Ever since the raid on the Yearning for Zion Ranch in Eldorado, Texas, I have been fascinated with “The Other Mormons,” the Fundamentalists. The clothes, the hair, the extremely simplistic lifestyle is so different from my own that it is hard for me to imagine living on a FLDS compound. I unfairly connected their practices and lifestyle with Latter Day Saints, who as evidenced by the reading, are nothing like their notorious counterparts.
In “The LDS Church and Community of Christ: Clearer Differences, Closer Friends,” Russell goes to great lengths to separate the RLDS from the FLDS. He states that though the RLDS defended Joseph Smith, claiming that he did not practice polygamy nor did he write in Section 132, he admits that Smith was a participant. LDS members took issue with the practice of polygamy, the lineal succession of the church, plurality of gods, baptism for the dead and secret temple rituals. These issues led them to reorganize.
1) I found it interesting and admirable that Russell admits that “Joseph Smith was a very flawed human being, but most [LDS members] still see him as a legitimate prophet”. Russell admits that the actions of the LDS to manipulate the way the public and followers viewed Joseph Smith was unfair. In some ways, I think that accepting Smith’s actions as fault and still admiring him is contradictory as the LDS adamantly opposes polygamy. However, I can also understand that forgiving Joseph Smith for his flaws is the right thing to do, since forgiveness is a large part of the Mormon religion. How do you come to terms with the decision of the LDS to forgive Smith and continue to idolize him as the founder and prophet of the Mormon religion as a whole? Does it seem contradictory to you that though LDS members do not support the everyday practices of Joseph Smith, they strive to live by the word of his teaching?
2) Russell describes a radio interview where newly inducted President McMurray was asked whether or not he himself believed the Book of Mormon was based on historical fact. McMurray gave an answer that dodged the question, saying that “the Book of Mormon doesn’t give the tools to determine” whether or not the book is historical. If I was a follower of the Mormon religion, I do not think that I would be able to continue to have faith if the president himself did not appear to wholeheartedly believe in the scripture I dutifully worshipped. How do you feel about the answer McMurray gave to this question? How do you feel about believing in things that cannot be refuted by historical fact?
3) Out of curiosity, what were your personal, preconceived notions regarding the Mormon religion before you enrolled in this class? The only information I knew about the LDS religion was what I saw or heard about through the media, which I now know sensationalizes stories for the entertainment of their viewers. Did you know the difference between the FLDS or LDS followers? I thought that all Mormons practiced polygamy.
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteI do not see the Latter-day Saints as contradicting the teaching of Joseph Smith by ceasing to sanction plural marriages. The Manifesto of 1890 does not explicitly reject polygamous relationships in the LDS membership nor does it deny polygamy’s place within the context of Mormon theology. Instead, the decision to put practicing polygamy “on hold” manifests the temporality of Mormonism, the idea that specific time periods require appropriate responses. As such, the Latter-day Saints continue to embody the teachings of Joseph Smith, including his original notion of temporality.
ReplyDeleteAdditionally, I would like to bring up something that I find very interesting: the significance of names. The Reorganized Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints officially changed its name to the Community of Christ in 2000. This change is interesting as it is an attempt to distance the RLDS from both the Mormons (LDS) and mainstream Protestant denominations. Ironically, both of the groups the RLDS rejects being accuses the RLDS of being the other. I believe this new nomenclature is intended to emphasize the Christianity of the religion, something the LDS and Protestant denominations do as well. This leads to an interesting paradox of where the Community of Christ is pushing its image in opposing directions.
I believe that the Mormons acceptance of Joseph Smith's teachings and their denouncing of some of his daily habits are not contradictory. They believe that God ordained the teachings that Joseph Smith put into words. This is yet another example of the notion that God is perfect, religion is flawed.
ReplyDeleteIt is not easy to think of the Mormon religion and its timeliness and the open revelation from an outside point of view, but I believe that it would be difficult for me to support such a religion that could change at a moment's notice.
Before taking this class, I knew very little about Mormons, only that they were a religion predominantly present in Utah and did not condone the consumption of alcohol. I was pretty sure that polygamy was generally a thing of the past, and I certainly did not know about the differences between Mormon denominations.