Elizabeth was always dealing with some plot or another by persons desiring regime change. She was particularly concerned about Mary Queen of Scots who she imprisoned. Mary finally lost her head, not because she was Catholic, but because Elizabeth became convinced the plotting would not cease as long as Mary lived.

This same rivalry, between Catholics and protestants was not a small factor in the English Civil war the end of which was regicide. Charles, who lost his head, had a Catholic wife ,as I recall.

Of course in the country we do not have any established religion. I do think it is interesting though that one candidate for President is using religion the way his supporters think the Mormons would if they had enough power, meaning votes.

As Hellmut posted above, \”If we have to be unpopular to be free then that is a price well worth paying. Asserting our liberty, we are realizing America’s essence and that is a much greater contribution to the common good than electing one of our own president.\” I absolutely agree.

I don\’t think that being Mormon (or being evangelical or Jewish or Muslim or Catholic…) inherently qualifies or disqualifies a person\’s suitability for office. In fact, I\’m wondering why everyone seems so entranced by the religion issue v. the issue on where candidates stand – especially in the divisive primary election runs.

For me, the exposure of bitter \”soft bigotry\” in America\’s underbelly during this political season has sickened me.

While there are always different interpretations of scripture my reading of D. & C. 29:12, 76:56-59 and 132:19-20 (v. 20 Then shall they be gods, because they have no end; therefore shall they be from everlasting to everlasting, because they continue; then shall the be above all, because all things are subject unto them. Then shall they be gods, because they have all power, and the angels are subject unto them.” ) is that this teaching is and has been doctrine since the1843. To my knowledge nothing has been said to change that. The Doctrine and Covenants (Book of Commandments) is official cannon because it was presented and voted on by the general membership of the church. Over time some changes have been made. King Follett is no longer part of the D. & C. neither is the Lectures on Faith. Sections 137 and 138 were added as was D2 in 1981. The apparent silence on the subject does not invlidat it.

The couplet “As man is now God once was: As God now is, man may be.” Was taught by President Lorenzo Snow. This statement was treated as doctrine as late as 1979 when it was included the the book My Kingdom Shall Roll Forth published by the Church as a short course in Church history for use in Sunday School classes.

The Adam-God theory was never canonized. It may be that Brigham Young misunderstood something Joseph Smith said.

Robert Southwell and the Jesuits, however, did not only assert the authority of Rome against the crown but the authority of the conscience. Moreover, governmental coercion creates an incentive to lie. Just as the Spanish inquisition had to distrust Jewish converts who had been won over under threat, the state’s coercion made it impossible for Southwell to be credible in the eyes of his persecutors.

The solution to this problem was, of course, for the state to respect the freedom of conscience.

The contemporary problem for Mormons only arises because instead of settling for toleration, we desire to be popular. If Mitt Romney would not be running in a popularity contest, there would not be any pressure on Mormonism to change.

Feldman is right. If we want to be popular then there is pressure to change but, may be, being popular is not quite the proper priority for Mormonism and the LDS Church. After all, Christ has asked us to take the narrow and not the popular path.

While the bigotry of the religious right is unfortunate, I am not sure that it would be wise to allow those who hate us to determine the path of our religion. Mainstreaming in the face of hate would amount to a surrender.

And why would we? We have a right to be different. America is about being different. Liberty means that one may be different.

If we have to be unpopular to be free then that is a price well worth paying. Asserting our liberty, we are realizing America’s essence and that is a much greater contribution to the common good than electing one of our own president.

“Equal in power and glory” – at the moment not a doctrine, nor hearsay, but rather history. It is certainly a legitimate (and common) interpretation, but I don’t think it has been held to be doctrine since Brigham Young – and his take on it was rejected, so in a sense it has never been official doctrine.

Not only that, with the current canon, I don’t think it is doctrinizable – there are too many open questions of the sort that got Brigham Young into trouble with the Adam-God theory.

It is not often taught explicitly in places like General Conference or the Ensign, although it’s more often implied. It does not appear in the missionary lessons, but does appear in the gospel essentials manual. Pres. Hinckley and other church spokesmen have seemed reluctant to acknowledge it in public. So while I wouldn’t say it is “secret,” exactly, there does seem to be an interesting sort of discretion about when and how it is presented that does not apply to other theological teachings like “God has a physical body” or “there are three degrees of glory in the afterlife.” Is this because the doctrine is less important, or less well founded, or what?

The canon is important in certain contexts, but if the leadership does not think a scriptural precept worth mentioning, in practice it quickly becomes more a matter of intellectual curiosity than anything else.

It’s interesting and instructive to contemplate the ways in which we’re perceived by outsiders, and what we might change to mitigate these unfavorable perceptions. But it’s also interesting to contemplate the ways in which those outsiders might themselves be changed through their encounter with the religious other at the very heart of American democracy.

I hope that we are not being perceived in the same manner, but I have seen some of the anti-Romney/Mormon attacks trying to tie us to a hidden theocratic agenda. We need to be careful about the “mental reservations”, and be perhaps more personally open about many things. Saying “Sacred, not Secret” doesn’t cut us much slack these days.