Past Mormon Memes:
Friday, November 21, 2014
Tuesday, November 18, 2014
Alma 46: The Title of Gliberty
This chapter sees the rise of Amalickiah, who ambitiously wants to destroy the church and become a king at the same time.
Hatred Transcending Reason
Amalickiah emerges as the leader of the faction of wicked Nephites, and he's somehow managed to lead away a decent chunk of Helaman's appointed priests during his rise to prominence. What I find amusing, however, is the insanely fast, insanely irrational escalation depicted in the opening verses of the chapter:
Nephites Must be Excellent Speed-Readers
Captain Moroni is so distraught over the apostasy and appetite for violence that seem to be gaining so much traction among his countrymen that he tears his coat and writes some epic words on it: "In memory of our God, our religion, and freedom, and our peace, our wives, and our children." Because family comes last. (Well, second-to-last, because parallel structure is even less of a priority.)
But somehow Moroni makes it work and his coat becomes a called the Title of Liberty, which stands as an ensign and a rallying cry among the righteous Nephites.
What Kind of an Idiot Makes That Deal?
People love Moroni's stripping antics so much that they follow suit, tearing their own clothes off as some kind of weird symbolic gesture of agreement. And, as a group (because groups of people in the Book of Mormon often speak with one voice), they declare their loyalty:
First of all, thanks to the previous chapter's prophecy, we know that the Nephites are eventually going to be destroyed because of their transgressions. I really doubt Joseph Smith was going for dramatic irony here, but it's a decent example nonetheless. Looks like there is a little literary value to the Book of Mormon after all.
Secondly, who does that? "Hey, God, listen, I just want to say, if I ever start being wicked, you should totally send the Lamanites to beat us to a bloody pulp until we all die." Not only is that a pretty one-sided covenant, but it's basically what God's been saying he's going to do for the last few hundred pages anyway. You might as well just say, "Hey, God, you remember all that horrible stuff you were going to do to us because you love us so much? Don't forget to do it later when we wind up totally deserving it."
What Kind of an Idiot Doesn't Make that Deal?
Amalickiah chickens out of his plan to kill all the religious people because he realizes he's outnumbered. So he takes his followers and tries to flee northward, hoping that the Lamanites are stupid enough and bloodthirsty enough that he can just manipulate them into doing the heavy lifting. Captain Moroni intervenes with his army to stop the Amalickiahites from adding to the already overwhelming ranks of the Lamanites, but Amalickiah himself and a few of his closest friends escape. What does Moroni do with the ones he captures?
First, who appointed Moroni? The chief judges and the people? Or is this another part of the Book of Mormon's love affair with American-style representative democracy? (Because he was appointed by officials who were elected by the people, then he must have been appointed by the people!)
Second, his authority is over the army. Why would anyone think it's a good idea for him to also have the unadulterated power to kill prisoners whose only crime so far is disliking the current form of government? If anything, that sounds like sedition, which should fall under the purview of one of the judges, not the military.
Third, Moroni has once again delivered an unfair ultimatum to coerce people into doing what he wants. It's completely unwarranted to execute all these people, but he decides to do it because then he'll scare the rest of them into rejoining society as upstanding citizens who believe in freedom. But come on...look at all the hypocrisy involved in his threat: "Say you love freedom or I'll kill you! Except the freedom to live, we don't care about that in our free government!"
Fourth, how stupid is this Moroni dude? If the only other option is death, how many hearts and minds is he really winning over to this whole freedom-and-liberty obsession of his? He clearly can't practice what he preaches, and the ones who are smart enough to take the deal and pledge themselves to a free government are bound to be left with some deep-seated resentment over murdered comrades and abuse of military power and being stiff-armed with political dogma.
And lastly..."there were but a few who denied the covenant of freedom." Who the hell wouldn't take the deal? I mean, I guess it's noble to die for a cause you truly believe in or whatever, but come on. Have some sense, Amalickiahites! Claim to love freedom and then secretly plan to overthrow the government later. Is it really that hard to come up with that idea?
Death and the God-given Herbal Cures
The chapter concludes with a strange little footnote about death and disease:
Hatred Transcending Reason
Amalickiah emerges as the leader of the faction of wicked Nephites, and he's somehow managed to lead away a decent chunk of Helaman's appointed priests during his rise to prominence. What I find amusing, however, is the insanely fast, insanely irrational escalation depicted in the opening verses of the chapter:
And it came to pass that as many as would not hearken to the words of Helaman and his brethren were gathered together against their brethren.
And now behold, they were exceedingly wroth, insomuch that they were determined to slay them.Slow down, there, champ! It hasn't even been a year yet! This is still the nineteenth year of the reign of the judges (or approximately 73 BC for normal people). You guys have just barely split into two factions, so there's no need to be getting all murderous just yet. Seriously, shouldn't it have taken a little more time for Amalickiah to win over so many people and then whip them into a Helaman-hating frenzy?
Nephites Must be Excellent Speed-Readers
Captain Moroni is so distraught over the apostasy and appetite for violence that seem to be gaining so much traction among his countrymen that he tears his coat and writes some epic words on it: "In memory of our God, our religion, and freedom, and our peace, our wives, and our children." Because family comes last. (Well, second-to-last, because parallel structure is even less of a priority.)
And when Moroni had said these words, he went forth among the people, waving the rent part of his garment in the air, that all might see the writing which he had written upon the rent part, and crying with a loud voice...If a decorated war hero starts tearing his clothes off, tying some of it to a pole, writing stuff on it, running around in public screaming and waving his shirt like people are actually going to be able to read the entire sentence before the flag flaps back on itself, wouldn't you think...nervous breakdown? Post-traumatic stress disorder? Too much strong drink?
But somehow Moroni makes it work and his coat becomes a called the Title of Liberty, which stands as an ensign and a rallying cry among the righteous Nephites.
What Kind of an Idiot Makes That Deal?
People love Moroni's stripping antics so much that they follow suit, tearing their own clothes off as some kind of weird symbolic gesture of agreement. And, as a group (because groups of people in the Book of Mormon often speak with one voice), they declare their loyalty:
Now this was the covenant which they made, and they cast their garments at the feet of Moroni, saying: We covenant with our God, that we shall be destroyed, even as our brethren in the land northward, if we shall fall into transgression; yea, he may cast us at the feet of our enemies, even as we have cast our garments at thy feet to be trodden under foot, if we shall fall into transgression.Okay. Um, why?
First of all, thanks to the previous chapter's prophecy, we know that the Nephites are eventually going to be destroyed because of their transgressions. I really doubt Joseph Smith was going for dramatic irony here, but it's a decent example nonetheless. Looks like there is a little literary value to the Book of Mormon after all.
Secondly, who does that? "Hey, God, listen, I just want to say, if I ever start being wicked, you should totally send the Lamanites to beat us to a bloody pulp until we all die." Not only is that a pretty one-sided covenant, but it's basically what God's been saying he's going to do for the last few hundred pages anyway. You might as well just say, "Hey, God, you remember all that horrible stuff you were going to do to us because you love us so much? Don't forget to do it later when we wind up totally deserving it."
It's also odd that the covenant mentions being destroyed "even as our brethren in the land northward." That's clearly referring to the Lamanites. But when have the Lamanites ever been destroyed by God because of their iniquity? The Nephites are the ones who get destroyed. The Lamanites merely get proselytized into unconsciousness.
What Kind of an Idiot Doesn't Make that Deal?
Amalickiah chickens out of his plan to kill all the religious people because he realizes he's outnumbered. So he takes his followers and tries to flee northward, hoping that the Lamanites are stupid enough and bloodthirsty enough that he can just manipulate them into doing the heavy lifting. Captain Moroni intervenes with his army to stop the Amalickiahites from adding to the already overwhelming ranks of the Lamanites, but Amalickiah himself and a few of his closest friends escape. What does Moroni do with the ones he captures?
Now, Moroni being a man who was appointed by the chief judges and the voice of the people, therefore he had power according to his will with the armies of the Nephites, to establish and to exercise authority over them.
And it came to pass that whomsoever of the Amalickiahites that would not enter into a covenant to support the cause of freedom, that they might maintain a free government, he caused to be put to death; and there were but a few who denied the covenant of freedom.There is so much wrong with this.
First, who appointed Moroni? The chief judges and the people? Or is this another part of the Book of Mormon's love affair with American-style representative democracy? (Because he was appointed by officials who were elected by the people, then he must have been appointed by the people!)
Second, his authority is over the army. Why would anyone think it's a good idea for him to also have the unadulterated power to kill prisoners whose only crime so far is disliking the current form of government? If anything, that sounds like sedition, which should fall under the purview of one of the judges, not the military.
Third, Moroni has once again delivered an unfair ultimatum to coerce people into doing what he wants. It's completely unwarranted to execute all these people, but he decides to do it because then he'll scare the rest of them into rejoining society as upstanding citizens who believe in freedom. But come on...look at all the hypocrisy involved in his threat: "Say you love freedom or I'll kill you! Except the freedom to live, we don't care about that in our free government!"
Fourth, how stupid is this Moroni dude? If the only other option is death, how many hearts and minds is he really winning over to this whole freedom-and-liberty obsession of his? He clearly can't practice what he preaches, and the ones who are smart enough to take the deal and pledge themselves to a free government are bound to be left with some deep-seated resentment over murdered comrades and abuse of military power and being stiff-armed with political dogma.
And lastly..."there were but a few who denied the covenant of freedom." Who the hell wouldn't take the deal? I mean, I guess it's noble to die for a cause you truly believe in or whatever, but come on. Have some sense, Amalickiahites! Claim to love freedom and then secretly plan to overthrow the government later. Is it really that hard to come up with that idea?
Death and the God-given Herbal Cures
The chapter concludes with a strange little footnote about death and disease:
And there were some who died with fevers, which at some seasons of the year were very frequent in the land—but not so much so with fevers, because of the excellent qualities of the many plants and roots which God had prepared to remove the cause of diseases, to which men were subjected by the nature of the climate—Okay, that's fascinating. This is yet one more thing that really didn't need to be carefully etched into metal a few times and preserved for the modern era. But I guess it's nice that the Nephites had some kind of rudimentary understanding of medicine. Good for them.
Saturday, November 15, 2014
Alma 45: Alma's Last Words
We're transitioning between protagonists now, as Alma and his wacky adventures have run their course. He's an old man who's about to disappear mysteriously amid rumors of being translated, but he needs to make sure his son Helaman is in place as a worthy successor.
Mum's the Word
After conducting a quick personal priesthood interview with Helaman, Alma says that he has something important to tell him.
It seems to me that the right thing to do in this situation would be to publicize the prophecy. Most people will probably ignore it, sure, but isn't it fair to give the Nephites a fighting chance to avert their own downfall?
Some Exclusions Apply
Alma's fresh off an explanation of how the Lamanites will hunt the Nephites to extinction when he drops this contradictory claim:
Sure, sure, back in the day it was because the Lamanites didn't know any better and the Nephites had the truth of the gospel in their lives, bringing about greater accountability. But by the time this prophecy comes to fruition, the Lamanites and Nephites will have both been enlightened followers of Christ and they will have both been bloodthirsty evildoers. There's so much corrupting and converting going on in the Book of Mormon that it's completely unfair to claim that the Lamanites didn't know any better and the Nephites should have.
If God cannot look on sin with the least degree of allowance, then both tribes should be obliterated. Or if God is actually as loving as Mormonism tries to depict him, then both tribes should be preserved. But only one being exterminated? The reasoning makes no sense.
High Gospel Turnover
Once his dad wanders off to meet the fate of Amelia Earhart, Helaman gets to work on fixing the religion-related problems in his society:
After Helaman went on his church reunion tour, there "arose a dissension" of people who refused to listen to the words of God and who began to be proud and wealthy. This brings me to my best theory as to why the church struggled so much in the Nephite kingdom—the gospel keeps dying of whiplash.
Mum's the Word
After conducting a quick personal priesthood interview with Helaman, Alma says that he has something important to tell him.
But behold, I have somewhat to prophesy unto thee; but what I prophesy unto thee ye shall not make known; yea, what I prophesy unto thee shall not be made known, even until the prophecy is fulfilled; therefore write the words which I shall say.He then proceeds to foretell the demise of the Nephite nation due to the wickedness that will envelop their culture four hundred years after the coming of Christ. But why, exactly does this need to be kept a secret? Alma doesn't say.
It seems to me that the right thing to do in this situation would be to publicize the prophecy. Most people will probably ignore it, sure, but isn't it fair to give the Nephites a fighting chance to avert their own downfall?
Some Exclusions Apply
Alma's fresh off an explanation of how the Lamanites will hunt the Nephites to extinction when he drops this contradictory claim:
And he said: Thus saith the Lord God—Cursed shall be the land, yea, this land, unto every nation, kindred, tongue, and people, unto destruction, which do wickedly, when they are fully ripe; and as I have said so shall it be; for this is the cursing and the blessing of God upon the land, for the Lord cannot look upon sin with the least degree of allowance.God cannot allow sin in any way. Which is why he's going to kill off the sinful Nephites. Except that he's going to use the also sinful Lamanites to make it happen. And one thousand years later, the Lamanites are still going to be happily going about their business when the Europeans show up. Why, exactly, are the Lamanites excluded from this zero tolerance policy?
Sure, sure, back in the day it was because the Lamanites didn't know any better and the Nephites had the truth of the gospel in their lives, bringing about greater accountability. But by the time this prophecy comes to fruition, the Lamanites and Nephites will have both been enlightened followers of Christ and they will have both been bloodthirsty evildoers. There's so much corrupting and converting going on in the Book of Mormon that it's completely unfair to claim that the Lamanites didn't know any better and the Nephites should have.
If God cannot look on sin with the least degree of allowance, then both tribes should be obliterated. Or if God is actually as loving as Mormonism tries to depict him, then both tribes should be preserved. But only one being exterminated? The reasoning makes no sense.
High Gospel Turnover
Once his dad wanders off to meet the fate of Amelia Earhart, Helaman gets to work on fixing the religion-related problems in his society:
Therefore, Helaman and his brethren went forth to establish the church again in all the land, yea, in every city throughout all the land which was possessed by the people of Nephi. And it came to pass that they did appoint priests and teachers throughout all the land, over all the churches.That's great. Except that forty-five years earlier, Alma had done the exact same thing. Did the gospel really have such a fragile foothold in Nephite society that the church would need to be reestablished in the lifetime of many who were present during its initial establishment? Was there really such a weak cultural tradition that belief in the church could all but die out in less than fifty years? Was the church itself so structurally unsound that its leadership hierarchy could almost entirely dissolve after a short war?
After Helaman went on his church reunion tour, there "arose a dissension" of people who refused to listen to the words of God and who began to be proud and wealthy. This brings me to my best theory as to why the church struggled so much in the Nephite kingdom—the gospel keeps dying of whiplash.
Friday, November 14, 2014
Alma 44: Moroni's First War Crime
Captain Moroni has Zerahemnah's army cornered. When he steps forward to demand their surrender, he uses the spotlight as a chance to bear his testimony and convert people...as any good Mormon surely would.
When Piety Borders on Denial
Moroni is so confident that the events of the battle undeniably point to the powerful intervention of God that he even goes so far as to assume that the Lamanites see things the same way:
Now ye see that this is the true faith of God; yea, ye see that God will support, and keep, and preserve us, so long as we are faithful unto him, and unto our faith, and our religion; and never will the Lord suffer that we shall be destroyed except we should fall into transgression and deny our faith.He seems to have some seriously strong faith that God protects his people so long as they are righteous, which is a little bizarre, considering that the slaughter of the righteous, pacifist people of Ammon was a pretty significant event that took place very recently. About five years before that, also in young Moroni's lifetime, God also allowed the righteous inhabitants of Ammonihah to be destroyed. So I'm not sure why he was so positive that God was going to keep his army from destruction, especially after he put all his chips on that one super-risky military strategy that never should have worked.
Identical Experiences, Divergent Conclusions
When Zerahemnah manages to get a word in, he responds with this:
Behold, we are not of your faith; we do not believe that it is God that has delivered us into your hands; but we believe that it is your cunning that has preserved you from our swords. Behold, it is your breastplates and your shields that have preserved you.Captain Moroni is so wrapped up in his own euphoric spiritual orgasm that he's forgotten that the Lamanites don't share his religious views. Because God's finger wasn't visibly smiting anybody, it's actually a matter of some debate whether he was even involved. Moroni is content to look at the events of the battle as God opening up a divine can of whoop-ass. But Zerahemnah, thoughtful, down-to-earth man that he is, sees the impossible underdog victory as the result of some more logical factors, such as his army being outmaneuvered and underequipped.
I notice, however, that Zerahemnah doesn't take responsibility for the biggest reason he lost—that he repeatedly had his army retreat in the worst possible direction. He must be too ashamed to admit to it.
ProTip: Hire a Professional Editor
Somewhere in the midst of Moroni's bloviation, he demands that Zerahemnah promise to end the wars between their clans:
And now, Zerahemnah, I command you, in the name of that all-powerful God, who has strengthened our arms that we have gained power over you, by our faith, by our religion, and by our rites of worship, and by our church, and by the sacred support which we owe to our wives and our children, by that liberty which binds us to our lands and our country; yea, and also by the maintenance of the sacred word of God, to which we owe all our happiness; and by all that is most dear unto us—
Yea, and this is not all; I command you by all the desires which ye have for life...Yeah. No kidding, that's not all. You started off saying that you were commanding him to do something, but you got so caught up in listing things you were commanding him for that you never actually got around to commanding anything. Proofread, Joseph! You have too many sentences in this book that you forget to resolve...or strangely, that you resolve later, in a different sentence. Seriously, what the hell? It's like you had very little formal schooling or something!
 |
| And don't even get me started on your punctuation habits! |
Honor Among Savages
Anyway, Moroni offers to spare the lives of the defeated army if they agree to put down their weapons, leave Nephite territory and "come not again to war." Here is the Lamanite commander's surprisingly classy reply:
And now it came to pass that when Zerahemnah had heard these sayings he came forth and delivered up his sword and his cimeter, and his bow into the hands of Moroni, and said unto him: Behold, here are our weapons of war; we will deliver them up unto you, but we will not suffer ourselves to take an oath unto you, which we know that we shall break, and also our children; but take our weapons of war, and suffer that we may depart into the wilderness; otherwise we will retain our swords, and we will perish or conquer.Humbly, Zerahmenah personally offers his arms to Moroni and requests permission to leave in shame. Even though he clearly has an easy out by saying "oh, yeah, sure, we totally promise we won't attack you guys any more" whether it's true or not, he takes the high road. He says that even if they make the oath, they know they won't keep it. He speaks realistically and honestly. But Moroni somehow interprets this as supreme defiance and reacts dramatically:
 |
| We don't stand for that kind of disgusting honesty around here. You've brought your destruction upon yourselves! |
And now Moroni was angry, because of the stubbornness of the Lamanites; therefore he commanded his people that they should fall upon them and slay them. And it came to pass that they began to slay them; yea, and the Lamanites did contend with their swords and their might.
Some of the Lamanites had agreed to Moroni's terms before this happened. And after it happened, Zerahemnah and his remaining followers agreed to it as well. This just goes to show how effective it is to enforce peace with threats of violence.
But more than that, this shows how much of a role model Captain Moroni isn't. In this chapter, he's arrogant, bloodthirsty and uncompromising. Zerahemnah, in contrast, comes off as much more honorable, yet for some reason he's the leader of the "savage" Lamanite army and Captain Moroni is the virtuous leader of the righteous Nephite army. This is clearly backwards. Zerahemnah is a classy guy. Moroni is a full-blown war criminal.
They surrendered, you prick! You're supposed to stop killing people when they surrender!
A Neat if Pointless Ending
There are heavy losses on both sides. The Lamanites limp back to their homeland and the Nephites return from war triumphant. But, at the conclusion of this chapter, I have one remaining question: What vitally important doctrine was all this violence and bloodshed at the hands of a supposedly righteous man supposed to teach us?
|
Thursday, November 13, 2014
Apologists on Polygamy
The recent New York Times article that shared the church's essay on Joseph Smith's polygamy with the world has elicited some interesting responses on the internet and some interesting recirculations of already existing apologetics.
Reddit pointed me to a site called entitled, appropriately, Joseph Smith's Polygamy. It's maintained by Brian C. Hales, a semi-famous apologist, and his wife. And it's a treasure trove of mind-bogglingly obtuse excuses and mental parkour (because mental gymanstics is both overused and doesn't accurately portray apologists' tendencies to, basically, run away from the problem with a whole lot of style). Here's a great example that flabbergasted me in the section about why it's not a big deal that Smith supposedly lied about his polygamy:
Imagine the following scenario:
When people asked Joseph Smith if he had more than one wife, they asked because they were suspicious that he was participating in activities that operated outside the legally established limits of behavior. And this argument, no matter how inane, does nothing to repair the besmirched character of the prophet. If anything, it paints him as a deviously deceptive man who hid behind frail semantics and willfully ignored the obvious basis of accusations against him instead of just painting him as a regular, old-fashioned, flat-out liar.
The other fun piece of reading material I came across was a post at Millennial Star that chides those who decry the church for having never taught them about all this shady polygamy stuff. The author of the article makes the fair point that the church hasn't altogether eschewed mention of polygamy—after all, nobody's removed section 132 from the Doctrine and Covenants. And the subject is touched upon (albeit lightly) in various church magazines and lesson manuals.
But then he makes the weaker point that it's unreasonable for people to assume that the church has time to bring up "all the lurid details" that shock people so much (polyandry, teenage brides, angels with drawn swords, et cetera, et cetera). He calculates that the church only offers us about 45 hours of instruction a year. I take issue with that. Allow me to do my own calculations.
Assuming nobody is going to teach a toddler about whether or not the prophet had sex with his teenage brides, I'm going to focus on the approximate nine-year window between the time I received the Aaronic Priesthood and the time I stopped going to church. At 52 weeks a year, minus 2 for General Conference, minus 2 for stake conference, and minus 1 for "emergencies that will involve the cancellation of Church," I'm coming up with 423 weeks. Agreeing with the article's assertion that Priesthood and Sunday School classes only have about thirty minutes of instruction each (and ignoring Sacrament meeting because it's usually just regular people babbling without an official manual), that's 423 hours of instruction.
But I'm going to add stake conference back in because it involves a lot of sermons straight from our local leadership. With a youth session, a priesthood session and a general session at about 45 minutes each, occurring twice annually, that adds 40.5 hours of instruction, bringing my current total to 463.5 hours. And I'm definitely going to include General Conference, because that's ten hours every six months of the top leaders from the church talking to the entire body of the membership. How is that not a golden opportunity to discuss the heavy topics and explain some stuff that needs to be explained? With 180 hours of conference over those nine years, my total is now at 643.5 hours.
But let's not forget early morning seminary. With 180 school days and approximately 30 minutes of actual instruction every morning over the course of four years, that's a whopping 360 more hours, which bumps me up to 994.5 hours. And, of course, there's the monthly ten-minute home teaching lesson read straight from the First Presidency message in the Ensign, so that adds another 18 hours, pushing us into quadruple digits at 1012.5.
And we can also throw in the monthly youth firesides from the ages of 12 to 17, which might be fairly rounded down to about thirty minutes apiece. That'll add another 36 hours for a running total of 1048.5. There's also the five youth conferences I attended, which usually knocked out an entire weekend. But, just to be on the safe side, we can call it about an hour and a half of instruction per day for three days. That's 22.5 more hours which at least brings me back to a whole number of 1071.
That all constitutes most of the major opportunities for instruction from the church (although I might have missed something). By this estimate, I'm just shy of 45 days of solid, non-stop teaching. In that month and a half of learning, I heard polygamy addressed a few times. But I never heard that Joseph Smith married anyone other than Emma. I never heard that he married teenagers. I never heard that he married women who were living in his house. I never heard that he married other men's wives, sometimes while they were abroad on missions he'd sent them on. I never heard that he kept many of his marriages from Emma. I never heard that he claimed an angel had threatened him with destruction if he didn't take more brides. I never heard that he lied about being a polygamist, whether he had reason to or not.
With 64,260 minutes of instruction during my adolescence and adulthood, the church had plenty of opportunity to briefly tell me just once, "hey, the founder of your religion married chicks who were currently married to other dudes and he did some other stuff you might want to know about too." But it didn't. In fact, it often implied the opposite. For example, the Joseph Smith movie from 2005 depicts Joseph and Emma as so romantically and passionately devoted to each other that you'd never even imagine that anyone else could be in the picture.
The author of the article closes with this:
The author, in his defense, is a convert to the church, so maybe he doesn't really understand the indoctrination involved with growing up Mormon. As a teenager, I was a voracious reader and a huge fan of American history. But I never had any desire to brush up on my church history—after all, the church would tell me anything I needed to know that I didn't already, right? I had a blind faith instilled in my from childhood that told me that it was perfectly fine for the church to control the flow of information. Why would I ever need to seek it out on my own?
Too many of us realize too late that the church has deceived us. Not everything was a lie, and some shady topics were briefly touched on, but the existence and persistence of the deception cannot be overlooked.
Reddit pointed me to a site called entitled, appropriately, Joseph Smith's Polygamy. It's maintained by Brian C. Hales, a semi-famous apologist, and his wife. And it's a treasure trove of mind-bogglingly obtuse excuses and mental parkour (because mental gymanstics is both overused and doesn't accurately portray apologists' tendencies to, basically, run away from the problem with a whole lot of style). Here's a great example that flabbergasted me in the section about why it's not a big deal that Smith supposedly lied about his polygamy:
The 1827 Illinois State anti-bigamy law reads: "All marriages, where either of the parties had a former husband or wife living at the time of solemnizing the last marriage, shall be void."
In other words, any person with a legal spouse could not be married to another according to state statute. Any subsequent ceremonies would be "void" from a civil perspective. A man or woman could never be legally married to two spouses. Consequently, legally speaking it was impossible for Joseph Smith or any other Nauvoo pluralist to truthfully answer "yes" to the question: "Do you have more than one wife?"
 |
| I'm currently working on a Leverage fanfic in which Eliot Spencer goes back in time to kick the crap out of a 13-year-old Joseph Smith |
COP: Sir, do you know why I pulled you over?Does this make any sense whatsoever?
DRIVER: I have no idea, officer.
COP: You were swerving all over the road. Have you been drinking?
DRIVER: I have not.
COP: (leans in) Ugh, I can smell the alcohol on your breath!
DRIVER: As I'm sure you know, officer, drinking and driving is illegal. Therefore, I could not have legally gotten behind the wheel of this vehicle if I'd been drinking beforehand. By the laws of this state, it's simply an impossibility.
COP: (grins sheepishly) I have to admit, you've got me there! You have a nice night, sir. Drive carefully!
When people asked Joseph Smith if he had more than one wife, they asked because they were suspicious that he was participating in activities that operated outside the legally established limits of behavior. And this argument, no matter how inane, does nothing to repair the besmirched character of the prophet. If anything, it paints him as a deviously deceptive man who hid behind frail semantics and willfully ignored the obvious basis of accusations against him instead of just painting him as a regular, old-fashioned, flat-out liar.
The other fun piece of reading material I came across was a post at Millennial Star that chides those who decry the church for having never taught them about all this shady polygamy stuff. The author of the article makes the fair point that the church hasn't altogether eschewed mention of polygamy—after all, nobody's removed section 132 from the Doctrine and Covenants. And the subject is touched upon (albeit lightly) in various church magazines and lesson manuals.
But then he makes the weaker point that it's unreasonable for people to assume that the church has time to bring up "all the lurid details" that shock people so much (polyandry, teenage brides, angels with drawn swords, et cetera, et cetera). He calculates that the church only offers us about 45 hours of instruction a year. I take issue with that. Allow me to do my own calculations.
Assuming nobody is going to teach a toddler about whether or not the prophet had sex with his teenage brides, I'm going to focus on the approximate nine-year window between the time I received the Aaronic Priesthood and the time I stopped going to church. At 52 weeks a year, minus 2 for General Conference, minus 2 for stake conference, and minus 1 for "emergencies that will involve the cancellation of Church," I'm coming up with 423 weeks. Agreeing with the article's assertion that Priesthood and Sunday School classes only have about thirty minutes of instruction each (and ignoring Sacrament meeting because it's usually just regular people babbling without an official manual), that's 423 hours of instruction.
But I'm going to add stake conference back in because it involves a lot of sermons straight from our local leadership. With a youth session, a priesthood session and a general session at about 45 minutes each, occurring twice annually, that adds 40.5 hours of instruction, bringing my current total to 463.5 hours. And I'm definitely going to include General Conference, because that's ten hours every six months of the top leaders from the church talking to the entire body of the membership. How is that not a golden opportunity to discuss the heavy topics and explain some stuff that needs to be explained? With 180 hours of conference over those nine years, my total is now at 643.5 hours.
But let's not forget early morning seminary. With 180 school days and approximately 30 minutes of actual instruction every morning over the course of four years, that's a whopping 360 more hours, which bumps me up to 994.5 hours. And, of course, there's the monthly ten-minute home teaching lesson read straight from the First Presidency message in the Ensign, so that adds another 18 hours, pushing us into quadruple digits at 1012.5.
And we can also throw in the monthly youth firesides from the ages of 12 to 17, which might be fairly rounded down to about thirty minutes apiece. That'll add another 36 hours for a running total of 1048.5. There's also the five youth conferences I attended, which usually knocked out an entire weekend. But, just to be on the safe side, we can call it about an hour and a half of instruction per day for three days. That's 22.5 more hours which at least brings me back to a whole number of 1071.
That all constitutes most of the major opportunities for instruction from the church (although I might have missed something). By this estimate, I'm just shy of 45 days of solid, non-stop teaching. In that month and a half of learning, I heard polygamy addressed a few times. But I never heard that Joseph Smith married anyone other than Emma. I never heard that he married teenagers. I never heard that he married women who were living in his house. I never heard that he married other men's wives, sometimes while they were abroad on missions he'd sent them on. I never heard that he kept many of his marriages from Emma. I never heard that he claimed an angel had threatened him with destruction if he didn't take more brides. I never heard that he lied about being a polygamist, whether he had reason to or not.
With 64,260 minutes of instruction during my adolescence and adulthood, the church had plenty of opportunity to briefly tell me just once, "hey, the founder of your religion married chicks who were currently married to other dudes and he did some other stuff you might want to know about too." But it didn't. In fact, it often implied the opposite. For example, the Joseph Smith movie from 2005 depicts Joseph and Emma as so romantically and passionately devoted to each other that you'd never even imagine that anyone else could be in the picture.
 |
| Just look at the way they stare into each other's eyes while they cuddle up by a romantic fire to share an intimate husband-and-wife discussion before going to sleep. |
The Church did teach you stuff about even controversial topics. Perhaps you were distracted or didn't pay attention or were not curious enough to explore on your own. You are ultimately responsible for your own learning, and you are responsible for how you respond to new information. That is what the whole "free agency" thing is all about.Pissed off that you just learned about Joseph Smith being a polygamist? It's your own fault for not trying to find out sooner! Never mind that that the church taught you repeatedly that you should only trust what they tell you and never believe stuff you read from angry people on the internet. Never mind that you probably heard a glossed over version of historical polygamy in Sunday School and that it was mostly, "this stuff happened and here's D&C 132, but we don't do it anymore, and only bad people do it now, so don't worry about it, let's move on." Never mind that you were taught to focus on the fact that the church was true so that you could take some initially troublesome information on faith. You just weren't curious enough.
The author, in his defense, is a convert to the church, so maybe he doesn't really understand the indoctrination involved with growing up Mormon. As a teenager, I was a voracious reader and a huge fan of American history. But I never had any desire to brush up on my church history—after all, the church would tell me anything I needed to know that I didn't already, right? I had a blind faith instilled in my from childhood that told me that it was perfectly fine for the church to control the flow of information. Why would I ever need to seek it out on my own?
Too many of us realize too late that the church has deceived us. Not everything was a lie, and some shady topics were briefly touched on, but the existence and persistence of the deception cannot be overlooked.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)