ShareThis Page
On Mormons, ‘WWJD?’ |

On Mormons, ‘WWJD?’

| Wednesday, June 20, 2012 12:30 a.m

While I had thought the letter “Not their call to make” (June 1 and by self-identified Evangelical Presbyterian Samuel J. Orr III on the topic of the Grove City Area Church Softball League’s decision to exclude a Mormon team was the ultimate of reason in its theme of letting Jesus Christ decide who is Christian, along comes Jeff Ruzicka’s letter “Exclusion biblical” (June 12 and to remind us that bigotry is still alive and well. Without the benefit of an election to the clergy, a congregation or even the willingness to identify his own denomination, Ruzicka merely proclaims his own biblical interpretation to be the final authority and declares that any who do not agree are ignorant and uninformed.

Really? I’d rather apply the “WWJD?” (“What would Jesus do?”) test as opposed to drinking this Kool-Aid. And it’s pretty clear what Jesus would do. There was a group called the Samaritans, who didn’t exactly fit well with the mainstream religious thought at the time. In fact, the mainstream clergy for the most part shunned them and considered them apostates at best. Jesus reached out to them in his repeated travels between the Jerusalem and Nazareth areas and his apostles recorded those interactions in the New Testament. On the other hand, Jesus didn’t get along so well with much of the mainstream clergy at the time.

This is not to deny the right of the Grove City Area Church Softball League or Ruzicka or anybody else to practice any form of bigotry they like. That is a constitutional right. Just don’t try to cloak it in Christianity.

David Staples


Categories: News
TribLIVE commenting policy

You are solely responsible for your comments and by using you agree to our Terms of Service.

We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.

While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.

We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments either by the same reader or different readers

We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.

We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.

We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.

We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.