Pope Benedict XVI recently revoked the excommunication of four rebel Catholic priests in an attempt to seek reconciliation with an uber -traditionalist Catholic Order — the Society of Saint Pius X (SSPX). Ordinarily this would seem like an internal affair only significant to Catholics. However, it turns out that one of the priests — Richard Williamson — is a holocaust denyer who claimed that no Jews died in gas chambers during WWII. Not a good PR move for a Pope who has pledged to tackle anti-semitism.
On March 10, 2009, in a letter addressed to the world’s Catholic Bishops, Pope Benedict XVI admitted that “mistakes” had contributed to the international furor that followed the revocations. Of course, this is a wonderful understatement. A few minutes of research by the curia would have prepared the Church for the turmoil and provided the Pope with background on Williamson. It might be a good idea for the Pope to take his PR staff “to the woodshed” and tan their apses.
A less serious incident recently happened in Utah. An LDS Apostle, the LDS Presiding Bishop, a Church lobbyist, and LDS staffers met with State lawmakers. Apparently this is an annual event. This get-together was severely criticized in a column in the Salt Lake Tribune (the paper not owned by the LDS Church). Columnist Rebecca Walsh advocated for separation of church and state, and suggested the meetings are inappropriate.
Unfortunately for the Church, their PR man — Michael Otterson — wrote a somewhat less that politic response to the Trib’s column. Speaking about Ms Walsh, Otterson wrote: “it’s difficult to calm someone who invariably sees a conspiracy behind every pew. . .” He paints a less than flattering picture of an hysterical woman, not a good move in today’s PC world. I’m not sure I understand the logic of personally attacking a reporter. A “trip to the woodshed” to discuss the Golden Rule might be appropriate for Otterson.
Otterson needs to consider that the majority of residents in Utah are Mormon and that any religious majority needs to be circumspect about its participation in the political process. Also, since the Mormon Church places a strong emphasis on obedience, he needs to be doubly careful. Reporter Walsh certainly has pointed out a legitimate issue. Not learning a lesson from this encounter, the LDS Church continued their participation in the political process by engaging in negotiations over Utah’s outdated liquor laws (and probably other things). Aren’t their more important things for our leaders to do?
Other more serious LDS PR problems have been popping up recently over a variety of issues including: (1) the FLDS raids in Texas; (2) the Presidential campaign of Mitt Romney, (3) the Prop 8 initiative in California, (4) the Chris Buttars controversy in the Utah State senate; (5) the “Big Love” HBO series and the temple ceremony; (6) the continuing selection of male white anglo-saxons to high church positions; just to name a few. The LDS PR staff may want to consider that the LDS Church is not immune from criticism, satire, and investigation. Learning to be less defensive is sometimes a difficult task, but none the less an important one. LDS Church members had better develop a thicker skin because I’m sure there is more excitement in our future.
Tired Road Warrior 
I spend a fair amount of my time in Uganda (eastern central Africa) where the AIDS epidemic continues to be a serious problem. I was shocked when Pope Benedict XVI recently reiterated the Catholic Church’s anti-condomstance.
“You can’t resolve it (HIV/AIDS) with the distribution of condoms,” the Pope told reporters aboard a plane heading to Cameroon. “On the contrary, it increases the problem.”
The late Cardinal Alfonso Lopez Truijillo made headlines in 2003 for saying that condoms may help spread AIDS though a false sense of security, claiming they weren’t effective in blocking trasmission of the virus.
These sorts of statements are irresponsible given today’s realities. Here is another issue where congregational nullification is in order.
On a more positive PR note, LDS Church officials on April 2 met with former Veep and presidential candidate Al Gore to discuss climate change and its ramifications. Gore gave a 30-minute presentation, which was followed by Q&As. Church spokeman Scott Trotter called the get-together “cordial.”
Prudent stewardship and wise use of resources are principles that church leaders have emphasized throughout the history of the church,” Trotter explained. “The church encourages its members to join with their fellow citizens in supporting worthy programs that will make their communities better places to live and raise families.”
On Saturday, March 28, church official participated in the worldwide “Earth Hour” campaign to draw attention to climate change. The SL Temple’s outside lights were darkened for an hour along with those in 88 countries and more than 4,000 cities.
Mormon issues continue to hit the news regularly including: (1) the LDS heirarcy and immigration issues; (2) the practice of baptism for the dead; (3) Deseret Book banning the “Twilight” book series (written by an Mormon author); (4) LDS church members participating in Bush’s torture debacle; (5) Mormon elected officials in DC continue to make embarassing statements, and, or course, (6) the continuing saga of Chris Buttars and the Utah Republican Senate leadership. The Church’s stand on gays is also staying in the news with “radical” Marie Osmond and others starting to voice serious doubts about Church policy (as more and more Mormons realize they have gay friends and relatives).
The Catholic Church has decided to try and ignore the upcoming film: “Angels and Demons.” Having allegedly learned a lesson from the previous Dan Brown/Opie collaboration (“The Da Vinci Code”) where controversy stoked movie ticket sales; this time around will be different. “Be careful not to play their game,” a top Vatican official said. “Dramatizing the question unintentionally gives publicity.” Both books/films put a negative light on the Catholic Church.
The Mormon heirarchy continues to have difficulties dealing with gay issues. The most recent problem involved two gays kissing on Temple Square. Of course the incident was mishandled and negative press ensued. Maybe it’s time for a new LDS PR staff, or atleast some retraining of the existing staff. Some reorientation of church priorities might also be in order. For instance, couldn’t the church focus on the plight of its members in Developing Countries instead of obsessing over gay issues?
At the 2009 SLC Sunstone Symposium, I attended a session on activism. A young Logan married couple talked about their experiences with activism (anti-war, recycling, and such) and then related it to Biblical and other Mormon scripture. The most thought-provoking part of the session (aside from the enthusiasm of the presenters) was when Sunstone elder stateman Armand Mauss stood up and asked the rhetorical question: Why is the Momron hierarchy “always on the wrong side of social issues?” Good question.
There are a couple of social issues where the Mormon hierarchy is trying to take what I consider a reasonable stand. On immigration and “illegals,” the Church’s position, while unclear, shows hope. It is a tough go because so many Mormons are so conservative politically. But because so many “illegals” are Mormons and potential Mormons, the leadership is trying for a compassionate middle ground. This I applaud.
Also, the ban on guns at BYU is certainly reasonable and correct.
High profile Mormon church members continue to make embarassing statements:
About a dozen companies have withdrawn their commercials from Glenn Beck’s (conservative potstirrer) Fox News Channel program. This came as a result of a statement made by Beck in July 2009: President Obama is a racist with a “deep-seated hatred for white people or white culture.”
Let’s not forget Orson Scott Card, science fiction writer and homophobe: “The Church has plenty of room for individuals who are struggling to overcome their temptations toward homosexual behavior. But for the protection of the Saints and the good of the persons themselves, the Church has no room for those who, instead of repenting of homosexuality, wish it to become an acceptable behavior in the society of Saints. They are wolves in sheep’s clothing, preaching meekness while attempting to devour the flock.” Talk about paranoia.
Paul Mero, president of the conservative think tank The Sutherland Institute (think “quiver of children” here) was quoted as making the following statement by the SLTrib: “The John Huntsman family fits the People Magazine persona, good-looking people, wealthy, hip . . . They adopt their children Madonna-style, and for some reason that seems to resonate, even in Utah. Its baffling to me honestly.” JoAnn Jacobsen-Wells in a letter to the editor rightly called Mero to repentance. And to his credit, Mero apologized in a subsequent letter to the editor.
What causes high-profile Mormons to take these extreme positions? I think the Mormon hierarchy needs to ponder this question.
The following letter to the editor (from Ken Rasmussen) appeared in the SLTrib on Sept 11, 2009:
“. . . KSL Radio sees no problem carrying the Sean Hannity show for 3 hours every weekday. I realize that Hannity makes big money for KSL, but his negative views of the current administration are one of the main causes of the divisiveness in our community. His poison is every bit as toxic as pornography or gambling, yet it is carried live every day by a station that many people believe to be the voice of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints.”
I think the Mormon hierarchy needs to ponder if Hannity views are really in line with what the Church wants to represent.
The Mormon PR snafus just keep on coming. The latest, we have lawyers discussing biological issues (SLTrib, Sept 19, 2009): “People who are attracted to members of their own sex can change, an LDS general authority (Elder Bruce C. Hafen) said Saturday, so they shouldn’t let Satan persuade them they can’t.” When will we ever learn?
On my way from Provo to SLC on I-15, I saw two big billboards promoting the Sean Hannity radio talk show on KSL. I think many Mormons would view this as an endorsement of his political agenda.
Also Glen Beck has been in the news a lot lately. His conversion to Mormonism is frequently discussed. On a recent cover of Time Magazine, Glen is sticking his tongue out. He is viewed as an instigator of many of the groups disrupting meeting about health care and similar subjects. When asked about his bad behavior and the behavior of his ilk, Glen rationalizes by pointing to the behavior of past anti-war protesters (if one group behaves badly then why can’t we?). Glen has also been pushing the books of deceased Mormon wacko Cleon Skousen. Again the Church is involved in this craziness whether they want to be or not. The Church has much more to fear from the Right than they ever did from the Left.
And the snafus just keep on coming. The latest was the Mormon Church’s response to documentary “8: The Mormon Proposition” which was premiered at the Sundance Film Festival this year:
“Although we have given many interviews on this topic, we had no desire to participate in something so obviously biased,” LDS Church spokeman Scott Trotter said via e-mail Sunday. “Judging from the trailer and background material online, it appears that accuracy and truth are rare commodities in this film.”
A more appropriate response might have been to acknowledge the alienation problem of gay Mormons, and strongly state that the Church is actively working to improve the situation. And that the Church supports several issues on the gay agenda including . . . . That way they could have turned a negative into a positive. When the Church PR staff is being baited, they need to quit being so defensive.
More instances of PR snafus include: (1) Apostle Oaks comparing the comparively minor damage done to LDS churches after the Prop 8 debacle TO the pursecution of African-Americans during the civil rights era and (2) a papal official comparing the heat the Catholic hierachy is now taking over priestly bad behavior TO the pursecutions of Jews during WWII. Talk about pursecution complexes. Can’t these individuals keep their mouths in check?
It just keeps on getting worse. According to USA Today (14 Mar 2010):
“The Vatican on Wednesday tried to defuse growing anger over remarks by the pope’s top aide that the problem behind the pedophile priest scandals is homosexuality and not the church’s celibacy requirement.
Cardinal Tarcisio Bertone, the Holy See’s secretary of state, outraged gay advocacy groups, politicians, and even the French government with his remarks Monday in Chile.
‘Many psychologists and psychiatrists have demonstrated that there is no relation between celibacy and pedophilia,’ the Italian cardinal said. ‘But many others have demonstrated, I have told told recently, that there is a relation between homosexuality and pedophilia. That is true. That is the problem.'”
A high vatican official was recently interviewed on PBS’s nightly news hour. When asked about misbehaving priests, he said that the Catholic Church wasn’t along with the problem pointing out other organizations with similar issues (ie. the Boy Scout). To which, the reporter correctly asked, “Shouldn’t the church be held to a higher standard?” An excellent question and one that left the clergyman stammering for an answer. Why can’t organizations just say we have problem and we are dealing with it in a forthright manner. NO EXCUSES.
Commenting on the recent controversy surrounding cable TV’s portrayal of the Mormon temple ceremony, Apostle M. Russell Ballard complimented the Church’s PR department’s response (Ensign, Jul 2010). “There is nothing defensive about it, yet it responds to an inappropriate portrayal of one of our most sacred religious ceremonies.”
Elder Ballard then quoted from the PR departments newsroom Web site: “If the Church allowed critics and opponents to choose the ground on which its battles are fought, it would risk being distracted from the focus and mission it has pursued successfully for nearly 180 years.”
The last few years have not been good ones for the LDS Church’s PR department. And I’m sure that Elder Ballard’s article was an attempt to build confidence in staff. In many cases, however, the department is defensive to the point of being seriously offensive. Unfortunately . . . other groups are determing our agenda.
Fortunately, KSL Radio has cancelled its contract with pundit Sean Hannity. This move is very positive considering Hannity’s constant spewing of negativity.
Deseret Press also quit publishing “Mormon Doctrine.” This is also a very positive step given the extreme conservative religious view of the author. Deseret claimed their reason for halting publication was declining sales. An excuse disputed by local book vendors.
In an article from the “Washington Post” by Felicia Sonmez (and reprinted in the SLTrib 2 Sep 2010) titled “Is Glenn Beck’s rise good for Mormonism”:
“Michael Otterson, managing director of public affairs for the LDS Church, said that opinion on Beck is just as divided among Mormons as it is elsewhere.
“Views on Glenn Beck would be right across the spectrum,” Otterson said. “It depends on where individual Latter-day Saints are. Some would embrace him completely and others would no doubt, be at odds.”
“It really underscores that members of the church are free to have their separate political views and express them whatever way they like,” Otterson said, adding that Beck “would be the first person to say that he does not speak for the church.”
This response leaves a lot to be desired. And I hope that Otterson said a great deal more in his interview (but not included in the article). For example, that the Church hierarcy does not question President Obama’s Christian credentials. Also, that the Church is committed to social justice (something that Beckites seem to oppose), particularly given the large number of members living in developing countries. The Church PR department had a real opportunity here, but again they dropped the ball.
According to Nicole Winfield (AP) as reported in the SLTrib (23 Nov 2010), the Pope has changed his mind about condoms:
“Using a condom is a lesser evil than transmitting HIV to a sexual partner — even if that means a woman averts a possible pregnancy, the Vatican said Tuesday, signaling a seismic shift in papal teaching as it explained Pope Benedict XVI’s comments.
The Vatican has long been criticized for its patent opposition to condom use, particularly in Africa where AIDS is rampant. But the latest interpretation of Benedict’s comments about condoms and HIV essentially means the Roman Catholic Church is acknowledging that its long-held, anti-birth control stance against condoms doesn’t justify putting someone’s life at risk.
“This is a game-changer,” said the Rev. James Martin, a Jesuit editor and writer. “By acknowledging that condoms help prevent spread of HIV between people in sexual relationships, the pope has completely changed the Catholic discussion on condoms.””
Hooray.