The 2012 Presidential election will probably feature a Mormon. Many evangelicals see Mormonism as a cult, and says they will never elect a Mormon. I think the term cult is brandied about haphazardly, having a negative but unclear connotation. To call anybody who does not hold to Orthodox Christian doctrines a cultist broadens the definition to the point of losing its nuance. Might as well say that cult is synonymous with Non-Christian or heretical (in the perspective of Orthodox Christianity). For a Christian to say that Mormonism is a cult is equivalent to saying that a Mormon is not a Christian.   

     A cult may just refer to a set of religious practices and beliefs, which would make cult synonymous with religion. Christianity is as much a cult as every other religion then because it has a set of beliefs and practices. If the criteria for calling a religion a cult is its strange beliefs (out of mainstream), it becomes subjective. A cultic belief could be anything some person finds strange (for example, scientology's belief that humans are reincarnated aliens called Thetans). Christianity's belief in resurrection would have been considered strange in the first century, and still sounds hard to believe with modern people. That would make Orthodox Christianity as much a cult as Mormonism.

     The best definition of a cult is a devotion to a certain movement, person, etc. This devotion may be taken to the extremes that a group of people may separate from mainstream society. If we take that definition, we then have to ask if Mormons separate themselves from mainstream society. The fact that two Mormons are running for president belies that claim. 

     Some say that cults demand absolute loyalty to the point of a person losing his individuality. I have two responses to that. Could it be that we have an aversion to the term "absolute loyalty" because of our attachment to individualism- the person's freedom to pursue his own agenda? Is it intrinsically wrong to submit your thinking to some object, movement, or person? For a person whose main loyalty is to himself, this is unconscienable. However, faith requires "absolute loyalty". As a Christian, I believe it is right to give "absolute loyalty" to Jesus. The Christian is to be devoted to Jesus, following him to the cross.

    This then makes me ask the question, where does Mitt Romney's absolute loyalty lie, or does it even matter? It is true that it is not to the Jesus of Orthodox Christianity, but a "different" Jesus. Will that make him a bad president? I don't think it necessarily would make him a bad president. All human beings put their loyalties somewhere, even to themselves. There was a fear in the 60's about our first Catholic President, John F. Kennedy. Would he follow the commands of the Catholic church in making policy? If the answer is no, it just means that President Kennedy's values lie somewhere else. If Mitt Romney, if he becomes president, is influenced by the Mormon hierarchy, it would not necessarily be bad for the country.  

    There are several reasons for this, including the fact that a president does not have absolute power. Another reason is that we cannot assume that the Mormon hierarchy's values goes against the values of the majority of Americans, and that they have no sympathy for those who do not share their beliefs. Mitt Romney must clarify the values he stands up for despite pressures from anybody else, and if it matches up with our values, then we should not back off from voting for him, even if he does not share our ultimate loyalty.

     When I think about what is a good citizen, I think about a verse in the bible "Also, seek the peace and prosperity of the city to which I have carried you into exile. Pray to the LORD for it, because if it prospers, you too will prosper.” (Jeremiah 29:7) The interest of the exilic community, which the people of God is, is the welfare of the place where God puts them. The Christian citizen must then be concerned about the welfare of his country. If he believes that what is best for the welfare of his country is a non-Christian president who shares the values that make for a good society, then he must support that presidential candidate. 

     I understand that the ultimate best is for the whole world to embrace the grace of God in Jesus Christ. However, the victory of the gospel is not in our hands but in the hands of God the Holy Spirit who is able to change hearts of stone into hearts of flesh. For now, we must seek the welfare of our nation in the ways available to us.