Mitt Romney and the Prophet Joseph

When Barack Obama was first nominated there were many questions about the election of an African-American to the presidency, something long overdue since the blacks’ emancipation. There were also questions around the man’s faith, though he didn’t have any — that is, his official religion was a subject of doubt — but these were just attempts to achieve a psychological victory over Easterners, despite the fact that this victory was only imaginary.

However, Republican candidate Mitt Romney is a follower of a prophet named Joseph — not the Joseph from the well-known story, but an American prophet according to the Mormon faith, of the Church of the Latter Day Saints. The Republican candidate spent time as a missionary for his religion when he went to France; this is a matter that calls for serious consideration regarding the shape and substance of what would be in store for America if this saint came to the White House. He would exceed all his predecessors in taking steps beyond the borders of the United States in the name of divine inspiration.

Romney believes in Joseph Smith, who was martyred when he was in his late 30s in 1844. The story of his prophecy is that he received new tablets that will bring 1,000 years of prosperity, the return of Christ and the end to the battle with Satan, followed by the Final Judgment. These are, in brief, the pillars of the presidential candidate’s doctrine, all of which stem from the Plan of Salvation — but however it is expanded in its details and free in its timeframe, a doctrine collapses when it is the product merely of human thought, and not of divine inspiration. In Islam this future turning point is resolved in that there is a distinction between a God who is all-powerful and alone in His divinity, and the human and mortal prophets, the last of whom was Mohammed. None of the mainstream Christian sects go beyond the crucifixion, resurrection and ascension.

The strange part isn’t limited to the claims of a prophet coming to the Americas in the 19th century. This act simply represents people’s need to spark communication with the heavens and demand justice on earth; according to Christian theology this issue was already resolved with the coming of Jesus, in the Muslim and Christian accounts. What is strange is that Mormonism isn’t just a supplement to Christianity; according to its gospel, Mormons were the last of the lost tribes of Judaism, and the end of revelation was placed more than 1,000 years after the revelation of Islam.

The issue that demands attention is that fundamentalist doctrines have not died away — not here and not there. This fundamentalism is often a better way to effectively shut down thinking and judgment, both on an individual level and in general, as a person governed by the need for spiritual balance — taken from him and issuing from him — is predisposed to fear questions about the afterlife.

I will say here that we have often been ridiculed and declared heretics for our rituals, which do not deny any of the prophets but do deny that any of these prophets are divine. We don’t dispute the history of the birth, death, role or message of a prophet — these targeted campaigns are domestic before they are international, born out of the polarization between a culture which wants to perpetuate an earlier vision of Islam and a group which was founded on progressive Islam aspiring toward unity. It has been written that we are superior in this to the West because, for political reasons, we pursued a society that stood against a historical conspiracy, a society where prejudice overcame the commandments of the prophet. Human actions achieved a temporary victory which then crumbled, and apart from the fundamentals, there was no space to challenge it. However, the sins of the state appeared to be a weak end to the revelation because it didn’t oppose the tribal leaders, stained with the blood of reformers and revolutionaries, after which came an era of salvation which is universally recognized in prophetic messages and ancient times.

But now we’re presented with a Mormon man with a prophet and a holy book, and this prophet — according to the doctrine — discovered hidden golden plates which completed one religion and went beyond the timeframe of another religion.

Similarly, it was not written that one of the sons of Ishmael was inspired or not inspired, that the prophet Joseph had images and parables, or that, as this doctrine affirms, he was a 19th-century American prophet.

I believe that the term “clash of civilizations” is overly polite, even timid. It doesn’t acknowledge the conflicts between religions, or even how it’s possible for two people to have a discussion where the first man acknowledges that there is an afterlife at the same time that he believes that this afterlife is only for those of his religion and no others. Can you imagine how leaders will be able to cooperate, one of them the most powerful leader on earth, when he is a missionary still following the prophet Joseph Smith and governing according to his holy Book of Mormon?