dobbs was once very effective as a business journalist, cracking through protective public relations facades with incisive, well researched questions. For a while it seemed he would make thoughtful, precise questioning work for him as the network's prime time news anchor. But Dobbs tossed objectivity into the floodwaters that swamped New Orleans last summer. His tough, reflective questions turned partisan and self-righteous. He became reporter, commentator, advocate and judge. These days,
especially when commenting on immigration and border security, his punditry
glitters with generalities, hyperbole and bombast one expects from radio
talk show hosts, not from a serious reporters for major news gathering
organizations. "LOU DOBBS ": I think he's done pretty well. He appears right now, Anderson, to be in charge of U.S. immigration policy and border security, such as it is. I think he's doing very well. COOPER: You say that why? Because the Bush administration hasn't come out critical of him? DOBBS: Oh, hasn't come out critical of him, doing exactly what he says. He doesn't want security on the northern border of his nation, and this president isn't providing security on our southern border. Because this is, after all, a president of a government exporting about 15 percent of their population to the United States, sending about 3 million of their citizens into this country so that they can get back more than $20 billion a year in remittances. This is the same country, good friend, neighbor and partner, as President Fox puts it, who's shipping us -- Mexico is now our leading source of meth, marijuana, cocaine, and heroin. So, you know, it looks like the partnership is going just the way President Fox wants it. COOPER: It's interesting. He's visiting Utah. And the Hispanic population has tripled in Utah since 1990. And I guess he's going there to show how important Hispanics are and I guess illegal immigrants are as well to the work force in there. It's sort of an odd message, though. DOBBS: It's definitely an odd message. Until you consider that the Church of Latter-Day Saints, the Mormon church, has about 1 million Mexican converts, has built 12 churches in Mexico, and has a vigorous enthusiasm for as many of Mexico's citizens as they possibly could attract to the state of Utah, irrespective of the cost to taxpayers. Once I picked myself up off the floor, I fired off a letter to Mr. Cooper that said: "I have tracked the Mormon Church all of my 35-year career as a journalist -- at United Press, then Life/Time/People, and now as a columnist covering Gov. Mitt Romney's prospective bid for the Presidency. In all those years, I have never once come across information that the Mormon Church is attempting to attract Mexican citizens to Utah at the expense of Utah taxpayers. "That claim is as outrageous and as wrong as Dobbs assertion that the Mormons have built "12 churches" in Mexico. There are hundreds, perhaps thousands of Mormon churches in Mexico [I later learned that at the end of 2003 Mexico had 199 Mormon stakes (dioceses) and roughly 1,800 wards and branches (parishes)] and that Mormons have been there since the late 1800s. In fact, Presidential candidate and Massachusetts Governor Mitt Romney's father, former Michigan Governor George Romney, was born there. "If Mr. Dobbs has evidence that the church is encouraging Mexicans to move to Utah, he should present it. Otherwise, he should correct the error and apologize for making such an outrageous claim. Sloppy reporting like this only underscores perceptions that journalists play it fast and loose with the facts." Exhibit one for the prosecution: Lou Dobbs.
COINCIDENCE,
RELIGION, SAME SEX MARRIAGE AND POLITICS By RB
Scott BOSTON, MASS.-- Circumstance and coincidence often combine to create conflicts that can be easily misconstrued, especially in election seasons super charged by passionate disagreements over how pious teachings should influence public policy. Liberal Massachusetts is a harbinger for 2008 because it permits same sex marriage and its religious governor -- a Mormon and born-again conservative Republican -- wants to be President in 2008. Consequently, there seem to be more political, religious and moral activists, sleuths and operatives encamped here than you can shake a stick at. A few weeks back some of them banged the drum loudly when the Mormon Church - the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints - "announced" it supported the concept of a constitutional amendment defining marriage. Is there any reader on the planet unaware that the Mormon Church opposes same sex marriage? The "announcement," such as it was, only restated its position. Kill the drum roll. Moreover, it was tied to a rather pedestrian event: a Mormon apostle and other religious leaders signing a document endorsing the need for a marriage amendment. Mute the trumpets. My sources insisted that apostle's action was simply a careful restatement of principle, not a commitment to tactics. Neither was it an effort to tell members how to act nor should anyone assume the church will do anything more than express its position, as a matter or principle. Although the church does not consider Same Sex Marriage a "wedge" issue, some members do. Last Fall as the church was advising its leaders in Massachusetts to avoid getting involved in marriage amendment activities, The Legacy Law Foundation - founded and run by Mormons - was recruiting the faithful to collect signatures in support of a ballot initiative. Foundation director Elizabeth Harmer-Dionne, a well-educated attorney, exploited her Mormon connections in an e-mail message: "Later today, I will copy … you on an e-mail … giving final times and places for the two meetings … information as to wards [a "ward" is the Mormon equivalent of "parish"] where we have representatives and wards where we still need them…" "A brief introduction … I hold degrees from Wellesley College, the University of Cambridge, and Stanford Law School. My husband … serves as bishop of the Cambridge 1st Ward. .." Reacting to complaints from other Mormons, the organization dropped language implying a church connection. Dionne's Utah-based organization is only one of several advocacy groups - like Family Leader Network and its parent Meridian Magazine -- that play-up church connections. But, back to Temple Square's "statement of principle:" it implies that the state-by-state campaigns were unnecessary because same sex marriage is not forbidden by the Constitution, which is what many serious constitutional scholars have argued for years. Incidentally: if the Constitution permits same sex marriage, then all the hoo-haw about the twisted, agenda-laden activist judges of Massachusetts and California amounts to a rubbish heap of demagoguery and partisan politicking. The "amendment solution" creates a few ironies, which may explain why the church regards it as statement of principle only. Long ago the church argued that plural marriage was protected. It relinquished to save itself from dissolution, free its men from prison and win statehood for Utah. The church proudly proclaims the Constitution was divinely inspired. True, the diviners built-in the arduous amendment process for fixing what they overlooked. It is disingenuous to argue they overlooked marriage - after all, most were husbands. Thirty years ago the church argued that passage of the Equal Rights Amendment could unintentionally curtail important protections for mothers and children. Likewise, DOMA may inadvertently eliminate crucial marriage benefits. More on point: the church is quite good at counting noses. It must realize an amendment will not win Congressional support. It has to be developing compromises that will not provoke people of goodwill to behave badly. David Parker
spent a night in the Lexington, Massachusetts town jail last year ago
after he staged a one-man sit-in demanding prior notification before
his son's kindergarten class was taught about homosexuality. Since same
sex marriage is legal in the state, the school said it would not comply.
Although the Wirthlins joined the Parkers in what could be a precedent-setting Federal lawsuit, "all we wanted was to have the teacher notify us before she teaches this theme," said Wirthlin, a graduate student working on his Ph.D. The story should end there. But, the 2008 Presidential campaign has already begun. Someone is bound to make something of the fact that the Wirthlins are devout Mormons, in fact Robb is the namesake grandson of Elder Joseph Wirthlin, an apostle of the church. He is also the grand-nephew of Richard (Dick) Wirthlin, the media-savvy Washington opinion pollster who served Ronald Reagan, the Republican Party, Massachusetts Governor and likely Presidential candidate Mitt Romney, the Mormon Church, and had a hand in founding organizations that oppose same sex marriage. Coincidentally, Romney is on a mission to convince the Christian Right he's really one of them (mercifully he's not). A press agent could not have concocted a more compelling way to demonstrate Romney's change of heart on same sex unions than to stage a shootout on Mitt's home turf between arrogant radical-chic school officials and a principled, guileless grad student trying to be a good dad. Even though the Wirthlins deny any connections to advocacy groups opposing same sex marriage. He says "it's been years" since he talked to his celebrated grand uncle and has never met Mitt Romney, he concedes the coincidences are enough to make a grad student's head hurt all the way to November, 2008. Update: Despite their denials of a prior association, in a June 2006 newsletter to members of The Legacy Law Foundation, Mrs. Harmer-Dionne noted that she and the Wirthlins have been long-time good friends.
-30-
DEALING WITH THE MORMON FACTOR By
RB Scott
Romney should sharpen that sound bite and stay on message. Like it or not, questions about Mormonisms will hound him wherever he goes, as they always have. And Mormons don't have an anti-defamation society to cry foul whenever someone hits below the belt or indulges a silly stereotype. Besides, it's true that extra scrutiny may be warranted given Romney's history as a regional ecclesiastical leader for The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. He is not your "ordinary" true believer like Presidents Kennedy and Carter or Sen. Joe Lieberman. It is odd that reporters of Wallace's stature and background, Jewish by heritage, seem unashamed badgering Mitt about arcane Mormon beliefs. The chief beef is the "one true religion" claim. Tied for second are the church's non-traditional Trinitarian definition of God, its experiments with plural marriage and its policy that until 1978 excluded blacks from its priesthood. A fortnight ago a Boston Globe op-ed piece by the estimable John H. Bunzel, past president of San Jose State University and senior fellow at Stanford's Hoover Institution, stated that racist explanations offered by previous church leaders for the exclusion of blacks from the priesthood remain alive and could hurt Romney if not clearly repudiated. Trouble was, Bunzel's argument was based on issues raised in a 9-year-old Los Angeles Times story that have since been resolved, according to the man who raised them, Dennis Gladwell, then a senior partner in the respected law firm of Gibson Dunn and Crutcher, who said, "The matter ended when President [Gordon B.] Hinckley told [CBS's] Mike Wallace that the practice [forbidding ordination of blacks] and various speculative explanations resulted from misinterpretations of scripture by early church leaders." Confirming that the matter is not being studied and dismissing the need for a fresh renouncement, Temple Square nonetheless cautioned that Hinckley is an "out-of-the-box thinker who has surprised us all before." The church is aware that some members still believe theories taught by leaders like Brigham Young, who proclaimed that black skin and loss of priesthood were "marks" placed on all descendants of fratricidal Cain. Others said it was punishment for being less valiant in the war in heaven. Young's harsh sidebar comments - one sanctions death for partners in interracial marriages - are particularly vexing. After the policy was renounced, it was hoped that apostle Bruce R. McConkie's sweeping disavowal to the church's Seminary and Institute of Religion teachers of all that had been previously taught would tie up loose ends: "Forget everything that I have said, or what President Brigham Young . . . or whomsoever has said . . . that is contrary to the present revelation. We spoke with a limited understanding and without the light and knowledge that now has come into the world . . . " But it didn't. A perusal of any Mormon-oriented e-mail discussion group today would confirm that the Internet gives currency to such recidivist views. That is why some members believe a more specific statement is needed. And Hinckley may be just the man to make it. In 1971 Hinckley took the lead in founding Genesis, the organization for black Mormons that many regarded as the first public signal that the church planned to end the priesthood ban. Arguably, no one has done more to bring the church into the mainstream. Given Hinckley's history, it seemed almost ironic that while he was recovering from recent surgery for cancer, Brigham Young University refused to renew the contract of a black professor who had campaigned vigorously - "too forcefully," some said - for a formal renunciation. The nearly 96-year-old Hinckley's immediate priority was to mend well enough to travel to Chile to rededicate the temple there. His once-delayed trip was about to be postponed again when he, not surprisingly, insisted on going, despite advice to the contrary. Perhaps Mitt Romney is one of many Mormons who pray that Gordon Bitner Hinckley surprises everyone again and firmly repudiates all the damaging explanations for the abandoned black policy. A fresh, sharp illumination can't come soon enough.
FAUX
PAS AT FOX, THE BOSTON GLOBE By RB Scott
"America has a political religion and that people who are elected to office subscribe to this political religion, which is to place the oath of office, an oath to abide by a nation of laws and the Constitution, above all others." Romney needs to "gird up" his loins, as the inspiring Mormon hymn "Come, Come Ye Saints" exhorts, and steel himself for intense hectoring down the road. Like it or not, questions about Mormon dogma will hound him wherever he goes, as they did in 1994 when he ran against Senator Ted Kennedy and preferred not to delve into religious matters. His church, directly or indirectly, is not making his life any easier. On Saturday, The Salt Lake Tribune reported that Brigham Young University in Provo, Utah, flagship of the six-college Mormon education system, had not reviewed the contract of Darron Smith, an African-American Smith diversity counselor and adjunct professor of sociology. Smith says he was told he had been terminated because of his outspoken view that "happy face" kind of racism still exists in the church, nearly 40 years after the policy prohibiting black members from being ordained to the priesthood was forsaken. For more than a decade, he and many others have been encouraging the church to formally renounce the "folk doctrines" that were once offered as justification for the abandoned policy. More on that
increasingly troublesome matter later. It is nonetheless odd that reporters like Wallace, Jewish by heritage, seem unashamed to badger Mormon candidates about arcane religious doctrines over which they have no control. Such reporters seem fixated on teachings that nettle various mainline Christians and evangelicals. The chief beef is Mormonism's claim to being the "one true religion," and a close second and third are the church's non-traditional-Trinitarian definition of God and the abandoned practice of polygamy. Now the once divisive issue of racism, which Mormons thought they'd put behind them in 1978, resurrects itself just in time to undercut the Presidential aspirations of favorite son Mitt Romney. The Sunday before his testy interview with Wallace, Romney had no opportunity to comment on an op-ed piece in the Boston Globe that lifted information and verbatim quotes without attribution from a Los Angeles Times story written nine years earlier (the Times included statements from a book written nearly 50 years ago, since, disavowed and apologized for by it's author.) that raised the once exclusionary priesthood policy forsaken by the church nearly three decades ago. The writer of the op-ed was the estimable John H. Bunzel, past president of San Jose State University and a senior research fellow at Stanford University's Hoover Institution. Bunzel argued the policy the church abandoned in 1978, one that once prevented black members from being ordained to the priesthood, could come back to undermine Romney's Presidential aspirations. The troublesome excerpt reads: "However, critics of the church maintain that although the ban has been removed, the doctrine has not changed. 'It's the linkage to Cain that so distresses Mormon African-Americans today,' says California attorney Dennis Gladwell, who has been working with church leaders calling for change. 'It places their spiritual lineage in shambles, since they are alleged descendants of a man who has come to symbolize evil on the same level as Lucifer himself." These are precisely the points made by BYU's Smith. The only problem with the Gladwell quotes is that they are old. They reflected his opinion nine years ago. Since then, "California Attorney" Gladwell, once a senior partner at Gibson, Dunn & Crutcher in Irvine, California, has retired and is now living in Utah. "I haven't visited this issue in nearly a decade," Gladwell said in a telephone interview from his home near Ogden, Utah where he too, like Romney once did, serves in the bishopric of his ward (parish). "I have not talked with Mr. Bunzel or The Boston Globe," he said. "For me, the matter was fully resolved when President (Gordon B.) Hinckley told CBS' Mike Wallace on network television that the practice and various doctrinal explanations were misinterpretations of the scriptures by early leaders of the church." "No, I have never talked to Gladwell," Bunzel acknowledged in a telephone interview. "When we were cutting the piece to 800 words, The Globe asked me about the Gladwell quote and I said: 'Well, I can't find the source offhand, but I know I didn't make it up." For its part, The Globe said it does not have the resources to fact check op-ed pieces that are submitted. "They represent the opinions of the authors" said Nick King, the editor who handled the Bunzel piece. "We assume the authors - especially a former president of a major university - would understand the importance of fact checking. Sometimes we get burned." Temple Square, while denying that the matter was being studied and dismissing even the need for a fresh renouncement , cautioned that President Gordon B. Hinckley was an "out-of-the-box thinker who has surprised us all before." This may come as a surprise to Armand Mauss, professor emeritus of sociology at Washington State University and author of All Abraham's Children: Changing Mormon Conceptions of Lineage and Race," who told the Salt Lake Tribune: I know that some of the [LDS apostles] would like to see such a statement issued, but I don't know how many of them," he says. "President [Gordon B.] Hinckley clearly believes that it is not necessary, for the 1978 revelation and policy change 'speaks for itself,' as he has said." Mauss told The Tribune he doesn't expect such a statement as long as Hinckley lives, "even though his administration has been otherwise very sincere in its outreach to black people."
Others speculated the restriction was the penalty for being less valiant in the war in heaven. Worse, Young's harsh sidebar comments - one sanctions death as a punishment for both participants in an interracial sexual relationship - are quite troubling, never mind they were uttered in the 1860s. A perusal of any Mormon-oriented Internet discussion group would reveal that the original theological premise for the ban lives on in the minds of some Mormons, despite the 1978 renouncement of the policy and its collateral teachings, as well as the on-the-fly renouncement in the Hinckley-Wallace interview of the late 90s. If not corrected explicitly, it's possible the forsaken policy and the supporting folk doctrines could come back to bite the church and severely wound Mitt Romney, perhaps mortally. Just two years after the passing of Marjorie Pay Hinckley, wife of 67 years and constant companion to the energetic, "out-of-the-box"-thinking Mormon prophet, Gordon Bitner Hinckley is now bearing down on his 97th birthday. He has been in remarkably robust health; but, his recovery from recent laparoscopic surgery to excise a cancerous blockage from his colon is not going as well as expected. Romney may be but one of many Mormons hoping for at least one more surprise from the change agent who has led the church for the past 11 years. To them, another Hinckley surprise is critical and can not come soon enough.
By RB Scott BOSTON, Mass. -- Marsha, a high school friend in Salt Lake City designs costumes for the big screen. Obviously, she knows a thing or two about how to dress stars to keep them in character and on message. So I listen-up whenever she says something about why ordinary people pick the clothes they do, and the subtle messages they reveal about the wearer's true nature, inner self, not to mention net worth. She has been weighing-in on such heady matters since 1960-something when she anointed a brass uncoiling Cobra arm bracelet her signature piece of jewelry (I have no idea what a snake wrapping around her left arm portends. Frankly, I'm afraid to ask.). This is why I paid particular attention when she noted that President George W. Bush prefers rolled-up long sleeved shirts whenever he descends to mingle with the hoi polloi, as he did recently in Louisiana, Texas and Colorado. "Think he was hoping to carry hod down there in the N'Arlins mud?" Marsha hissed sarcastically (being a Hollywood type, she lists toward John Kerry, well, Bill Clinton). "If he's really going to work up a big sweat, don'tcha think he ought to do it in short sleeves, like a real man?" I couldn't IM a terse, smart answer - "How would I know? Do I look like his mother?"-- because she was ranting at me in the old fashioned way: by e-mail. She had the floor, as it were, and so she raved on: Frankly, I'm certain he's got a wardrobe spin stylist on payroll. It's a stupid waste of taxpayer dollars. What do you think?" From New England, which became my home shortly after Marsha acquired that trademark Cobra, I responded circumspectly and respectfully because I didn’t want to rattle her, her snake, or, for that matter, any of my pals in Utah who proudly strut short sleeves year round. So here's what I wrote. “Hey Marsha, “Because I live in Massachusetts, you probably assume I'm no big fan of George Bush. Nevertheless, I am compelled to defend the way he wears his shirts. Trust me on this: shirtsleeves rolled-up is not just a Republican thing. “If you can find a picture of John Kerry in short sleeves (golf, tennis and Hawaiian shirts don't count), e-mail it and maybe I'll back off. Until then, stop with the eye-rolling and pay attention. “Remember, George's DNA is very bluish. If Bushes didn't get off The Boat - that would be The Mayflower -they may as well have. Ditto the Forbes- Kerrys. As you live in a region of the country where everyone knows they are related to everyone else, it shouldn't surprise you one little bit that George and John are distant cousins literally, connected by regal blood and shirtsleeves. "Texas may be George's legal home, but he spent his formative years in Washington, or hanging with uppity expatriate brats in China, or prepping at Andover just north of here, and studying (loose application of the word, I know) at Yale with those conspirators in the Skull and Bones tomb, and summering at the family's weather-beaten rambling shake shingle seaside shack in Kennebunkport. “You get the picture. “And, the backgrounder on John Kerry is quite similar, right down to the loose application of the word studying. Here's the point, Marsha: no Bush or Kerry or cousin worth his salt etched Topsiders and martini shaker would dream of wearing short sleeves in good company. It just wouldn't be proper. “Check out Boca Grande - the shabby chic village on a barrier island off the WASP, er West Coast of Florida where the Bushes and, blush, blush, I vacation from time to time. Regardless of the heat and humidity, you'll see plenty of long-sleeved casual shirts, rolled to their owners bending-elbows down at the Dolphin Cove or Pink Elephant. George would join them were he not on the wagon. “To give you credit where credit is due: As you suspected, the president was coached. No doubt about it. Any reasonably savvy media consultant, not to mention Dress For Success guru John Molloy, would counsel: don't dress down. It's patronizing and, in the end, you won't get it right. So he wore the kind of casual long-sleeved shirt he would normally wear, and rolled-up the sleeves to signal he was ready for action even if he wasn't. “Consider the silliness of wannabe cowboys from Manhattan's upper east side arriving at a Montana ranch in freshly laundered and creased Calvin Klein blue jeans. Almost brand new blue jeans at that, not weather-beaten saddle-softened Levis. “Killer snickers would resound for weeks. Lifetimes, perhaps. Better to come as you are and let the locals teach you a thing or two. They may even forgive you your Calvins. “Bill Clinton and Al Gore are roll-em-up kinda guys too. Bill may speak Arkansan and Gore may like hanging out at the Pickin' Parlor in Nashville, but film from any photo op will prove they know the tell-tales of shirtsleeves. “Which gets me to the penultimate lab: The Yard off Harvard Square on any balmy September day. Guaranteed, the few short sleeved shirts will be on the backs of freshmen from Iowa, Nebraska or Utah. “By Halloween those future masters of the universe will be eagerly rolling the cuffs of their 100 percent cotton oxford cloth button downs from LL Bean and J. Press. “You see, I know it is quite possible to squeeze most of the Nebraska, Iowa and Utah out of the boy. I just checked out my own closet and discovered but one short sleeve collared shirt. And it was a Christmas gift from my sister in Salt Lake. “Glory be, Marsha, I have become a snoot!” "Snoot? Not quite," Marsha and her Cobra fired back, wrinkling her nose in an e-coded (;~|) sneer. “Lose the extra "o." © 2006
RB Scott All Rights Reserved
RB Scott BOSTON, Mass. -- Inevitable presidential candidate and current Massachusetts Gov. W. Mitt Romney's threat to wiretap mosques and monitor Muslims won support from his party's right wing. But it left some fellow Latter-day Saints and others wondering if he had lost his grasp of constitutional law not to mention the history of his own church's frightful encounters with government informants and harassment. Because Romney once led a Mormon ecclesiastical precinct, roughly equivalent to a Catholic diocese, some worried he spoke for the church, too. By all accounts, he did not. The relationship between The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints and the 30,000-strong Muslim community in Utah is solid -- empathetic, cooperative and respectful. On Sept. 14, he said, "How about people who are in settings -- mosques, for instance -- that may be teaching doctrines of hate and terror? Are we monitoring that? Are we wiretapping?" Not long before Romney's explosive comments to the conservative Heritage Foundation, the Mormon stake he once led hosted an interfaith dinner intended to strengthen ties between Muslims, Jews and Christians. Because of the goodwill generated that night, Dr. Sepi Gilani, a surgeon and former board member of The Islamic Center of Boston, was particularly dismayed when she read reports of Romney's alarming words a few weeks later. "Either they show the depths of his ignorance about us, or his willingness to use fear to polarize people," she said. Wary moderate supporters see Romney's "expedient" side re-emerging as he nears announcing what everyone knows: He wants to be president in 2008. Currying favor with powerful neo-conservatives led him to flip-flop on "choice," "same-sex civil unions" and stem-cell research, and to veto a bill approving the so-called "morning-after pill" (his veto was overridden by a unanimous vote of the legislature). Romney's expedient side surfaced back in 1994 when he skirted the abortion issue as deftly as Bill Clinton: "Not my choice, but every woman has the right to choose." Sympathetic Mormons supported his muse then that the "morning-after pill" might be balm for abortion war wounds. They even understood when he claimed "civil unions" would ensure rights for gay citizens while protecting traditional marriage. But, they muttered "oh, please" when he unnecessarily supported building Native American-owned casinos near Cape Cod. While the polls made it plain -- no candidate who opposed abortion could win in Massachusetts -- some sympathizers thought Romney was just a little too eager to compromise. A Catholic father of eight groused: "I'll vote for Romney, no matter what. But, I wish he would drive a stake in the ground and be himself. I know what Mormons believe. But, I have no idea what Romney stands for." Illusive, evasive and virtually unknown Mitt Romney gave Sen. Edward Kennedy the scare of his political life in 1994. Eight years later, hailed nationwide as the savior of the 2002 Winter Olympics, he undermined incumbent Republican Gov. Jane Swift's candidacy so decisively that she scratched before the convention. Now Romney crassly plays to fearful Americans who fret that home-grown terrorists are religious fanatics praying at the mosque rather than the dispirited, irreligious angry young men they often are, drinking whiskey in a strip club on the "cheatin' side of town." That's why the governor's rhetoric confounds another Salt Lake native, Dr. Christopher Blakesley, who went to church with Romney when they were students in Boston. Now an expert in international criminal law and terrorism, he holds a professorship at the University of Nevada, Las Vegas, and is the J.Y. Sanders Professor Emeritus at Louisiana State University Law Center. Blakesley wonders "Is wiretapping mosques really what Mitt believes, or is he willing to prostitute his beliefs for the nomination?" A professor at a prominent university near Boston, a former Utahn who has known Romney for years warns: "Mitt's recent flip-flops on key issues are foolish pandering. He seriously overestimates the support he or any Mormon would ultimately receive from ultra-right Christians." Thomas Duncan of Provo, who served with Romney when the two were missionaries in France, worries, "If Mitt gets serious about wiretapping mosques, how long will it be before the press figures out that Mormons were once at odds with the government and swore oaths in church that outsiders thought promoted terrorism?" Duncan refers, in part, to a series of distorted dispatches from adversaries and paid informants that persuaded President James Buchanan to send federal troops to Utah in 1857. Before siccing snoops on Muslims, like they once were turned on Mormons, the governor should listen to Mahmud Jafri, a member of the Dover (a wealthy Boston suburb) Republican Committee, contributor to both Romney campaigns and founding member of the Islamic Masumeen Center of New England: "His comments saddened Muslim leaders. Why wiretap and spy while we pray? We've already pledged to submit transcripts of all our services and proceedings in our mosques and centers." Like the Salt Lake Olympic Organizing Committee, America needs a uniter, not a divider. It would be refreshing if the governor divined what polls will eventually tell him and decided right now, on his own, to stand for something.
A Yarn About God, Golf, Sunday School and One Irons;
By RB Scott BOSTON, MASSACHUSETTS
Dear cousin, I am sure there is meaning and purpose to your Sunday routine -trundling off to your local meetinghouse to absorb quaint homilies from one parochial dignitary or another, the folks next door and their children. However, I prefer golf. Titillating photography -- enhanced by smoky filters, stop action and slow mo -- is supposed to race your engine and make you feel warm and fuzzy all over. Over the course of my life I've seen enough racy flicks and magazines to choke a ... well, forget that metaphor. I prefer golf! If you learn to play, you'll understand why. On a long par five take out a three wood for your second shot and launch one dead-on the flagstick, leaving you just a tap-in for eagle. Your engine will race and you'll feel warm and fuzzy for days. Weeks. Even years. And, you won't to have hide the font of this pleasure in your old socks drawer either. Sermons at church are supposed to lift your spirit, teach you new moral truths, and persuade you to be more honest with yourself. So to be honest with myself (and you), the last regular Sunday sermon I enjoyed was back in 1960- something. By contrast, golf builds spirituality. For instance, over the course of a normal round I am called to prayer about ninety times over the course of five hours. Even a hepped-up missionary conference couldn't produce so many fervent entreaties. Out on the golf course --especially when I am playing alone, which is my wont -- damn if I'm not encouraged to be more honest with myself. For instance, hackers like me are known for our Mulligans. Mulligan is a pleasant synonym for "do over" without taking a penalty. To true believers like me, Mulligans are, in a word, "cheating." Of course, if you're playing alone (one of the true pleasures of golf) you can take as many Mulligans as you like. No one will notice or care. I used to think that fudging a little -taking a Mulligan here and there - made very little difference, even when playing in a group, for money or just for pride. "I shot an eightytwo," I boasted one Sunday, for this is truly was a nice score for a fourteen handicapper like me. My companion is dubious, he's remembering the Mulligans I took at critical points. "I'll bet you had the SATs memorized before you stopped retaking them," he chided. No matter. I continued
to take Mulligans all the time. When I told my friends about the accomplishment, one snipped: "was it your first shot off the tee or your second…or third." My Mulligan days were over. Nowadays I play every shot as it lies. Which is sort of the way God has us approach life, don't you think? Other eternal lessons can be learned from the game. For instance: make the best out of what you've got. Let's suppose that, like me, you aren't physically capable of playing scratch (even par) golf. The game accounts for such deficiencies. This is the fair thing to do, I think. You can't help it if God didn't give you the stuff to be a golf champion. Maybe He had different mission in mind for you -- like teaching a Sunday School class. That's where handicaps come in. They level the playing field, as they say. Here's how it works. Let's suppose you're only capable of playing bogey golf (one over par per hole). After playing a few rounds, you establish a handicap, which is figured based on what your scores reveal to be your golf deficiencies. As a result, you establish bogey as your par, which means that you are expected to take about eighteen more strokes more per round than a scratch golfer, one whose handicap is zero. Assuming the scratch golfer plays to his potential, all you have to do to beat him and the course is to play one stroke better than your potential. See how fair and just and God-like golf is? The game also teaches you not to mess around too much with the mysteries and riddles life presents. For instance, it is accepted Golf doctrine that only God can hit a one iron. To avoid temptation, many weekend golfers refuse to carry a one iron in their bag. Wiseguys and fools are the exceptions. Every once in a while you see one tempting fate. They rarely succeed. As a caddie I was paid well and not infrequently to fetch an entire set of exquisite golf clubs out of the pond in front of the eighteenth hole at The Country Club (as in The One And Only) in Salt Lake City. On such occasions, my employer was always the mercurial Joe Bamberger, a scratch golfer whose pocketbook was as large as his temper. On this day he ignored my counsel (forgetting that he never used fairway woods, I recommended a three wood, then lamely a two-iron). "Why not a one-iron?" he challenged boldly. "You know what they say about one irons," I said meekly. "It's Sunday and damned if God's not with me even if he's not with you," he teased, knowing that I had bolted Sunday School early to make his tee time. Joe was Jewish, so playing on Sunday was no special mishuggunah to him. Unlike Jesus, also a Jew, Joe succumbed to temptation, which had its way with him as temptations almost always do with people who don't take them seriously. While Joe cursed the heavens and the gods of golf and other gods and demigods within earshot, there I was earning an extra twenty bucks, rescuing his bag and clubs from the water his ball had entered only moments before. I was a very diligent caddy. I was also exceedingly kind. Not only did I find the ball he hit, but the bag and every single club...except the one iron. Truth be told, I stumbled across it too, but thinking his life and mine would be a lot saner if he never saw that blasted club again, I scrunched it deep into the mud with my bare feet. Joe was a persistent man and, as I said, he was also quite generous. So, a few hours later he asked me to take another look, for another twenty bucks. Naturally, I obliged. Locating the iron with my feet, I pushed it deeper into the mucky bottom, where it probably lies mired to this day. Maybe it's a fossil by now. It was a long, long time ago. "What am I going to do without my one iron," he wailed, as I waded out of the pond, empty-handed, smelling like a dead carp. "Try church," I said. There may have been something to my advice. A few years later, I wrote several magazine pieces about young guy who could work miracles with a one iron. His name was Johnny Miller. He never ever missed his weekly church meetings. After Sunday School in June of 1973, for the final round of the U.S. Open at Oakmont, he played better than anyone thought God could. END
© 2006
RB Scott All Rights Reserved
|
|
|
