Please help me understand this quote by Rick Santorum

[Olympian]

Hello,

this is from the news story 9 controversial Rick Santorum quotes

5. Reminding America that some view Mormonism as "a dangerous cult"

Quote: "Would the potential attraction to Mormonism by simply having a Mormon in the White House threaten traditional Christianity by leading more Americans to a church that some Christians believe misleadingly calls itself Christian, is an active missionary church, and a dangerous cult?" (Santorum's Philadelphia Inquirer column, Dec. 20, 2007)

I tried to understand this by parsing it like this:
a. Would the potential attraction to Mormonism by simply having a Mormon in the White House threaten traditional Christianity?
b. by leading more Americans to a church
c. that (Church) some Christians believe misleadingly calls itself Christian
d. and which (Church) is an active missionary church and a dangerous cult?

Please see if my understanding is correct:
1. The church being referred to here is the Mormon church
2. Some Christians believe that the Mormon church is an active missionary church and a dangerous cult.
3. The main point here being (a rhetorical question) - is having a Mormon president (Mitt Romney) in the White House going to threaten traditional Christianity? And the implied answer (from page 3 of the interview) is that it is not going to.

On page 3 of the interview he says -

I admire President Bush's religious commitment, but I've never been tempted to become a Methodist. Kennedy's election didn't produce a surge of converts to Catholicism in the 1960s. A Mormon in the White House? Christianity has survived far tougher tests over the last 2,000 years.
Faith still matters in America. Mitt Romney showed it matters to him, too. He should be a viable choice for voters whose faith matters to them."
Thank you

[Barb_D]

In your second point, you've omitted the most important part: some people believe that the church is being misleading in calling itself Christian.

[susiedq]

I am glad that you understand that this is a rhetorical question posed by the author of the article, not the author's viewpoint.

In fact, right after the quote, he asks "How is a candidate supposed to answer this question."

[Olympian]

In your second point, you've omitted the most important part: some people believe that the church is being misleading in calling itself Christian.

@Barb_D, I see, yes, I did miss it. You are right. Thank you.

[Olympian]

I am glad that you understand that this is a rhetorical question posed by the author of the article, not the author's viewpoint.

In fact, right after the quote, he asks "How is a candidate supposed to answer this question."

@susiedq, thank you. You are right. Sorry, I did not provide the full context and left out what he said right after the part I have quoted. He said, "How does a candidate possibly address such concerns?"

I understand the importance of Moderator 5jj's signature - "Context is always important; labelling is rarely important." but I was lax in not providing the proper context.

[5jj]

I understand the importance of Moderator 5jj's signature

This is (a) off-topic and (b) not a criticism. I happen to be a moderator in this forum, but that is my 'job', not a title. I am just '5jj'. And the fact that I am a moderator does not mean that I am always right.

[5jj]

Though I usually am.

[Rover_KE]

Though I usually am.

And modest too.