Romney Advocates Following Mormon Prophet, Even If It Is Wrong

No, not that Romney. The other one. Marion G. Romney, 1st cousin once removed from former Presidential candidate Mitt Romney. Yeah, that one.

Marion G. Romney, who attained to the First Presidency of the Mormon Church, once told a story about then President of the LDS Church, David O. McKay. In this story, the LDS President encourages Romney to “keep his eye on the President.” Romney states;

I remember years ago when I was a bishop I had President Grant talk to our ward.
After the meeting, I drove him home. At that time there was a great deal of
criticism against the President of the Church because of a front-page editorial
some of you may remember. We talked about it. When we got to his home I got out
of the car and went up on the porch with him. Standing by me, he put his arm
over my shoulder and said: “My boy, you always keep your eye on the President of
the Church, and if he ever tells you to do anything, and it is wrong, and you do
it, the Lord will bless you for it.” Then with a twinkle in his eye, he said,
“But you don’t need to worry. The Lord will never let his mouthpiece lead the
people astray.”
(Elder Marion G. Romney, Conference Report, October 1960,
General Priesthood Meeting 78.)

Even if it is wrong? This statement raises a number of questions.
First, if something is wrong by nature, who decided that is was wrong? That would be God, right? He has the authority to declare what is right and wrong.

Second, doesn’t the LDS prophet claim to receive authority and direction from God? That being the case, the LDS prophet is himself subject to the authority of God.

Third, why would God bless someone who disobeyed Him because they were obeying someone else of lesser authority?

Fourth, why would that person of lesser authority, i.e. the prophet, encourage people to obey Him even if it is wrong?

Fifth, and this is a side question. Does Mitt Romney agree with this reasoning? If so, and he is chosen as the Vice President and some day is put in the position where he must chose to obey one or the other, how can Americans be assured that he will do the right thing instead of obeying his prophet?

Print Friendly, PDF & Email
Facebook Twitter Email


  1. Bill McKeever is a lying douche.

  2. That is really brave of you anonymous. Real brave.

  3. AnonymousWhat is the difference in what you said and having a mocking or contentious spirit?To whom (what spirit) do you belong?

  4. Or let’s try that 5th option again: Does Mitt Romney agree with this reasoning? IF NOT, then he certainly wouldn’t be alone among faithful LDS Christians.Mitt’s parents for years were strong promoters in making clinical abortions available to the U.S. public–which was sharply against the leadership and policy coming out of Salt Lake. Yet they still remained active in the LDS Church and in its local leadership.And that’s just one example of why your 5th and crowning option (though just an aside!) really isn’t fair. It’s as loaded and baseless as your “all Romney’s MIGHT be alike” lead. At least from beginning to end you’re consistent, Keith.Hopefully you stick with this mindset in your religious convictions alone. Hate to think of what other types of boogey men you might be keeping alive for your children.Your brother, Sincere.

  5. Is anonymous 1 and anonymous 2 the same? If so, what does one comment have to do with the other? Finally, grow up.

  6. Sincere,I believe it is a valid question. After all, it is the same question that plagued Kennedy, but he dealt with it. Romney would rather avoid the subject.

  7. Apparently, Mitt’s problem is that those who don’t wan’t to hear him choose not to listen.I think that’s the problem of all would-be leaders.Romney on several occasions in the presidential campaign (and many, many times throughout his political career) has loudly and clearly emphasized that as a publicly elected official he WILL NOT be governed by the voice of any religious leader–the LDS church president, or any other. Unfortunately, to allay Romney’s religious opponents and cranks, apparently, would require that he open his daily protocol with a public announcement–announcing time, after time, after time again–his disdain for the LDS heirarchy. If not, then he might as well not be saying anything at all, right?Really, Keith, educate yourself. While you’re at it, you might want to try mustering a reason or two why having a faithful Mormon President might be exactly what your nation needs right about now. You can hate Mitt’s religion till hell freezes over, but there just aren’t many conservative Christians like him that are not only qualified to lead this nation, but are actually willing to make the sacrifice.As a Mormon, I’d love for one to beckon from the Bible belt, but the only one to make noise this year was a highly under-qualified Ark. Gov that rose to prominence merely as Mitt’s religious counter. Sad for America.Huckabees come a dime a dozen every election, but not Romneys. So we’ll get used to McCain, I guess.Your brother,Sincere.

  8. Sincere,I just had to smile when I read your last comment. First you insinuate that I am choosing not to listen to Mitt Romney when he says that he “has loudly and clearly emphasized that as a publicly elected official he WILL NOT be governed by the voice of any religious leader–the LDS church president, or any other.”Then you say that I should come up with a couple of reasons “why having a faithful Mormon President might be exactly what your nation needs right about now.”Which is it? Is Romney going to be faithful to the covenants he has made in the temple (and I KNOW you don’t want to go there) or is he going to put the needs of his country above the voice of his prophet?

  9. In other words, if Romney is a faithful Mormon, then wouldn’t he have to obey the voice of the Lord through the LDS President?

  10. As a servant in Christ’s Church, yes, he does covenant TO THE LORD JESUS CHRIST to consecrate his all to the Church (its established leadership of course being in some degree implied).Does that covenant in any way presume the interpretation you cite from Marion Romney? I most strongly think not (as do many Mormons of whom I’m aware). Additionally, loyalty to the Church’s President is merely one implication among many in this sweeping covenant. There’s nothing from the holy temple that suggests that following any personality is to supercede one’s loyalty to Jesus Christ and to his teachings. The covenant is between God and Man. Period. It was so in Joseph’s and Brigham’s day, as it is still today. In all the Christian covenants, the Holy Ghost is identified as the binding authority in behalf of the Father and Son. No prophet is mentioned or necessary. Again, as all Mormons know, that’s the way it’s always been.So, No; Mitt is not at some bewildering crossroads by any stretch.Your brother,Sincere.

  11. My message is painful to relate, but marginally appropriate, I am afraid. If I told you that I attended a Sunday School class in which the subject under discussion was whether or not the church leader should be obeyed if he directed a member to kill someone, you would know which church I was talking about, I would not not have to name it.By the way, the class came to the conclusion that the leader should be obeyed and that the moral consequences for the act would be born by the leader and not the member. Please don’t roll you eyes in dismay, this event really did happen!

  12. Jesus said “I am the way” The blood of Jesus Christ cleanes us from all our sin.

Leave a Comment