In 1982, the newly appointed Bishop Mitt Romney rang the doorbell to my North Cambridge home. I was barefoot, pregnant and in the kitchen on that late weekend afternoon. The visit was unexpected, but not totally surprising. In previous months, local Mormons had suddenly begun phoning and coming to my home to urge me to return to the church. Rattled by uninvited attention, I felt harassed and unnerved. Having no desire to resume contact with the church, I finally asked one caller what I might do to compel the local Church of Latter Day Saints (LDS) members to leave me alone. I was told to write a letter asking to have my name removed from the rolls. So I did, thinking that would end all contact.
I had decided many years earlier to leave the religion of my childhood. As a great-granddaughter of Mormon pioneers, surrounded by a large, active Mormon family, this had not been an easy thing to do. Luckily, though, I was also the daughter of a liberal-minded family known for its critical thinking about Mormon-ness. Following an unorthodox wedding at the age of 20 to my Jewish husband, I had little direct involvement with Mormons other than family.
Until, that is, that long ago afternoon when I was confronted by the local bishop. Not knowing who he was or his future trajectory into politics, I still knew fear. There is a certain clean-cut, white-shirted, stiff-shouldered demeanor that I recognized on some primal level, and I knew upon answering the door that I was looking at two early-middle-aged Mormons in authority. “Sister Gerson?” the man to my right inquired brusquely. “I’m Lani Gerson,” I replied, feeling as if I were being set upon by soul-snatchers. I wanted to shut the door quickly and hide. The man introduced himself as Bishop Mitt Romney of the Cambridge LDS ward and the man with him as a member of the bishopric. Romney served me with a letter, not unlike a sheriff with a summons, informing me of my trial of excommunication scheduled for the following Saturday.
How could I be tried for excommunication when I had long ago quit the church? Throughout our brief encounter, “Brother” Romney expressed no curiosity as to why we were facing each other. He stood braced at the doorway like a high school jock, smirking at the world. Did he care to know why I had quit the church? Did he question his own authority to take action against a person he had never met? Did he wish to engage in a conversation about religious beliefs? The answers clearly were: NO, NO and NO.
And, how would I have answered those questions? Would I have told him that, as a child, I heard the stories of the Prophet Joseph Smith, the Angel Moroni and the golden plates buried in a hillside of upstate New York as quite wonderful fairy tales? Would he have understood the confusion I felt when I realized as a six year old that the adults around me believed these stories to be true? How to explain to believers the rational thoughts of an inquisitive child – let alone that of an adult?
Would he have had a response to my story of the time I stormed out of church as a teenager when a Sunday School teacher, the local dentist, called Martin Luther King a communist, unworthy of the Nobel Peace Prize?
Romney’s surreal visit left me quite shaken, but with my soul intact. I knew I would not attend my “trial,” feeling the church had no authority over me – but at the same time, I understood the anger and disgrace my parents would feel on my behalf. I phoned them immediately and they were outraged. In an effort to “defend” me, they contacted several authorities in the Mormon hierarchy and were told by one that “young Romney” was a bit of a zealot and was overreacting to my desire to be left alone by the church. Most Mormon bishops look the other way when members of the church depart. Excommunication is usually reserved for flagrant acts of blasphemy or for transgressions including adultery, something Romney would know. Bishop Romney, like many Mormons, simply could not understand why others might wish to quietly leave the fold or follow another path. For him, punitive action apparently seemed necessary. After all, he’s the guy who later said he liked to fire people.
My parents may have succeeded in persuading Bishop Romney to cancel my trial and excommunication. I never heard from church officials again. My parents and grandparents are no longer alive, but I do know they would be voting for someone, anyone other than Romney.
I offer this story as an insight into Romney’s character. I, for one, worry about a candidate who enjoys firing people, is prone to shape-shifting, appears blinkered by his religious zealotry, and lacks curiosity about the experiences and beliefs of others. Do we want such a person governing our multi-racial, complex and constitutionally secular nation? And besides, there is also the business with the dog!
We’re not backing down in the face of Trump’s threats.
As Donald Trump is inaugurated a second time, independent media organizations are faced with urgent mandates: Tell the truth more loudly than ever before. Do that work even as our standard modes of distribution (such as social media platforms) are being manipulated and curtailed by forces of fascist repression and ruthless capitalism. Do that work even as journalism and journalists face targeted attacks, including from the government itself. And do that work in community, never forgetting that we’re not shouting into a faceless void – we’re reaching out to real people amid a life-threatening political climate.
Our task is formidable, and it requires us to ground ourselves in our principles, remind ourselves of our utility, dig in and commit.
As a dizzying number of corporate news organizations – either through need or greed – rush to implement new ways to further monetize their content, and others acquiesce to Trump’s wishes, now is a time for movement media-makers to double down on community-first models.
At Truthout, we are reaffirming our commitments on this front: We won’t run ads or have a paywall because we believe that everyone should have access to information, and that access should exist without barriers and free of distractions from craven corporate interests. We recognize the implications for democracy when information-seekers click a link only to find the article trapped behind a paywall or buried on a page with dozens of invasive ads. The laws of capitalism dictate an unending increase in monetization, and much of the media simply follows those laws. Truthout and many of our peers are dedicating ourselves to following other paths – a commitment which feels vital in a moment when corporations are evermore overtly embedded in government.
Over 80 percent of Truthout‘s funding comes from small individual donations from our community of readers, and the remaining 20 percent comes from a handful of social justice-oriented foundations. Over a third of our total budget is supported by recurring monthly donors, many of whom give because they want to help us keep Truthout barrier-free for everyone.
You can help by giving today. Whether you can make a small monthly donation or a larger gift, Truthout only works with your support.