Pastor Mark Driscoll of the mega Mars Hill Church in Seattle told his followers that Your Working Boy is carrying water for Mormonism by denying that it’s a “cult.” Here is the quote he used from this post on my blog:

“It is especially offensive, at least to me, to hear Christians speak of Mormonism as a ‘cult.’ Usually when you hear that word being applied to a church or religious group, it’s designed not to describe, but solely to marginalize…In my experience, Mormonism produces exemplary people, the kind who form stable families and strong communities, and who make good neighbors. I do not believe in Mormonism, nor do I have the slightest interest in becoming Mormon. That Mormons tend to be good people does not make their doctrines true. But inasmuch as Mormons—and I’m generalizing here—tend to produce people who are often better Christians, in terms of their behavior, than the more orthodox expressions within the Christian tradition, should make thoughtful Christians consider what truth may exist within Mormonism and what we may learn about how to live well from the Mormon experience.”

Reading his sermon, in which he very selectively quoted me, it would be easy for his listeners to conclude that I accept that Mormonism as authentically Christian. I do not. I have made that perfectly clear here, on many occasions. Why, I even said so in the very same blog post that Driscoll quotes from. Here are the first two lines from that post:

Mormonism deviates so far from basic orthodox Christianity that I have a difficult time, as a theological matter, considering it authentically Christian, even within an expansive definition of “Christian” that includes believers in this or that heretical doctrine or set of doctrines. Nevertheless, it’s patently absurd to claim that Mormons don’t love Jesus Christ, or are, because of their religion, to be treated with suspicion.

The quote Driscoll cherry-picked looks different in the context of my entire blog entry, does it not? Driscoll goes on to say that Mormonism may not be a cult by popular definition or sociological definition, but it is a cult by “theological” definition. How does he figure that? Well:

For example, the ESV Study Bible defines a cult as, “…any religious movement that claims to be derived from the Bible and/or the Christian faith, and that advocates beliefs that differ so significantly with major Christian doctrines that two consequences follow: (1) The movement cannot legitimately be considered a valid “Christian” denomination because of its serious deviation from historic Christian orthodoxy. (2) Believing the doctrines of the movement is incompatible with trusting in the Jesus Christ of the Bible for the salvation that comes by God’s grace alone.”

In light of this definition, Mormonism is most certainly a cult theologically speaking because it deviates substantially from historic Orthodox Christian belief about essential issues related to God, humanity, and salvation. But not in that it deviates from Christian teaching alone, as that would make all belief systems apart from orthodox Christianity a cult, but in that it claims Christianity while subtly subverting it in both practice and theology. Because it claims to be Christian, uses Christian language, but is antithetical Christianity, it must be labeled a cult theologically.

The Evangelical ESV Study Bible editors may accept that definition of “cult,” but I doubt very much that many other Christians, even those who don’t consider Mormonism authentically Christian, would find it useful. Surely Mark Driscoll understands that many Evangelicals believe that Roman Catholicism teaches that salvation does not come by grace alone — at least not in the way they understand the working of divine grace — and for that reason consider the Roman Catholic Church to be a “cult.” I have no idea if Driscoll believes that, but he should reflect on whether a definition of “cult” that, because of its narrow focus on justification, arguably declares over 1 billion Roman Catholics — the largest single Christian church in the world — as cult members. Any definition of “cult” that, depending on its interpretation, includes every Roman Catholic on the planet is at best problematic.

Anyway, my real complaint is about Driscoll’s selective quoting of my blog entry implies that I recognize Mormonism as authentically Christian simply because I don’t condemn it as a cult, and I find much to admire in the behavior and standards of Mormon people. Well, I don’t accept Driscoll’s narrow definition of what constitutes a cult. I believe Mormonism is untrue, and not truly Christian. I believe the LDS Church is filled with people who clearly love Jesus Christ. I believe, with Father Neuhaus, that:

we owe to Mormon Americans respect for their human dignity, protection of their religious freedom, readiness for friendship, openness to honest dialogue, and an eagerness to join hands in social and cultural tasks that advance the common good.

To accomplish that, we should stop applying to them the same scare word commonly used to denounce dangerous fringe religions. We can oppose Mormonism theologically, and with rigor, without insulting Mormons. Why is that so hard for some people to understand?