Good or evil.  Material or immaterial.  Mind or matter.  Spiritual or physical. Even male or female. As this article from the Jewish Virtual Library describes, many of these “dualism” classifications have been used as the bases of philosophy and religions since primitive times. They seem to constantly reemerge after being subordinated to religious and philosophical principles of “monism” (oneness or wholeness).

Duality instead has nothing to do with two different aspects of reality.  In contrast, it focuses on recognizing that a single, inseparable “monist” reality does almost always have two (or more) entirely separable “dual” descriptions.  It is the descriptions of reality that are dual — like two languages used to describe the same concept — and not the reality itself.

In a way, duality was the key to the anomaly that sparked the entire quantum revolution in physics at the beginning of the 1900′s.  Light had been understood as electromagnetic waves since the work of James Maxwell, published in 1864.  The existence of such waves was a mathematically required consequence of the basic laws of electricity and magnetism that had been easily verified in the laboratory.

But as the 20th Century dawned, observations about light were beginning to pile up that could not be explained by any wave model.  Instead, depending only on the question an experiment tested, light seemed to betray either wave-like or particle-like behavior. Look for wave properties, and the experiment would find them; look for particle properties, and the experiment would find them instead. Even notions of everyday common sense would break down to maintain the insistence on light being both wave and particle.

Worse, when the wave experiments grew sophisticated enough to be applied to good-old-rock-solid matter, matter showed exactly the same stubborn insistence on being both particle and wave-like, too.  Everything in the material world turned out to exhibit the properties of these seemingly contradictory physical models.  Reality could not be so neatly compartmentalized according to the mental constructs humanity had available.

For a time, there was even a trendy word to describe things — “wavacle” — until people realized that giving something a new name didn’t mean we understood it any better.  Quantum mechanics, the science that developed out of these early shocks to our conceptual system, has only one reality.  But it can be described in at least two mathematical languages: the mathematical language of waves, and the mathematical language of “matrices”.

The languages were proven to be translatable from one to another before 1930, and so they must always make exactly the same predictions.  But the value in the notion of duality is that — just as some things are easy to say in German that are extraordinarily difficult to say in Japanese, and vice versa — the difficulty in making predictions in one description is easy for some situations, yet impossibly hard in the other description.  And in some other situation, the utility of the two descriptions is completely reversed.  Scientists needed two conceptually different languages to describe this one reality in which we live.

New examples of duality showed up with increasing frequency as people began to appreciate the explanatory power of the approach.  Some of the dualities that have been recognized are even more bizarre than the wave-particle duality.

Many of today’s best candidate theories for “quantum gravity” that would unite relativity and quantum mechanics into a “theory of everything” are collectively known as “string theory”.  They often have a property called “T-duality”.  In particular, T-dual theories predict that a universe, such as ours appears to be – of vast extent and expanding in size – is absolutely indistinguishable from an infinitesimally small universe which is shrinking toward nothingness. The laws of physics would dictate that exactly the same electrical and gravitational signals would enter our brains in either case.

If these string theories are correct, large and small are alternative languages to describe the same reality.  In fact, for all we can tell, we could all be living in an ultramicroscopic reality right now, with our brains arbitrarily choosing to interpret things so that the universe appears infinite in extent.

Then there’s the “holographic principle”. This idea seems to suggest that there are deep connections between modern information theory — the science that underlies telecommunications, including the internet — and the structure of spacetime itself. In addition to the way we describe reality, there appears to be an entirely equivalent way to describe it using one less spatial dimension. There are even reports that an unexpected effect predicted by the second description has been seen in equipment accidentally optimized for its detection.

So duality is not going away from physics anytime soon, regardless of what the philosophers and theologians have to say about monism versus dualism. Might it be fruitful for the theologians to consider what the concept of duality has to add to their debate?

In a way, duality as the existence of multiple descriptions of a single reality, Jesus Christ – “fully man, yet fully God” — is almost too obvious within Christian history. Indeed, the connection between the Father and the Son, with the Holy Ghost thrown in as a third description for good measure, is another application ripe for exploration.

However, what I’d like to explore in this and future posts is the question of whether and where we can replace the notion of dualism between the physical and spiritual in Restoration theology with the notion of duality, so that we can begin to conceptualize the physical and spiritual realms not as separate arenas of reality, but as two translatable descriptions of a single all-encompassing reality.

If the physical and spiritual are governed by principles of duality, not dualism, then things we do on earth may not just affect what happens in heaven, they may actually be the things that happen in heaven, and vice versa.

For example, in LDS theology, certain significant acts are directly sealed — made spiritually real and binding — through covenants marked by rites, while in CofChrist theology, ordinances are viewed as helps in the physical realm for spiritual purposes. But what if reality is put together to be more than these options? What if every moment of life is inherently sealed into the spiritual realm? If every relationship we enhance here is enhanced there. If every relationship we marginalize here is automatically diminished there as surely as gravity drags us toward the earth?

And what, from the other perspective, if the spiritual is acting as well in an ever present way, to seal the purposes of God into the physical realm?

I really enjoyed the last day of Sunstone, since I was able to attend all day, rather than a session here or there.  Don Bradley gave a presentation titled “Dating Fanny Alger”, a bit of a play on words.  I remember he gave a funny line to the effect of “By all accounts, she was hot!”  Anyway, Bradley tried to pin down when the “affair” happened.  Apparently, Emma discovered Joseph and Fanny late at night in the barn.  According to Bradley, Alger appeared pregnant.  Emma threw a fit, and threw Alger out of the house.  (Apparently Alger had been working as a sort of nanny.)

The discovery of the relationship by Emma probably dates to the summer or fall of 1835.  Bradley recounted several people who have tried to pin down the date, and noted problems with each date.  Some authors have discussed an “embarrassing” incident of polygamy in August 1835.   Joseph left for Pontiac, Michigan possibly to avoid embarrassment for his role.  On Oct 14, 1835, Joseph describes “dealing with household issues”, possibly a reference to evict Fanny.  However, Mark Ashurst-Mcgee suggests this incident refers not to Fanny, but a problem with employees at the printing office.

Fanny left Kirtland in August or Sept 1836, so the incident must have occurred prior to that.  Bradley notes that dissenters condemned Joseph on July 24, and Joseph left for Salem, Massachusetts for a treasure trip the next day on July 25.  Bradley believes Joseph sent Fanny to Missouri at the same time.  William McLellin gave his famous quote about having “no confidence” in church leadership around this time as well.  Fanny soon married non-member Solomon Custer after just a 6 week courtship.  Bradley believes it may have been a cover of legitimacy if Fanny was indeed pregnant.

———–

Following Bridget Jack Meyer’s wonderful presentation on Women priesthood holders in early Christianity earlier in the week, I thought Joshua Gillon’s presentation called “Mormon Women Had the Priesthood in 1843: Examining the Claims” might be interesting.  I was greatly disappointed.  Josh is a PhD candidate of philosophy at Princeton, having completed a BA at BYU.  His talk was nothing more than a rant against the church.  He mis-characterized Michael Quinn’s discussion of women and the priesthood.  He employed tedious grammar exercises to make his points, and finished off with an F-bomb to end his presentation.  It was definitely the worst presentation I have ever heard at Sunstone, though there was another terrible one later in the day.

I wasn’t very excited to go the the panel called “Glenn Beck: Likely Mormon or Unlikely Mormon”, but there wasn’t anything else that sounded interesting at that time.  As I reviewed the list of panelists, I was looking forward to hearing Joanna Brooks of Mormon Matters, and David King Landrith of Mormon Mentality.  (I had met him earlier in the week.) Kathryn Hemingway, Eric Samuelson, and Robert Rees weren’t nearly so interesting as Joanna and David, though they all made good points.  Rees was the moderator and not a fan of Beck.  Landrith and Hemingway were supporters of Beck, while Brooks and Samuelson were not.

I really enjoyed Landrith’s presentation.  Landrith showed that Beck’s rhetoric is very similar to political discourse over the past 200 years.  Early founding fathers often compared each other to monarchists, and spoke about each other more harshly than Beck does of his opponents.  I thought it was an interesting presentation.  Brooks really wasn’t that antagonistic toward Beck.  She basically said we should ignore Beck because his ratings are going down and he knows it.  There is no need to feed into the frenzy–Beck will go away on his own.

Following lunch, I attended a fantastic presentation by Apostle Susan Skoor of the Community of Christ.  She discussed her personal faith journey, showing how she has moved among Fowler’s stages of faith.  Her talk was titled “Faith in the Midst of the Difficulties of Life.”  Baptized at age 8 into the RLDS church, she discussed losing her testimony in her 30s, nearly falling into atheism.  Receiving a blessing, and asked “Do you want to believe?”, as Alma says, she let this desire work in her.  She discussed her new found faith as a stage 5 person, and said she knew she was too selfish to reach stage 6.  As I listened to her story, I marveled at how open she was about her life’s journey.  I don’t think an LDS apostle would admit to losing faith as she did, and I don’t think an LDS apostle would discuss spirituality in such as “secular” way as she discussed Fowlers Faith Stage theory.  I was truly moved.

Clair Barrus discussed “Oliver Cowdery’s Rod of Nature.”  It was a bit too technical for me, but I know others enjoyed it.  Finally, I listened to a panel discuss “Men and the Priesthood: Taking on the Feminine.”  Tom Kimball discussed being an unorthodox Mormon.  His previous bishop did not want to let him baptize or ordain his children.  As the bishop got to know Tom better, he decided to allow it.  Tom has previously discussed his story on Mormon Stories.  Tom’s new bishop has taken a more hard line approach, and Tom’s boys have not progressed in the priesthood.  Tom compared his situation to the idea that women can’t ordain daughters in the LDS church as well.

Robin Linkart, President of the 6th Quorum of Seventy for the Community of Christ spoke next.  She gave an excellent presentation and discussed the new revelation in 1984 allowing women to hold the priesthood.  Many in the RLDS church broke off (they lost nearly 1/4 of their membership.)  She discussed the challenges the RLDS church went through, and her personal journey in the priesthood.  It was excellent.

Holly Welker spoke next.  She gave a rant that the priesthood should be abolished in the LDS church.  During Tom’s, Lisa’s, and the Q&A session, she made faces of disbelief and disagreement.  Honestly I believe a 5th grader would have better behavior than she exhibited.  She was incredibly rude and unprofessional.  Her behavior was embarrassing.

Lisa Butterworth finished up the panel.  She started the blog at FeministMormonHousewives.  Being a feminist and an unorthodox Mormon, she was asked to speak in support of the idea of an all-male priesthood.  She did the best she could, but it was evident that she didn’t fully support the topic she was asked to address.

Overall, I enjoyed most of the sessions.  If you missed my first post on Sunstone, click here.  I’m not sure why I attended so many feminist presentations, but I guess they sounded the most interesting.  So what is your take on women and the priesthood?  Do you see it happening in the LDS church in the next 20-50 years?  Would you support or oppose such a move if the prophet received a revelation allowing women to hold the priesthood?

Apostle Paul Savage of the Church of Christ with the Elijah Message

Sunstone has been going on since Wednesday here in Salt Lake City.  It ends tomorrow, and I thought I would give a few words about the conference.  I have been blogging here at Mormon matters for about a year and a half, and have never met any other bloggers here….until this week!  It has been nice to nice BiV and Stephen Marsh.  I hope to meet others tomorrow.  It was also nice to meet with a few apostles.

I met Paul at the MHA convention in May, and he gave a presentation titled “Why Elijah (or John the Baptist) must come before Christ’s Return”.  I wasn’t able to attend his presentation, but spoke with him for a few minutes.  I learned he is one of 6 apostles for his church, based in Independence, Missouri.  Their church believes apostles are the highest office in the church, and they believe that many people can be prophets.  He noted that the Ephesians 4:11 lists apostles before prophets, so apostles should be the top of the hierarchy.

And he gave some, apostles; and some, prophets; and some, evangelists; and some, pastors and teachers;

Robin Linkart, President of the 6th Quorum of Seventy for the Community of Christ

It was fun talking to him.  I’ve been reading Scattering of the Saints by John Hamer and Newell Bringhurst, and plan to talk more about Paul’s church in the future.  I also enjoyed meeting with Apostle Susan Skoor of the Community of Christ, formerly known as the RLDS church.  (I already have a photo of her on my previous post–click here.)  She is always extremely friendly, and a treat to meet.  She introduced me to Robin Linkart, the President of the 6th Quorum of Seventy.  She lives in Colorado, and is in charge of missionary efforts in the western United States from the Canadian border to Mexico, California to Kansas.  (Sorry the photos are out of focus–I guess my $40 camera is only worth what I paid for it.)

CoC Historian Mark Scherer

Mark Scherer, is the historian for the Community of Christ.  He gave an interesting presentation on the latest revelation to be canonized in the Community of Christ, section 164 of the Doctrine and Covenants.  He said the revelation covers 4 main topics:  (1) open communion, (2) open baptism (don’t have to be rebaptized to join the RLDS church anymore), (3) moral and ethical behavior (allows countries to decide if they want to allow same sex marriage), and (4) the RLDS strives to collaborate more with evangelical Christians.

Bridget Jack Meyers, (aka “Jack”–she blogs at Clobberblog), gave a fascinating presentation called “Evidence for Women’s Priesthood in the Earliest Christianity.  She is a “never Mormon” that earned a BA degree from BYU and “seduced” (her words) a Mormon man there.  She is studying at Trinity Evangelical Divinity School.  She outlined various scriptures showing early women Christian leaders, including a woman by the name of Junia in Romans 16:7.  Jack says Junia was a female apostle, and quoted early Christian theologian John Chrysostum discussing her.  Early Christian theologian Origen discussed a female leader by the name of Phoebe.  Jack gave many other examples, and it certainly deserves a blog post or two to discuss her research.

Yesterday, I was able to attend Stephen Marsh‘s session called “How an Unpleasant Truth Can Be More Inspirational than a Pleasant Fiction.”  I learned that the session was based on his post from October, titled The Stories We Tell.  Briefly, Stephen told the true story about his daughter standing up for a disabled classmate.  Often stories such as this end with a happy ending where everyone realizes that they shouldn’t tease a disabled person, but in Stephen’s story, his daughter becomes ostracized.  Often, we don’t have happy endings, and sometimes it is hard to understand why God doesn’t bless us for doing the right thing.  I also learned that Stephen has 5 daughters, but 3 of them have died, despite his prayers to have them live.  It was an interesting presentation.  Often we learn more from our trials than our triumphs.

I’m excited to attend tomorrow.  If you’re in SLC, I encourage you to attend.  It’s at the Sheraton Hotel on 150 West 500 South.  If you attended, what sessions did you enjoy?  Do you have any questions about the sessions I attended?

The overall article is well worth reading to better understand current political debates, but that wasn’t what called my attention to it as a possible subject for Mormon Matters. Rather, the following paragraph toward the end of the Article startled me:

“Nothing has set the country class apart, defined it, made it conscious of itself, given it whatever coherence it has, so much as the ruling class’s insistence that people other than themselves are intellectually and hence otherwise humanly inferior. Persons who were brought up to believe themselves as worthy as anyone, who manage their own lives to their own satisfaction, naturally resent politicians of both parties who say that the issues of modern life are too complex for any but themselves. Most are insulted by the ruling class’s dismissal of opposition as mere “anger and frustration” — an imputation of stupidity — while others just scoff at the claim that the ruling class’s bureaucratic language demonstrates superior intelligence. A few ask the fundamental question: Since when and by what right does intelligence trump human equality? Moreover, if the politicians are so smart, why have they made life worse?” [Emphases added.]

When I read the bolded sentences above I almost sputtered to myself. “Of course, the intelligent should…” And then I remembered a series of conversations I had with my wife-to-be several decades ago when I was getting my baptism into the government policy environment in the DC area and she was free-lancing as a classical musician in New York City. When I visited her, it seemed her colleagues were always complaining about how little funding there was for the arts. When we were alone together, this conversation often continued as she noted that the government seemed to have plenty of money to pay me well for what I did. (I had enough spare cash at the time to fly back and forth between the two cities; she once, I found out later, had to walk home from seeing me off at the airport.) I had initially defended my privilege with exactly the same “Of course…” sputtering.

Well, true love triumphed, and we long ago moved on to debate other issues in our marriage, but my memory of those conversations stopped the sputtering, and I could start taking the article’s fundamental question seriously.

What trumps “the worth of all persons”, to use a Community of Christ terminology? Is it intelligence, which we now measure in our culture by having accrediting bodies grant us degrees that say we are intelligent? It is a very seductive idea, until I start to examine it closely. Why does a master’s degree in physics make me more intelligent than my wife’s masters degree in classical music makes her? She can play a piano; she gets calls to do that more often than I get called upon to solve third order differential equations (and she can still do it from memory, too). Who’s more useful? How many of me does society actually need?

Other cultures have believed (do believe?) that the basis of rule should be the ability to defeat enemy armies, to belong to a divinely-favored race or gender or ethnicity, or even a dubious claim to be sired by a previous member of the ruling class.  Shouldn’t I be willing to question the basis of my belief in the rule of “intellect”.

I am proud of my degrees and my connections to what Codevilla’s article calls the “ruling class”. My pride shows, no matter how hard I try to become conscious of it and question my cultural assumption. Oh, oh!

Ancient people of many cultures built monuments to their gods. Often, it became a little confusing about whether the monuments were built to the gods, or whether the people who built them believed they were gods. In places like Egypt or Meso-America there eventually was no mistaking that the pyramids were about the rulers.

I look at the great monuments in Washington. Some are monuments to political demi-gods of the past. But some seem clearly monuments to the present rulers themselves. Oh, oh! In fact, the places you see Senators or House Representatives being interviewed on TV are not the most ornate Congressional office buildings. The newest structures have multi-floor glass walled interiors that work poorly with reflections from TV lights, so they go unseen by most people without day-to-day business there. (And why did I bother to tell you that? Oh, oh!)

Other monuments are ideological. If you can’t get your name on a monument (or at least an office building in your local district), get your name on a law. In the sciences, get an effect, or a theory, or an equation named after you. Win a prize. Leave your mark on history.

In the Book of Mormon, the falling of people into the “pride cycle” is frequently thematically associated with the wearing of “costly apparel”. Those on the fringes of the ruling class could not build monuments, but they could signal their membership in that class to everyone by what they wore. If we take Meso-America as a model, they could make themselves into living pyramids of expensive cloth, jade, or shell.

And the more widely those signs spread (physically or metaphorically), the more ideas like “the worth of all persons” became illusionary self-deception. The more people were excluded from the ruling class, the more strongly those still on the fringe found it necessary to justify doing ever-more-questionable things to hang on to the symbols of status. The gulf between the classes widened into violence.

I am very much on the “fringe” of my culture’s ruling class. I can signal my membership in that class through my university affiliations, the reports I’ve co-authored, the conferences and advisory hearings I’ve attended, and the offices of the government officials who’ve passed me written “attaboys”. I can make my pyramid out of paper, and my mark on history can last digitally until the digital formats themselves become obsolete. Oh, oh!

Intellectualism is not a vice. Neither is being a member of any elite. But could membership in a ruling “intellectual” elite be the particular form of the pride cycle to which our modern Western culture can be tempted?

Trouble in Zion Poster

Kenny Ballantine is in the process of producing a documentary called Trouble in Zion.  The documentary discusses the events leading up to the 1838 Mormon War in Missouri.  It highlights the Extermination Order and Haun’s Mill Massacre, as well as events leading up to these terrible events.  Kenny showed a pre-release version of the film at the Mormon History Association in Independence, Missouri in May, and he is also showing the film at Sunstone here in Salt Lake City in August.  I really enjoyed the film, and highly recommend it.  I thought Kenny was pretty even-handed, and had experts discuss reactions by both Mormons and non-Mormons which escalated the violence.

Following the presentation at the MHA Conference, Ballentine explained that he didn’t want his documentary to look like a Ken Burns documentary.  A fan of comic books, Kenny found a comic book illustrator to show scenes depicting the conflict.  It took me a while to get used to the comic book art, but it is starting to grow on me.  Kenny was kind enough to give me an advanced copy, and I would like to offer some of my impressions about the film and the conflict.  I hope he stops by to answer questions too!

I was really impressed with the lineup of experts Kenny interviewed.  The most famous people include Richard Bushman, LDS assistant historian Richard Turley, CoC Apostle Andrew Bolton, Washington State University Religion and Sociology professor Armand Mauss, and BYU Church History professor Alex Baugh, among an impressive list of guests.  He outlined a series of events leading up to the Hauns Mill Massacre and the Extermination Order.  Here are some of the key events:

• July 20, 1833.  Bishop Partridge is told to leave Jackson County immediately.  He refuses and is tarred and feathered.  Three days later, he signs an agreement to leave the county.  Ballentine doesn’t really address the reasons why the Missourians were upset at the Mormons, though he does mention that the first Missourians wanted slavery to be legal, while the Mormons from the North were generally against slavery.  WW Phelps published an article in the Evening and Morning Star that Mormons wanted to welcome people of all color.  This is the reason the Missourians were upset, which is why they attacked Bishop Partridge, and destroyed the Mormon printing press.  (Joseph was living in Kirtland at this time.)
• July 4, 1838.  Rigdon issued another fiery patriotic sermon (following his “Salt Sermon”) stating that the Mormons and Missourians would wage a “war of extermination…one party or the other”.  It seems the subsequent Extermination Order by Governor Boggs wasn’t quite what Rigdon had in mind.
• Aug 6, 1838 – Mormons in Daviess County were prevented from voting.  The Whig candidate said Mormons were only supposed to live in Caldwell County and should be ineligible to vote.  He was concerned that Mormons would vote for the Democratic Candidate, because Mormons were overwhelming Democrats back then.  A big brawl broke out that has often been called a “battle”.  There were exaggerated rumors that Mormons were killed.
• Aug 19, 1838 – Mormons were expelled from DeWitt, in Daviess County.  Following the election, Missourians decided to expel Mormons.
• Oct 18, 1838 – The Mormons decide to retaliate.  Known as the Daviess Expedition, a group of Danites (a secret Mormon militia group) led an effort to expel Missourians from Gallatin, Millport and Grindstone Fork.   Mormons plundered the property and burned the stores and houses to the ground.
• Oct 24, 1838 – The Battle of Crooked River.  Mormons attack and scatter the Missouri Militia.  Many of the Missouri Militia erroneously believe all others are killed.  Only 1 Missourian was killed, but LDS Apostle David Patten (known as “Captain FearNot”), Danite leader Gideon Carter were both killed; 9 other Mormons were wounded.
• Oct 27, 1838 – Governor Lilburn Boggs issues the Extermination Order; “the Mormons must be treated as enemies, and must be exterminated or driven from the State if necessary for the public peace…”
• October 30, 1838 – The Hauns Mill Massacre; 18 Mormons are killed, ranging in age from 10-year old Sardius Smith, to 62 year old Thomas McBride.  I would like to quote directly from the film.

“On October 30, 1838, a large group of armed Missourians marched on the small and peaceful Mormon settlement known as Haun’s Mill, primarily in retribution for the Mormon gutting of Daviess County.

…

Amanda [Barnes Smith]’s two little boys, Sardius and Alma had followed their father into the blacksmith shop.  The men had hoped to use the shop like a fortress in the event of an attack.  Instead, it quickly proved to be a death trap.  Seeing no other alternative, the men made a desperate dash for the woods, nearly all of them being gunned down in the process.  Many of the attackers looted, humiliated, and brutalized the wounded and dying.  The oldest victim was 62 year old Thomas McBride who after surrendering his weapon was hacked to death with a corn knife.  And the youngest was 10 year old Sardius Smith.  An enraged Missourian leveled his gun against the small boy’s head, and after proclaiming that ‘nits become lice” pulled the trigger.

Amanda found her husband and 10 year old son Sardius dead, and her 6 year old son’s hip was “all shot to pieces.”Apostle Andrew Bolton of the Community of Christ said,

“Hauns Mill was a tragedy:  17 boys and men are killed and another one dies later from his wounds.  Hauns Mill was a peaceful settlement of Mormons: 15 miles from the main group in Far West, but therefore isolated and vulnerable in the sectarian war that was erupting around them.  Two days before the massacre they reiterated their commitment to live in peace with their neighbors.  This was a genuine, authentic group that didn’t want any part of the violence and suffered horrible tragedy.  The lesson from Haun’s Mill is the innocent get hurt whenever there is human violence.  It spills over, and there is tragedy.

So how does such a tragedy happen?  Why do neighbors turn so quickly on each other?  In my previous post, I discussed the Rwandan Genocide.  Armand Mauss describes the “Moral Panic” in Ballentine’s film.  He is professor emeritus of Sociology and Religious Studies at Washington State University.  He retired in 1999, but continues to be active on Mormon studies.  He is probably most famous for his book The Angel and the Beehive.  The Moral Panic explains how groups turn so quickly violent.

When a society is gripped by a moral panic, that society is apt to respond as though their facing matters of life and death.  That leads to violence that is considered justifiable in almost any extreme, because of what we see is at stake.  It makes it possible for people who yesterday felt very friendly toward another people, suddenly see those people not only as enemies, but as less than human.”

…

All of the restraints that people normally feel about the way human beings should treat human beings, those restraints gradually melt away, and people who are perfectly nice, decent people, find themselves doing things that they would have never thought that they could do….Under other circumstances a group of Mormons and a group of Missourians might have gone to dinner together and had a good time, but under these circumstances, they faced the Moral Panic.”

It is truly astonishing how quickly neighbor can turn against neighbor.  It is truly a tragedy when cooler heads do not prevail.

As I said before, I really enjoyed Ballentine’s film.  There is much more to the film than I have presented here.  If you get a chance to see this film at Sunstone, I encourage you to see it.  I know Ballentine is still trying to obtain financing to finish the film.  While it is not yet complete, I think it is an excellent film at this point.  If you would like a preview, click here to watch some clips from the official website.  I’ve invited Kenny to stop by, and I am sure he would welcome questions and comments.

I attended the Mormon History Association meetings in Independence, Missouri this past week.  I thought I’d share some pictures.  If you’d like to read more about the conference, here are some links to my posts from Day 1, Day 2, and Day 3.

CoC Independence Temple at Sunset

All trip long, I have been looking forward to attending the Community of Christ Devotional at the Independence Temple.  The meeting began at 8:30 AM, and was a wonderful hour of singing and spoken word.  Professor Alex Baugh of BYU, and Apostle Susan Skoor of the Community of Christ

gave background on many hymns written or revised by WW Phelps.  It was a truly inspiring meeting.  I haven’t enjoyed singing that much since I was in the MTC!

Following the service, I went on a tour of the temple.  We visited the meditation chapel, as saw many beautiful sculptures inside the temple.  Unlike LDS temples, we were able to take photos everywhere except for the museum.  I was lucky enough to be led on a personal tour by Ron Romig, Community of Christ Director of the Kirtland Temple.

Displayed in the museum were actual copies of 1830, 1837, and 1840 copies of the Book of Mormon, along with facsimiles of the printer’s manuscript.  The famous oil painting of Joseph and Emma were also there, along with photos of the previous 6 or 7 prophet/presidents of the Community of Christ.  It was truly fascinating.

Following the tour, I wanted to visit some of the other Restoration churches.  There are quite a few Restoration churches in the vicinity.  When Joseph designed the city of Independence, he had allocated 63 acres for 24 temples to be erected on 3 city blocks.  The original plan called for 12 temples for the Melchizedek Priesthood, and 12 temples for the Aaronic Priesthood.  These temples apparently were supposed to serve a more administrative role than for worship.  As you can imagine, many followers of Joseph Smith, both inside and outside the LDS and RLDS churches have clamored for this land.

A group calling itself the Church of Christ (Temple Lot) actually owns the location for the spot where Joseph Smith said a temple should reside, and they have a church on that location now.  The RLDS owns a portion o fthe temple lot, where the Independence Temple resides, and the LDS church owns a visitor’s center and a stake center on part of the temple lot.

I really would like to attend some of these other Restorationist branches, so it was difficult for me to choose where to go.  I attended part of the service for the Church of Christ (Temple Lot), also known as the Hedrickites.  The group was founded by a man by the name of Granville Hedrick.  There is an article in the Journal of Mormon History outlining many legal battles between the Hedrickites and the RLDS church, with the Hedrickites prevailing.  I attended about 20 minutes of the service.  During the service, a baby was blessed, and I heard references to both the Bible and Book of Mormon.  I was late for the service, but I did not see a sacrament table, so I’m not sure if that was part of the service.

Wanting to visit a few other churches, I attended the Stone Church—the oldest church in Independence. The RLDS church began construction in 1873 and it was dedicated in 1888.  I arrived just in time for the last song and prayer.  The church had a balcony, similar to the Salt Lake Tabernacle.  The congregation stood during the last song, and I was so tall that I had to duck into the aisle to see the organist.  There were old wooden benches there, but they had cushions.

I asked if I could take photos, and they said I could.  There were 3 beautiful stained glass windows: one showing Moroni, Joseph Smith, and

the Golden Plates, another showing Moses, Jesus, and the resurrection, and a third symbolizing the Trinity.  The people were extremely friendly, and it was nice to have one of the members take me on a mini-tour.

Following that service, I noticed another Community of Christ church a short distance away.  I was surprised to learn that they had a Jazz band playing.  I recorded a few minutes of their last song!  (I tried to post it, but the file is too big–I’ll try to condense it somehow.)  They mentioned that the neighborhood was full of drugs and gangs, and they were trying to help citizens in the area avoid these problems.  They invited me back next week for a baby blessing, but I told them I had a plane to catch.

A friend told me that I really needed to attend the Cutlerite Church.  It was founded in 1853 by Alphaeus Cutler, who I believe is mentioned in the D&C.  On my way there, I mistakenly thought this was a Cutlerite church.

I knocked on the door, but nobody answered.

Just a few houses down was the real Cutlerite church.  My friend told me that the Cutlerites are the only group that still maintains an Endowment Ceremony, and it is conducted in the upstairs portion of this church.

Apparently they only have about 10-15 people meet on a weekly basis.  The MHA pre-conference tour flooded them with about 50 interested participants.

Unfortunately, I arrived too late: the doors were locked.  Here are a few photos, and I stuck my camera up to the door to peer into the chapel.

As I looked at my map, I decided to try to find Lilburn W Boggs house.  Unfortunately, I never found it, but I did find another interesting church: the Remnant Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints.  They meet across the street from the Independence Temple in a converted high school (formerly Crisman High School.)  I walked around the building, and discovered a man.  Apparently, they hold luncheons for the needy and homeless.  Their freezer had broken, so he was loading food into his van.  I asked him if I might be able to tour the building, and he reluctantly agreed.  His name is Arlo Stevenson.

I learned that he is not a member of the Remnant Church, but his church has partnered with them to help out the needy.  The Remnant Church is a break-off from the RLDS church.  Arlo is a former member of the RLDS church, but has joined the House of Aaron, and I learned that this church has a branch about 50 miles west of Delta, Utah on the Utah/Nevada border.  Arlo showed me the Remnant Church offices, and then I learned that the Remnant Church has rented a room for the House of Aaron to hold meetings.  I purchased a “Sunday School” manual, and I hope to do a future post on the House of Aaron.

I also ran into some interesting people.  I had a nice chat on Saturday night with Paul Savage, Apostle of the Church of Jesus Christ of the Elijah message.  He is from Independence as well, and has a small congregation.  I had recently purchased Scattering of the Saints by John Hamerand Newell Bringhurst, and he pointed to the cover to his name.  I said, “Wow, I thought these were all dead people.”

“I’m not dead!” he exclaimed.  He was a really interesting person.  We didn’t have much time to chat, but I got his email address and hope to discuss this group further as I learn more.

I also took my picture with 2 apostles from the Community of Christ:  Andrew Bolton and Susan Skoor.  Here is Elder Marlin Jensen, Historian for the LDS church.  I was pleased to meet many authors including John Hamer, Newell Bringhurst, Kathy Daines, Rick Turley (asst LDS Church Historian), and Greg Prince.  It was a real blast—I remarked to some that Independence felt a bit like Mormon Disneyland to me.

The emphasis on the “physicality of God” even in the spiritual realm grew in concert with notions of the Eternal Family and its role and function in achieving and living in Celestial Glory. The elaboration of this theology was natural as the early church leadership began to push, even if at first secretly, new forms of marriage and family life, but it was not an inevitable evolution of the theology of the 1830 Restoration. For example, no one in the Community of Christ expects that the afterlife is about progressing to populate new worlds with our own spiritual offspring, as Heavenly Father populated our own world. In one denomination, it is the Heavenly Father; in the other it is Heavenly Father, with the seldom spoken inference that there may be Heavenly Mother lurking in the theology as well.

Today, because of this history, Mormons have a well-integrated belief system about how and why the Divine interacts with the physical universe that, nevertheless, is very different from its “prairie cousins”, let alone in comparison to more distantly related Christian denominations. As a prairie cousin with an abiding interest in the theological role of the physical, this fascinates me. LDS theology raises questions about the limits of acceptable definitions of “children of God”, and what God might do to see His children come out on top that would never occur to me in CofChrist theology. These are the kinds of questions I’d like to ask openly in this post.

Let’s look at extreme cases first, and then try to focus in on cases closer to home.

We know that the universe is a violent place. Creation is violent itself, and often involves destruction on scales we can barely comprehend. My favorite example is the “Death Star Galaxy”. We have in that example a small galaxy – a mere few billion stars is small – that has wandered into a radiation jet being emitted by a larger galaxy. The jet is obliterating thousands of solar systems, and any life there, as we watch by telescope.

What does that tell us? Are planets with life so rare that God can let planets be destroyed wholesale without moral consequences? Or perhaps there are not moral consequences because the life there is not human and thus has no spirits? Either way, would God be able to “write off” a great deal of reality under LDS theology because His “children” weren’t involved? He just has to watch over those special few worlds ideal for humanity. The worlds with just the right size, at just the right distance from stars of the proper temperature and age, with the proper orbital stability and a big brother planet like Jupiter nearby to protect against too frequent impacts from comets. The list of requirements is lengthy, but with infinite space to play around in, they’re bound to pop up here and there even if God doesn’t directly favor them with a helping hand.

Or perhaps God has to actively “weed out” competition for his favored species. You could interpret the evidence that way, too. Consider the destruction of the dinosaurian ecosystems 65 million years ago, or the even more catastrophic Permian extinction scores of millions of years still earlier. Our existence and physical forms today depend in complex, but critical, ways on details of those events. For example, the locations within their general orbits of all the inner planets of our solar system, including the earth, are known to be chaotic on only the order of 5 million years. Start out an orbital simulation with the earth relocated by as little as a millimeter, and in 5 million years, the earth could be on the other side of the sun. A “miracle” performed a hundred million years ago that protects humanity from destruction by asteroid strike or clears the world of big reptilians so mammals (and man) can take over could be too small to notice. Far easier than Moses calling on God to make the sun stand still during battle or parting the Red Sea.

What LDS theology would define to be human gets tougher to distinguish as we get closer to humanity. How close? Well, within the last few weeks, evidence has been published on the results of sequencing Neanderthal DNA. The evidence, first reported in Science, but more accessible here at Science News, shows that modern humans whose lines remained in Africa do not share Neandertal DNA. However, all of the rest of us get one to four percent of our genes from interbreeding with Neandertals that occurred after leaving Africa 45,000 or so years ago. We don’t carry Neandertal body types, but we do seem to carry something important from that population in our internal chemistry and in our brains. Eternal Family reunions might be more surprising than our expectations.

So, did the Neandertals die out because our body type was a little more divine than theirs? Or were the ones who bred with Homo sapiens the more righteous ones? Or do we extend the moral capability and need for redemption to an extinct species at all? Do we instead decide that we are all descended from ancestors who practiced bestiality? Were physical specimens of humans who had no Spirits walking around contemporaneously with Adam?

Look closer now as we get to Biblical or Jaredite times. Now we picture God as acting in detail to favor one nation over another, one individual over another. We try to point to specific reasons for that favoritism in terms of justice, mercy, or obedience in this life or in preexistence, and we can often convince ourselves that such reasons exist. I could argue a very good case, for example, that slaughter of entire Canaanite cities down to the last child might actually produce fewer casualties in the long run.

But the more uncomfortable I become unless I make the case in such terms, the more I realize that tying God’s plan of salvation to things other than intelligence, or justice, or mercy, or obedience – properties that have little to do with the shape or functions of my body – raises doubts. Wouldn’t exalted beings give up such narrow notions of the boundaries of humanity as part of the progression toward exaltation itself?

So I look at the criteria with which we define relationships with God through their physical manifestations – species, race, gender, diet, clothes – and I wonder. Is God really concerned about those things when He decides to claim His children. Or are we just engaging in a very destructive and provincial form of sibling rivalry?

In my Father’s house are many mansions. Maybe some reefs and rookeries, too. Maybe some hives for natural clones or collective minds.

And if that’s true, then certainly there are places for Homo sapiens with same-sex attraction, or childless couples, or singles – every form of Eternal Family we might imagine from the occurrence of those forms here on earth.

Perhaps the time has come in the church to recognize that some members want to openly espouse a non historical view of the Book of Mormon?

My daughter Bethany and her friend Clare have recently gone to the Community of Christ Church. They enjoyed it and said the members were very open and friendly but the church at least here in the UK didn’t seem anything like our Brighamite version of the church.

I understand that many of their high ranking members don’t view the book of Mormon as historical. Some members feel it’s historical; some feel it’s inspired, and some would like to see it jettisoned from the canon of scripture.

I thought it was quite courageous of their leaders to consult with historians and look at the facts as they see them and to seek and follow what they felt was God’s will, doing all of this by common consent with the members in their church.

One of their members Wayne Ham did a summary report (below) called Problems in Interpreting the Book of Mormon as History! But before you read his report please take the following quiz:

[poll id="171"]

[poll id="172"]

[poll id="173"]

[poll id="174"]

[poll id="175"]

Please read if you can all of Wayne Ham’s Problems in Interpreting the Book of Mormon as History from the Community of  Christ Web Page.  Below are some selections from Ham’s paper which I highly recommend you read if you have the time:

The origin and destiny of the [so-called] “Red Man” were among the chief topics for speculation and discussion on the early nineteenth century American frontier. The presence of many Indian burial mounds in the Great Lakes region was a constant source of curiosity for the settlers in that region. In 1823 Ethan Smith, a Vermont pastor, published a book entitled View of the Hebrews: or the Ten Tribes of Israel in America.

Those who received the Book of Mormon from the hands of eager missionaries were urged not only to assent to the narrative as a historical account of the Indians’ ancestory, but also to accept the book as evidence that God had broken the silence of centuries to restore his church to the earth by means of a young prophet. Many of the early Latter Day Saint believers took an all-or-nothing approach.  If the Book of Mormon was true, the religion expounded by its author and proprietor was true also. If the book should ever prove to be false, all validity for the restoration movement would necessarily have to be disclaimed.

The book immediately attained a canonical status in the minds of the Latter Day Saints that made literal acceptance of it as the revelation of God to the ancient Americans a matter of faith. As far as church members were concerned, the book was impervious to any kind of critical investigation and judgment.

As modern historical and textual scholarship in the realm of biblical studies became increasing appreciated and influential at the grassroots level in the late nineteenth and early twentieth centuries, and thus known to some extent to Latter Day Saints, a defensive reaction set in among some church members, resulting in some stiff resistance to allowing the tools of this scholarship to be applied to the church’s understandings of the Book of Mormon. Thus Book of Mormon studies in the past have been characterized by polemics, apologetics, and amateur archaeological surveys whenever the concern has moved beyond merely exploring the intricate details of the very complex narrative of migrations, wars, and religious revivals among the Book of Mormon peoples.

Because the temper of our times is such that no movement nor institution nor book can forever remain impervious to the searchlight of scholarly inspection, out times demand that all the rudiments of religious faith be subjected to the scrutiny of reason and empirical research.

As the Book of Mormon is examined without any intention solely to amass data to support preconceived notions about it, certain problems concerning traditional understanding of the books stand out. These problems include:

1. The story of its coming forth. The actual events culminating in the publication of the book are, as of now, quite irrecoverable in that it is impossible to distill a unified account from all the primary and secondary reports.

2. Identifying the book’s narrative with a particular time and space. Extravagant claims about ancient American archaeology supporting the Book of Mormon have been made. Toltec, Mayan and even Aztec ruins, all of a comparatively late period, have been unfortunately identified with Book of Mormon peoples.

3, The book’s propensity for reflecting in detail the religious concerns of the American frontier. Alexander Campbell in 1831 pointed out that every major theological question of the frontier was covered in the Book of Mormon, including infant baptism, ordination and ministerial authority, the trinity, regeneration, the fall of man, the atonement, transubstantiation, fasting, penance, church government, religious experience, the general resurrection, eternal punishment, and even the burning question of Freemasonry, republican government and the rights of man.

4. The Christological perspective of the book. To some students of theology, it would appear that there is a marked incongruity between the Christ Event of the New Testament and the Christ Event of the Book of Mormon.

5. The book’s ethical implications, when viewed as universally binding upon all men. Some Latter Day Saints, in talking of the Book of Mormon as the “fullness of the gospel” (D. & C. 17:2), believe that the book reveals the will of God more perfectly than any other resource we possess. Moreover they would assert that the transmission process involved in preserving and bringing forth the book would bypass many of the scribal errors to which the Bible was admittedly vulnerable.

6. The use of biblical scripture and ideas as sources. Several sizeable sections of the King James Version of the Bible are found in the Book of Mormon, including twenty-one chapters of Isaiah, the Sermon on the Mount, the Ten Commandments, Malachi 3 and 4, I Corinthians 12:1-11 and Acts 3:22-26. In addition to such full-fledged quotations, the Book of Mormon is replete with short biblical expressions. John Hyde counted 298 biblical snatches from the New Testament alone in the first 428 pages of the first edition of the Book of Mormon.

8. The matter of Book of Mormon anachronisms. Those who approach the Book of Mormon with the view of proving it to be essentially what it seems to claim to be–a record of the history of ancient Americans who lived between 2200 BC and AD 400–immediately find themselves having to deal with the problem of anachronisms.

9. The changes in the Book of Mormon. While the book itself confesses the possibility of errors, many claims concerning the verbal accuracy of the book have long been made by Book of Mormon adherents. Joseph Smith himself at one time state that “the Book of Mormon was the most correct of any book on earth.” Modern Microfilm Company of Salt Lake City has recently published a work documenting 3,913 changes in the Book of Mormon since its first printing.

Conclusions. None of the above problems areas “disprove” the Book of Mormon. They do, however, raise some questions about our traditional understandings concerning the book. Perhaps for some church members answers to the questions raised in this article would seem to be readily available. For others, however, quick and easy answers will not solve the dilemma. Perhaps the time has come in the church to recognize that some members want to openly espouse a non-literal view of the Book of Mormon, treating it as a non-historical treatise in much the same manner as modern critics view the books of Jonah, Ruth, Job, and Daniel in the Old Testament. Freed from some of the traditional hang-ups involved with having to accept unquestioningly the historicity of the Book of Mormon, these members could then read the book as a product of the Restoration movement in the nineteenth century, perhaps thus “enjoying” this fascinating piece of literature for the very first time.

“Delegation Takes No Action on Human Sexuality Issues: Church Will Continue Dialogue.”

Headline  by John Hamer on BCC on Thursday, April 15, 2010:

“Gay Rights Revelation Added to The Community of Christ D&C”

———-

The two headlines above generally cover the spectrum of opinion about what happened at the Community of Christ World Conference as it completed the process of canonization of a new Section 164 for its D&C. The spectrum of opinions about whether what happened was a good thing or bad thing, of course, runs even more broadly. Indeed, I’m not at all certain that we’ll even be able to see how intense the various “colors” of that spectrum will prove until information about the conference filters down to the bulk of the North American church that maintains no real connection to the World Church in the “Blogitorium”. As in many churches on the Christian left in North America, that membership tends to be somewhat more traditionalist than its leadership.

Nevertheless, I’ll give my view as someone from one part of the peanut gallery, focusing on what was in each portion of Section 164 and the effects of associated legislation passed to begin implementation. A future post will provide a similar analysis on legislation considered by the Conference not specifically addressed by Section 164 and suggest something about the overall direction of the Community of Christ in the future.

SECTION 164, PARAGRAPHS 1-4

President Veazey describes the experiences of meditation, particularly on portions of Galatians 3:27-29, that led him to offer the Section. After commending the church for similarly seeking to discern the Spirit in a structured process that has been going on for well over a year, he makes explicit an understanding of the church and its sacraments which has been implicit in CofChrist theology for a number of years.

“…Instruction given previously about baptism was proper to ensure the rise and cohesiveness of the church during its early development and in following years. However, as a growing number have come to understand, the redemptive action of God in Christ—while uniquely and authoritatively expressed through the church—is not confined solely to the church. God’s grace, revealed in Jesus Christ, freely moves throughout creation, often beyond human perception, to achieve divine purposes in people’s lives.”

The Community of Christ is to see itself as “one true church”, not as the “one and only true church”. How serious is this theological intent was earlier signaled by something I haven’t seen commentators note elsewhere. The first sessions of Conference always feature certain speeches of welcome. One is usually a non-CofChrist speaker. This speaker is often a local Congressman or a Missouri Senator. The speech is strictly non-political even then, but the identity is interesting because trends over time seem to show the direction of the church leadership’s interest.

This year that slot went to the Rev. Dr. Michael Kinnamon, General Secretary of the National Council of Churches. Kinnamon unabashedly spoke of the Community of Christ having unique gifts that should be seen as adding to bodies such as the NCC, rather than as a body going its own way. Ironically, contacts between the RLDS and the NCC were among the suspicions cited by fundamentalist opponents of the church circa 1970 as evidence of apostasy. Thus, such a speech 40 years ago might itself have been too controversial to occur.

Section 164 then lays out specific instruction (that will be followed quickly by formal administrative policy guidance to become effective by September 1, 2011). These policies will result in acceptance into membership into the Community of Christ upon confirmation by CofChrist priesthood – without requiring rebaptism if the original baptism: a) involved water;  b) was performed by an ordained Christian minister;  and c) as a personal expression of faith in Christ. In particular, we will not require someone to present proof of their baptism or the baptizing minister’s credentials, since that would be impossible in many places throughout the world. This clearly expands the notion of true priesthood authority beyond the boundaries of those called through the priesthood line passed to Joseph Smith.

The phrase “using water” also allows for baptisms done by immersion, pouring, or sprinkling, while upholding the church’s own standard practice of baptism by immersion at the age of accountability. There is also some additional specific guidance regarding the substance of the prayer of confirmation (Baptism of the Spirit) that is now the means by which one moves from being part of the Body of Christ into membership within the denomination. And preparation for confirmation will now be a formal requirement for the ordinance to occur.

Paragraph 3 contains a call for all members to serious consider and live the meaning of their baptismal covenants (water and Spirit). Paragraph 4 ties this call to consideration of the role the sacrament of the Lord’s Supper should play in renewing, witnessing, and amplifying our covenant. (Portions of the preamble specifically warn us to NOT make the meaning of the covenants atrophy even as we broaden the procedures, because of the concern that in some places this has happened with open communion).

This portion of the Section makes the Community of Christ look very Protestant – if you can call becoming more Protestant through modern revelation a Protestant concept in the first place.

SECTION 164, PARAGRAPHS 5-7

These are the paragraphs whose approval generated the widely divergent headlines above. Their actual content is to call attention to “serious questions about moral behavior and relationships” – but to prioritize those questions not simply as they are listed within the dominant culture of the denomination.

“These issues are complex and difficult to understand outside their particular settings because of strikingly different cultural histories, customs, and understandings of scripture. For example, the issues include female submission, female genital mutilation, child brides, forced marriages, and sexual permissiveness. They include cleansing and exploitation of widows, harsh conflicts over same-gender attraction and relationships, and varying legal, religious, and social definitions of marriage, to name just a few.”

More importantly, the Section calls us to see the solutions for these moral dilemmas as arising from an understanding of Christianity as a community that transcends definitions by economic status, social class, sex, gender, or ethnicity. They simply are no longer primary. Relationships are to be rooted in the principles of Christ-like love, mutual respect, responsibility, justice, covenant, and faithfulness, against which there is no law.

Section 164 then extrapolates that these principles require that the church move the resolution of moral issues to the church in the cultures most affected by them rather than let the dominant North American church decide for the rest of the world. Field Apostles, under the guidance of the Presidency, are authorized to call and set the agenda for field, national, or (non-geographical) cultural groups to deal with issues such as those listed above as they feel directed.

Uncertainty about the nature and timing of these conferences is generating the widely divergent headlines about gay rights. First, everyone in the Community of Christ seems to understand that the leadership feels that it must not expose our leaders and members in cultures where discussion of gay issues is taboo. If so, they can hardly move toward expanded gay rights in the United States unless they can find a way to maintain what the government would call “plausible deniability”.

Second, there is a large body of conservative members in the US church (and non-members in society) whose reaction must be anticipated and allowed for. The LDS experience with Prop 8 shows what happens when the church in the US takes any position on controversial issues in the political arena. Many feel the church has moved too hesitantly and will continue to do so; others are likely to feel the church is moving in the wrong direction entirely.

Finally, there are logistical questions. It seems unlikely that the US church has the resources to assemble a national conference on gay rights issues before the spring of 2012 at the earliest. It will take until September, 2011, simply to implement the new conditions for membership.

The greatest sign of movement toward gay rights comes from something in administrative minutia. It is normal for the church to realign Apostolic Fields following a World Conference (our Apostles retire, so there are usually changes in the Twelve). This time a gerrymandered field has been carved out for Apostle Susan Skoor that stretches from Southern Australia to Eastern Canada – and just happens to cover all of the non-US jurisdictions that proposed World Conference legislation expanding full priesthood and sacramental rites for gays. The extension of rights in that Field or in nations within that Field might be granted while maintaining sufficient distance from the World Church (and prying media) to protect the church in cultures hostile to gay rights.

Expansion to the US is much more difficult to do while maintaining any credibility to foreign governments and religious bodies that “this is just local jurisdictions acting on their own.”

Perhaps more significantly in the long run than the particular moral issues – at least from the perspective of this Washington spectator – is the change these paragraphs make in the legislative rights of mission centers to set the agenda for the church. The Presidency immediately ruled 21 legislative proposals that had been painstakingly brought to the conference as out of order because they reflect National or Regional concerns. These rulings were entirely appropriate under Section 164 guidance.

However, the Conference later passed implementing legislation for the field and national conferences that make them “special conferences”. Such conferences operate under different parliamentary rules than World Conference. In particular,  Mission Centers lack the right to place items on the agenda of special conferences; that agenda is set only by the Apostle who calls the conference with the approval of the Presidency. In short, this revelation makes the Community of Christ less democratic and more theocratic than it was a year ago.

SECTION 164, PARAGRAPH 8

Paragraph 8, by contrast, shows the flexibility and speed with which the Community of Christ can move on organizational issues when it wishes to do so. The Twelve and the Presidents of the Seven Quorums of Seventy have been meeting for several years in response to the immediately previous revelation (Section 163) to consider organizational changes to increase evangelistic effectiveness. Paragraph 8 is taken as authorization to make these changes.

Within 24 hours of Section 164 approval, the number of Quorums of Seventy was increased from seven to ten, the additional Quorum Presidents were named, and they were approved by the Conference and set apart to that calling. Jack Bauer couldn’t have moved faster. Clearly, the outcome of these discussions among the leading quorums was well prepared in advance, while they are still feeling their way around the notion of how and when national conferences will function.

Reorganization of the Twelve, while not fundamental, essentially separates the world into 10 Fields for the moment, each led by an Apostle, with the remaining two Apostles focusing on Headquarters-oriented tasks. For the first time, a single Quorum of Seventy will be aligned with the geographic or other missionary focus of a Field Apostle.

SECTION 164, PARAGRAPH 9

The final paragraph of the document is a benediction of sorts, and a challenge that the rise of Zion is no farther away than the willingness of all of us – all the “beloved children of the Restoration” – to overcome our insecurities and embrace a Christ-like life.

“The mission of Jesus Christ is what matters most to the journet ahead.”

The Our Voices, Our Visions Mormon Women’s Literary Tour is hitting the road. It’s the first ever literary tour by and for Mormon women, featuring eighteen Mormon women writers– younger and older, new and prize-winning, unorthodox and orthodox—giving readings at five universities from Claremont University to the University of Utah.

And it all began yesterday when Susan Scott, a fifth-generation RLDS / Community of Christ woman writer, arrived at the San Diego airport from her home in Ontario, Canada.

“I have a confession to make,” I told Susan as she climbed into my car. “I’ve never really talked with an RLDS woman before.”

“And I’ve never really talked with an LDS woman before either. Isn’t it amazing?”

Throughout an afternoon walking with my daughters on the shores of La Jolla—Susan is, after all, from Canada; she needs to see some beach—we trade questions about the larger Mormon tradition we share.

“For us, Independence, Missouri is the center of everything,” she tells me.

“That’s kind of true for us too, actually,” I tell her. “I grew up expecting to go back to Missouri some day. Did you grow up with the Second Coming?”

“Yes.”

“Is it like our Second Coming? With the end times, then Christ’s return, then the millennium, then Satan being loosed again, before the final judgment?”

“Yes.”

Susan tells me that when she was 18, she eloped with the cute musician from RLDS church camp to an RLDS commune in North Carolina. It was called Zion’s Depot.

“You had RLDS communes?” I ask, jealous.

“It was the 1970s. And I was very dedicated. Wasn’t that what we were supposed to be doing? Giving away all our worldly possessions and living the faith?”

It’s dinnertime now. The sun is setting behind my flowering nectarine tree, and my daughters are drawing with colored chalk on our patio.

“You have blessed oil, do you?” she asks.

“Yes, we call it consecrated oil.”

“At the commune, one of the big debates was using blessed oil to heal the cattle.”

“We definitely have blessing cattle stories!”

Tonight, joined by poet Elisa Pulido and fiction writer Lisa Van Orman Hadley, we’ll start with a reading at Claremont Graduate University hosted by Claudia Bushman. Tomorrow, we’ll drive across the desert to ASU.

We’re hitting the road, hoping to learn more about the tradition we call home, and looking forward to meeting you along the way.

For full details on where to see the Our Voices, Our Visions Tour this week, visit mormonwomenwriters.blogspot.com

All of its missionaries are reported to be safe, and the church is using nine meeting houses to provide shelter for members and an even larger number of non-members. There have been casualties among the membership, however.

The immediate need in Haiti is, of course, for emergency supplies and medicines, which the church is attempting to help provide. The news releases also indicate that the church will gradually move to assistance for reconstruction, expecting to stay involved with the effort for up to a year or more.

The second largest denomination of the Restoration, the Community of Christ, had embedded their ministry more deeply in the Haitian education system as a long term strategy for Christian ministry in that part of the world. CofChrist has increasingly tended over the last half-century to emphasize Zion-building, as seen through focusing on peace and justice issues in the present, over discussions of personal salvation. As a result, the work of the CofChrist in Haiti has been hard hit by the earthquake.

This approach has not been limited to the Community of Christ, and so a number of humanitarian ministries are looking beyond the immediate crisis and wondering about long term prospects for the country. As a front page Washington Post story by William Booth and Scott Wilson put it on January 23:

Schools’ Collapse Leaves Haiti’s Future in Rubble

The earthquake has crushed what many deem the only path to a better life in the impoverished country.

Of the many things taken from this city [Port-au-Prince] by the earthquake, few are as threatening to Haiti’s future as the near destruction of a school system viewed across society here as the only path to a better life.

Education is as precious as water in Haiti. The ruined capital was filled with parochial and secular schools built on the strict French model, many affordable even to the poorest parents, who struggled to pay a few dollars a week in tuition…

Now there are no schools. Education officials here estimate that the quake erased thousands of campuses, and at least 75% of those in the capital lie in ruins… Nearly every block has one, with many meeting in multiple sessions into the evening. …the debris-filled sites where they once stood are the places that smell the strongest of death. They were filled with children.

Information from the CofChrist is probably typical for other religious ministries in Haiti. The denomination primarily worked through a charity, Outreach International , created by church members several decades ago that had been able to build and maintain — even through years of political instability in the country — a network of ninety schools enrolling 9000 students. (That number is not impressive until you realize that the Community of Christ has only about 140,000 known, baptized members in the entire US and Canada.)

On January 19, Outreach International reported, almost defiantly:

Outreach International’s Haiti school children, staff and facilities are so severely impacted with loss of life and destroyed buildings that the organization cannot come close to accounting for extent of loss.

Matthew Naylor, Outreach International President, received an email today from Michel Rosier, Outreach International schools network director stating, “It is difficult and even painful to give you a detailed report on the Haitian situation. I thank you so much for your extreme concern for the Haitian people.”

With a teacher staff of 300+, Rosier and another staff member, Augustin Derat, executive director for the schools programs, are the only two staff accounted for. Both of them, along with their families, are living on the streets.

Early reports indicate that 7 of 12 schools which have been inspected are destroyed and the rest seriously damaged. There are at least 20 schools in the affected area. Rescue efforts at one school have saved 7 students from the rubble. Rosier states, nothing can be done for the others trapped.

With the Outreach International schools network so badly damaged, initial support for relief efforts has been made through Doctors Without Borders (MSF) located in Port-au-Prince, who will supply the type of immediate relief requested by our staff members on the ground.

Naylor promises, Outreach International will continue to invest in the long-term development in Haiti. We pledge to remain with the surviving children, families, and staff in order to put their lives back together. We will stay for as long as it takes. This is where the bulk of our resources will go.

I am sure that reader’s here have already made initial decisions about how much and in what ways they wish to help Haiti. However, I’d like to pose some more strategic questions that will still be relevant as the emergency evolves further:

How should our churches (and our peoples) give relative priority to our notions of the evangelistic and Zion-building enterprises?

Does the elevation of “care of the poor and needy” within the LDS “purposes” change their personal response in how they give time and money? Does the setback to the school programs in Haiti change how Community of Christ members allocate their giving?

How should the churches allocate the proportion of their support among their own people and ministries and among the general population affected by the crisis?

Is the best strategy for each church to focus massive resources on emergencies as they happen, wherever they happen (knowing that they will need to move on to some other emergency after a year or so, unfortunately)? Or is it better to build long term programs that, also unfortunately, may have to be built again and again?

How do the churches best coordinate with other religious and humanitarian agencies in ways that are faithful to the two denominations’ separate understandings of the meaning of the Restoration?

How do we integrate our sense of the Spirit calling us personally with the task of our churches and other ministries?

CofChrist Prophet: Baptism in Christ Transcends Culture

“5 It is imperative to understand that when you are truly baptized into Christ you become part of a new creation. By taking on the life and mind of Christ, you increasingly view yourselves and others from a changed perspective. Former ways of defining people by economic status, social class, sex, gender, or ethnicity no longer are primary. Through the gospel of Christ a new community of tolerance, reconciliation, unity in diversity, and love is being born as a visible sign of the coming reign of God.”

With these words, the Prophet/President of the Community of Christ delivered to the church for its consideration as divine counsel on January 17 a document that changes the relationship between its sacraments and its people. Copies of the documents are already posted at http://www.CofChrist.org.

Most stunning to readers on the bloggernacle, the document places resolution of pressing issues of marriage, sexual identity and roles, among others, into the hands of field or national jurisdictions to resolve within the context of their own cultures and secular laws. This appears to mean that the Community of Christ will no longer have a world-wide policy toward these cultural institutions, although what local policies will come into place is left undefined. Thus, jurisdictions in which gay marriage is permitted by the culture may be able to move forward with this practice as a sacrament of the church as well, and the church may continue to forbid discussion of the issue in nations where such discussion is taboo.

In addition, persons baptized by water within other denominations who are led by the Spirit to the Community of Christ are now to be accepted without rebaptism into membership upon confirmation following a period of study.

The headlines will probably not be the most important part of the document in the long run. Take a look at it and see what you think.

As some of you may know, the Community of Christ (formerly known as RLDS), canonizes revelations in their edition of the Doctrine and Covenants much more frequently than the LDS church does.  There is an upcoming World Conference (similar to General Conference) coming up in April, where they will discuss canonizing a new revelation.  I asked FireTag to write a series of guest posts discussing this process, and he has graciously agreed to do so.  Without further ado, here is his tourist guide to canonizing modern revelation:

Living prophets who add to the canon of scripture are a distinctive marker of the Mormon movement. In the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, the most recent such formal canonization was Official Declaration 2, added in 1978. The Proclamation on the Family could conceivably be submitted “for common consent” at some future date, the last step in its addition to the Doctrine and Covenants.

The next largest Restoration Movement body, Community of Christ, has added to its version of the Doctrine and Covenants far more frequently. Eleven new D&C Sections (153-163 in CofChrist numbering) have been added since 1978 under three prophet/presidents, and a proposed Section 164 is expected to be announced to the church by webcast on January 17, 2010 for consideration at the CofChrist’s April 2010 World Conference. Since World Conferences during the period have been held only seventeen times (counting 2010), adoption of new scripture is almost a “normal” World Conference activity.

The document is expected to deal primarily with two topics: (1) conditions of membership, as applied to converts from other Christian faiths; and, (2) with the rights to participate in and administer sacraments and ordinances of the church, including ordination and marriage, for those in non-heterosexual monogamous relationships where civil law allows.

Because the latter issues involved in the 2010 document will be very recognizable points of discussion in the bloggernacle, this post is offered as background for those Mormons who want to watch the process unfold. A later post nearer the time of the conference will focus more on events during the conference itself.

The CofChrist holds week-long Conferences that are far more legislation-oriented than are LDS conferences. Most of The Apostles or First Presidency are given no time to address the conference, for example, since only Sunday mornings and evenings are set aside for worship. Mornings and afternoons are devoted to consideration of legislation, whether in full conference, or in various quorums, committees, or delegate caucuses. Consideration of a revelation takes priority over all other matters.

In recent years, our Prophets have become increasingly uncomfortable with “springing” revelations on the people at the beginning of Conference for, literally, overnight consideration and adoption as had been the practice in earlier decades. It now seems to be standard practice for the Presidency to initiate a formal “discernment process” shortly after a Conference to call the church to participate in prayerfully considering the issues which will be the subject of action (and prospective revelation) at the following Conference 3 years later. Often, these are the very same issues which were referred back to the First Presidency for further study or direction (often through a standing or special committee that the Presidency creates) by the previous Conference. Of course, the Apostles, the Presiding Bishopric (chief financial officers, not pastors, in the CofChrist), the Presidencies of the various quorums, and others are closely involved in these considerations behind the scenes.

As a result of these practices, the general membership of the church has acquired some expanded opportunities to influence the theological and policy issues that the leading quorums of the church will seek to address during the periods between conferences. This power is not as explicit as in earlier times when the Prophet was directed to “inquire of the Lord”, and the Prophet has his own impresses regardless of what the Conference says, but there is definitely a notion that “common consent” is involved both in framing which questions the Prophet asks and in accepting the answers the Prophet receives as inspired.

Both of the major expected topics of proposed Section 164 are the result of pressures by significant portions of the membership to address issues of personal importance to them. The CofChrist draws a much smaller proportion of its active membership from North America and Europe than does the LDS church. In fact, conventional wisdom in the CofChrist holds that North American membership will soon be a minority in the church, if it is not already. As a result, views of the membership in places like Africa, India, and Haiti have major and growing influence on the church’s agenda.

These nations are less individualistic than Americans. They often have experienced great tension between teachings of Christianity and other great world religions accepted by their families and friends, and they are less likely to see differences among Christian denominations that loom large in American discussions as important. They often participate in the CofChrist while knowing or caring little about such things as the Book of Mormon or the early history of the Restoration movement. As a result, many of them deeply question the need for rebaptism, which seems to imply a rejection of the sacrifices they made to become Christian in the first place, as well as of the Christian families and communities around them.

The second largest demographic bloc in the church consists of relatively aged, relatively conservative members still very committed to the uniqueness of the Restoration and uncomfortable with any suggestion that their sacrifices would have been just as meaningful in another denomination.

Consequently, following the 2007 Conference, the First Presidency was left with an “action item” to address the issue of the “conditions of membership”, and has been directing a formal discernment process intended to lead to the January 17 guidance to the church. This issue is considered sufficiently divisive that the leading quorums had clearly indicated a desire not to deal with other divisive matters until the church has proven it can work through the issue. The schism that resulted in the church in the 1980’s over extension of priesthood to women has clearly instilled caution in the church leadership.

However, there is another divisive issue, the roles which gays living in monogamous relationships are to have in the church, which a third important demographic bloc, progressives in the Western nations, has forced onto the agenda despite the wishes of the leadership to defer consideration. Field jurisdictions which are roughly equivalent to LDS stakes (though they sometimes extend over several countries) have rights to pass legislation at their own conferences which then come to the floor of the World Conference for action. Ten such “mission centers” in the United States, Canada, and Australia passed overlapping resolutions which ask the church to change policies in various ways toward allowing gays to marry where civil authority permits, allowing our priesthood to perform such marriages as sacraments of the church, and/or to remove such relationships as barriers to holding priesthood. In response, four mission centers, in the southern US, Central America, and Africa passed proposed legislation that would reaffirm (either permanently or until further study) current policy. All proposed legislation is available for  reading here.

The significance of bringing these resolutions up at all should be understood. Their existence eclipses the Leading Quorums’ agenda for 2010 in a way that has not happened in perhaps 80 years, when the quorums were divided among themselves on the direction of the church.

The Presidency has been publicly studying these gay-rights issues without resolution since 1992. While Americans tend to view the issue through the lens of domestic politics, there is a major international church component in the CofChrist consideration. It took special deliberations among the 12 and Presidency to even publicly announce that the specific legislative proposals for 2010 existed, because of fears that members in some third world nations would be subject to physical persecution because discussion of homosexuality was culturally taboo.

It is these potentially divisive issues which form the background for proposed Section 164. The proposed revelatory document should be published on the Community of Christ website within 24 hours of President Veazey’s address to the church on January 17, and a link will be added to the comments of this post as soon as the document appears.

Do you have any comments or questions?

Prophet/President, Community of Christ

There are those (especially among Evangelicals) who believe that the Bible is inerrant and literal.  For example a scriptural literalist will claim that Noah’s flood covered the entire earth.  A non-literalist may say that the flood was merely a large localized flood.

Pres. Stephen Veazey is the prophet for the Community of Christ, and he gave a sermon on scriptural literalism.  The videos can be found on the CoC website, and this quote comes from Chapter 4.  Let me quote from Pres. Veazey directly:

Scripture is authoritative, not because it is perfect, or inerrant in every literal detail, but because it reliably keeps us grounded in God’s revelation.  And here is the heart of our challenge:  over the last several centuries, a doctrine of scripture emerged in Christianity that insists that all scripture, every single word, was directly dictated by God, and is inerrant in every detail.  This belief emerged as a response to the questioning of religious authority from those who held that human reason alone was the most reliable pathway to truth.  So a doctrine of scripture emerged that enshrined the literal words of scripture as inerrant and as the sole authority on all matters.

This view still dominates much of global Christianity today.  It also strongly influences more than a few members of the Community of Christ who have adopted it from the larger religious culture.  However, that doctrine, that view of scripture is not how scripture was understood in Christianity since its birth.  It’s not how Jesus Christ used and viewed scripture.  And it is not how the community of Christ officially views scripture today.

The church affirms that scripture is inspired, indispensable, essential to our knowledge of God, and the Gospel.  In addition, we believe that scripture should be interpreted responsibly, through informed study, guided by the Holy Spirit working in and through the church.  Scripture was formed by the community of faith to shape the community of faith, therefore, interpreting scripture is the constant work of the faith community.  Community of Christ also stresses, that all scripture must be interpreted through the lens of God’s most decisive revelation in Jesus Christ

So if portions of scripture don’t agree with our fullest understanding, of the meaning of the revelation of God in Christ, as illuminated by the Holy Spirit, and discerned by the faith community, the teachings and vision of Christ take precedence.  This principle applies to all of our books of Scripture, especially any passages by some to categorically assign to God’s disfavor, or negative characteristics, or secondary roles to others.

This is why our belief in continuing revelation is so important.  This belief keeps us open to yet more light and truth so we can grow and understand of God’s supreme will as revealed in Jesus Christ.  Doctrine and Covenants 163:70 states, “Scripture, prophetic guidance, knowledge and discernment must walk hand in hand to reveal the true will of God.”  Follow this pathway, which is the way of the living Christ, and you will discover more than sufficient light for the journey ahead.”

I find tremendous agreement with the CoC position.  What are your thoughts?  Do you lean for or against scriptural literalism?

Independence Temple

The site of the Independence Temple, or Temple Lot, is located southwest of the intersection of Lexington Street and River Boulevard in Independence, Missouri. On site is the headquarters of the Church of Christ. East and south of the Temple Lot are the Community of Christ (former Reorganized Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints) Temple and Auditorium, respectively. And southest of the Temple Lot on Walnut Street is the visitors’ center of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. Also on Walnut are the Missouri Independence Mission office and the Independence Missouri Stake Center.

From the official founding of the Church in 1830 and throughout the next decade, Joseph Smith received several revelations that dealt with the location and building of a temple in Independence, Jackson County, Missouri. On 20 July 1831, the Lord said to Joseph, “Behold, the place which is now called Independence is the center place; and a spot for the temple is lying westward, upon a lot which is not far from the courthouse” (D&C 57:3).  Sidney Rigdon was commanded to consecrate and dedicate the spot (D&C 58:57).  Later, the Lord confirmed his command “that a house should be built unto me in the land of Zion, like unto the pattern which I have given you.”  The revelation further stated that the temple was to be built by “tithing and sacrifice.”  (D&C 97:10-12.) Richard Neitzel Holzapfel, T. Jeffery Cottle,  ”Window to the Past: A Photographic Panorama of Early Church History and the Doctrine and Covenants”

“On the third day of August, I proceeded to dedicate the spot for the Temple, a little west of Independence, and there were also present Sidney Rigdon, Edward Partridge, W. W. Phelps, Oliver Cowdery, Martin Harris, Joseph Coe and Newel Knight. The 87th Psalm was read. The scene was solemn and impressive.” D. H. C., Vol. 1:199.

While excavating for the foundation of a temple in 1929, the Church of Christ discovered the northeast and southeast cornerstone markers. The Great Depression set in shortly thereafter, and the temple was never built, but the stones are now on display in the Church’s visitors’ center room.

The Saints were expelled from Jackson County in late 1834, before they could make any progress on the temple. Despite their best efforts, they were unable to return to reclaim their lands. After they settled in Nauvoo, Illinois, Joseph recorded another revelation rescinding the earlier commandment to build the Independence temple:

” Verily, verily, I say unto you, that when I give a commandment to any of the sons of men to do a work unto my name, and those sons of men go with all their might and with all they have to perform that work, and cease not their diligence, and their enemies come upon them and hinder them from performing that work, behold, it behooveth me to require that work no more at the hands of those sons of men, but to accept of their offerings….  Therefore, for this cause have I accepted the offerings of those whom I commanded to build up a city and a house unto my name, in Jackson county, Missouri, and were hindered by their enemies, saith the Lord your God.  (D&C 124:49, 51)  http://en.fairmormon.org/Independence_temple_to_be_built_%22in_this_generation%22)

Prior to the Second Coming of Jesus Christ, a magnificent edifice-the New Jerusalem Temple-will be erected on the location of the Temple Lot.

Far West Temple

Announcement:  26 April 1838
Groundbreaking:  3 July 1837
Site Dedication:  4 July 1838 by Brigham Young

The Far West Temple was the second temple commenced but never constructed by the early Saints in Missouri.  The Far West Temple site is located in Caldwell County, which was created specifically as a settlement for the Saints, who had been driven out of Jackson County several years earlier in 1833.  Far West was the county seat. See D&C 115.

“Let the city, Far West, be a holy and consecrated land unto me; and it shall be called most holy, for the ground upon which thou standest is holy. Therefore, I command you to build a house unto me, for the gathering together of my saints, that they may worship me.”  (D&C 115:7-8)

The cornerstones were laid for the Far West Temple on July 4, 1838, in the following order: southeast by the Stake presidency, southwest by the Elder’s quorum presidency, northwest by the Bishop, and northeast by the Teacher’s quorum presidency. At the cornerstone laying for the Far West Temple, President Sidney Rigdon gave his famous Independence Day oration.  The speech’s passionate declarations fueled tension between the Saints and the citizens of Missouri, eventually culminating in the issuance of Governor Lilburn W. Boggs’ extermination order on October 27, 1838.

Despite the great risk of danger, five apostles-accompanied by several others-returned to the Far West Temple site just after midnight on the morning of April 26, 1839, in fulfillment of prophecy. A large stone was rolled on the southeast cornerstone as recommencement of work on the foundation, and the apostles left to prepare for their overseas missions.

The Far West Temple site was reacquired by the LDS Church in 1909 under the direction of Joseph F. Smith.

Adam-ondi-Ahman Temple

Site Dedication:  October 1838 by Brigham Young

The beautiful site of Adam-ondi-Ahman lies at a bend in the Grand River in northern Missouri, about 70 miles north of Kansas City. On the highest elevation of Spring Hill, 124 feet above Grand River, a temple block was dedicated. No cornerstones were laid or temple constructed, however, as just days later, the Saints were ordered to leave the settlement. The Church has since acquired the site and much of the surrounding area, which is leased to local farmers.

The Adam-ondi-Ahman Temple was the third temple planned but never constructed by the early Saints in Missouri. The name Adam-ondi-Ahman is an English rendition of a phrase from the pure Adamic language, which could possibly mean “Adam in the presence of God.”The valley of Adam-ondi-Ahman was revealed to Joseph Smith to be the place where Adam blessed his posterity after being driven from the Garden of Eden.The first settlers of Adam-ondi-Ahman arrived in February 1838. By November 1838, the Saints had been delivered an ultimatum to leave Daviess County within 10 days.

On June 11, 1838, Joseph Smith gave Spring Hill the name of Adam-ondi-Ahman.  Some evidence suggests that a public square-not a temple block-was dedicated in October 1838 at Adam-ondi-Ahman.

Adam-ondi-Ahman is the site of a future grand council where Jesus Christ will meet with His stewards of all dispensations and receive back the keys of the kingdom in preparation for His Second Coming. Only those called to the meeting will know of its occurence.

Samoa Temple

Announcement:  15 October 1977
Suspended:  2 April 1980

Steady growth of Church membership in the Pacific islands prompted the 1977 First Presidency announcement of a regional temple to serve the 50,000 saints scattered across the islands of Samoa, Tonga, French Polynesia (Tahiti), and Fiji. At the time, members had to cross the Pacific Ocean for hundreds of miles to attend services in the Hamilton New Zealand Temple. The Tahitian saints, who lived the farthest from the temple, devotedly traveled 2,500 miles to receive temple blessings.

A groundbreaking ceremony was anticipated to take place in late 1978 with completion of the temple in 1980.

The specific site chosen for the Samoa Temple was in Malaeimi Valley on Tutila Island near the village of Pago Pago, American Samoa, adjacent to a newly completed stake center. Its location on a bus-serviced road from the international airport made it easily accessible to the many members who would be traveling to the temple by air. The picturesque setting at the base of a lush natural hill-visible from the ocean-is covered with beautiful foliage and palms trees.

Church architect Emil B. Fetzer said, “We expect [the temple] to be one of the finest, if not the finest, building on the island as far as workmanship, design and materials are concerned.” Plans called for a 20,000-square-foot temple, which would house a baptistry, a 100-seat ordinance room, four sealing rooms, and a circular Celestial Room featuring stained glass (visible from the front of the temple) and crowned by a round roof and single spire. The grounds would be extensively landscaped and feature a water fountain and reflecting pool.

On April 2, 1980, a landmark announcement by the First Presidency of plans for seven new temples for seven different nations were accompanied by a location and design change for the Samoa Temple.  At a press conference, President Spencer W. Kimball said, “The Pago Pago location was selected on the basis of convenience for air travelers from other islands. Since there will be two other temples in the South Pacific islands, the Samoa site was altered to be more convenient to Samoan members. Its design will also conform to those included in this announcement.”  With additional announcements for Nuku’alofa, Tonga and Papeete, Tahiti, the location of the Samoa Temple was moved from Pago Pago, American Samoa, to Apia, Samoa. The design and size were altered to conform to a new 12,500-square-foot standard design. The location change placed the temple on the island where the vast majority of Samoan members reside.

Hartford Connecticut Temple

Announcement:  3 October 1992
Suspended:  30 September 1995

During the Saturday afternoon session of General Conference on October 3, 1992, President Gordon B. Hinckley, First Counselor in the First Presidency, announced plans for a regional temple to be built in Hartford, Connecticut, to serve members in the New York and New England areas of the United States. Plans were also announced for the Hong Kong China Temple to serve a large region of Southeastern Asia and a second temple for Utah County to relieve the overburdened Provo Utah Temple-later identified as the Mount Timpanogos Utah Temple.

Three years after the announcement, plans for the Hartford Connecticut Temple were replaced. President Gordon B. Hinckley explained in the priesthood session of General Conference, “After working for years to acquire a suitable site in the Hartford area, during which time the Church has grown appreciably in areas to the north and south, we have determined that we will not at this time build a temple in the immediate area of Hartford.” Plans were then announced for temples in Boston, Massachusetts, and White Plains, New York. “In other words,” he said, “there will be two [temples] to serve the needs of the people where originally it was planned that one would do. We have sites in both of these new locations.”

To the members of Hartford who had joyed in the announcement of this temple, Pres. Hinckley said, “We apologize to our faithful Saints in the Hartford area. We know you will be disappointed in this announcement. You know that we, and your local officers, have spent countless hours searching for a suitable location that would handle the needs of the Saints in New York and New England. While we deeply regret disappointing the people in the Hartford area, we are satisfied that we have been led to the present decision, and that temples will be located in such areas that our Saints in the Hartford area will not have to drive unreasonable distances.”

Harrison New York Temple

Announcement:  30 September 1995
Suspended:  Mid-2000s, following the dedication of the Manhattan New York Temple (2004)

On September 30, 1995, during the priesthood session of General Conference, President Gordon B. Hinckley announced that plans for a regional temple in Hartford, Connecticut, which would serve the New York and New England areas of the United States, had been replaced with plans for two temples for that region on sites in Boston, Massachusetts, and White Plains, New York-later designated Harrison, New York. “In other words,” said Pres. Hinckley, “there will be two [temples] to serve the needs of the people where originally it was planned that one would do.”

On March 8, 1996, the Church purchased a beautifully wooded 24-acre site for the temple at the highly accessible intersection of Interstate 287 and Hutchinson River Parkway. The location of the site in Harrison was reflected in a name change made during a major renaming of many of the Church’s temples to a uniform guideline in October 1999, making the White Plains New York Temple the Harrison New York Temple.

The residents of Harrison and the Town Planning Board were very much opposed to the Church building its Temple in their town. As a result, the Church scaled back plans for 89,000 Sq foot building to a 56,000 Sq Ft. in an effort to appease certain elements in the town. They reduced the height of the steeple from 159 ft to 115 ft. and finally to 44 feet. They applied for a variance from the town, which had a 30 ft limit. That variance was denied. The Church elected to pursue a lawsuit, accusing the town of infringing on freedom of religion and assembly.

The spirit of compromise filled members of the Harrison Town Board, who unanimously voted on April 30, 2002, to approve a proposed settlement with the Church, when it became clear that the town would likely lose in court and spend millions of dollars if legal action were pursued. The agreement resulted in numerous additional concessions by the Church including reducing the building from 56,000 square feet to 28,400 square feet, dropping the number of seats from 200 to 100, lowering the height of the building from 44.7 feet to 34 feet and steeple from 115 feet to 105 feet, trimming the number of parking spaces from 198 to 135, paying for any damage to Kenilworth Road caused by construction, and refraining from building anything else on the property for 15 years after the temple opens.

In August 2002, the Church announced its plans to build the Manhattan New York Temple inside an existing Church-owned building. Though the seven-year dispute in Harrison contributed to the decision, significant membership growth in the city was emphasized, as explained by Stake President Brent Belnap: “Growth in the five boroughs has been so great, that the logic of having a temple within easy access to public transportation in the heart of the city makes far more eminent sense.”

By 2006, the Harrison New York Temple was removed from the Church’s official list of announced temples. The decision to build a temple on this site would constitute a new announcement.

Paris France Temple

Proposed:  4 June 1998 by Gordon B. Hinckley

During a European tour to dedicate the Preston England Temple, President Gordon B. Hinckley met with about 2,400 members from two Paris stakes and three outlying districts. In his remarks, he noted, “When I came here after the war, there were so few members of the Church, and now there are 30,000 of you.”  He continued, “I don’t want to build up your hopes, but the time has come when you deserve to have a temple among you, and we’ll look for a place to build one.  I don’t know how long it will take to find a suitable site. I invite every one of you, my brethren and sisters, to plead with the Lord individually in your prayers to lead us to a property in this great city, or its environs, where we can build a house of the Lord so that you won’t have to travel five hours to Frankfurt or six hours to Zollikofen.  Please unite your prayers with ours, and the time will come, and I hope that it will be quick in coming, when we can construct somewhere in this area a house of the Lord, a sacred temple, into which you can go and do that work which is found only in the temples of the Lord.”

In May 2004, President Hinckley returned to Paris, shortly after the dedication of the Copenhagen Denmark Temple.  He met with French members on May 28 in a hotel convention hall on the property of Euro Disney.  Remarking on the upcoming dedication of the Manhattan New York Temple, President Hinckley expressed, “I wish I could announce that we could have a temple here, but we do not have a suitable place yet, in my judgment, to build it. And so, we will continue to look. I don’t know when it will be built, but I am confident that we will have a temple for the French-speaking people of the Church sometime in the future.”  Continuing he said, “You are worthy of the richest blessings of the Church. You are worthy of every blessing which this Church has to offer.  And there is no blessing greater than the blessing of the house of the Lord. And so, my brothers and sisters, I ask you to be patient for a time. I know it is a long way to Frankfurt where you go.  I hope that you will continue to go there, but sometime in the future a beautiful house of the Lord will grace this land.”

As the April 2006 General Conference approached, hopes rose that the Paris France Temple would be announced when French media disclosed the Church’s interest in purchasing a huge tract of land outside Versailles-about one-third of the small city of Villepreux-reportedly for a temple. A church spokesman confirmed the Church was working with the property owners, but he said that the use of the property had not been determined and that temple locations were announced by the First Presidency. The summer before, President Hinckley had been considering a parcel of land in Saint-Cloud, a suburb of Paris, but attention had now turned to the Villepreux property. Moulin Rouge owners, the Clerico family, were also the owners of the land. Of the three interested parties-an Arab emirate, a Russian, and the Mormons-the mayor of Villepreux said he preferred the Mormons for two reasons: morality and quality of investment. Never has there been any concern about public order with church members, he said.3 No temple announcement was made, however, and in the end, the Church did not succeed in acquiring the property.

Southwest Salt Lake Valley Temple

Proposed:  1 October 2005 by Gordon B. Hinckley

During the opening session of the October 2005 General Conference, President Gordon B. Hinckley announced the construction of a temple in South Jordan, Utah, later named the Oquirrh Mountain Utah Temple.  With this announcement, President Hinckley indicated that another temple site had been acquired in the southwest part of the Salt Lake Valley, which would be announced later once membership growth in the valley required it.

For me, I’ve found that if, for some reason, I discovered that if the Church isn’t true, I probably would join another faith.  Why?

Though it’s not very chic these days to say so, I love religion AND organized religion.  I believe that there is a power in organization that simply can’t be found in a loosely-knit group of believers, and this is due to a recent visit to another faith that I will describe below.  I think organized religion brings people together and makes it easier to send relief when an emergency happens.  I don’t think I can believe in a “do-it-yourself” religion where you just completely pick and choose what beliefs to have.  That’s why I feel that if I found out the Church isn’t true, I’d definitely go SOMEWHERE.  I’ve also spent a great deal of my life studying other religions and faiths because I love to know how other people think and feel.  This has led me to compile a list of possible places to go if I were to discover that the LDS faith were not the true faith.

Feel free to make your own list here!  My favorite religions, in no particular order, that I would consider joining if I left Mormonism.

1. Islam

My parents have always been very supportive of my learning about other faiths, and my mom encouraged me to learn about Islam.  I love the simplicity and beauty of Islam.  I like the idea of Islam because they don’t claim to know who God is or what he looks like or what our purpose is here.  The idea is that we just obey Allah, we will be blessed and have peace.  In fact, the word Islam means “submission,” and the root of the word (SLM) in the language family has ties to the concept of “peace” (think “salem” in Hebrew).  I like the mandatory prayers.  Though repetitive, I love how they are required to take time out of their days and offer a peaceful tribute to Allah.  These prayers give the faithful the time to focus their thoughts on God.  It’s like a Sabbath moment, three times or more a day.  Fasting during Ramadan seems like it would be a great way to be thankful for the food God has given us.

If I found out the LDS Church isn’t true, I would be tempted to try Islam.  It would be my way of letting go and just trying to do what God asks me to do.  I admit, I do not like the organization of Islam.  The lack of any centralized authority means there are fundamentalists and extremists that put a violent spin on the Qur’an, and have become terrorists and murderers.  I would have a hard time dealing with these members of my own faith, as I consider myself to be peaceful and pacifistic.  Would I join the Sunni or Shi’ite sect?  Actually, I would probably join the Alevi.  I love the peaceful and accepting attitude of the Alevi in Turkey.  Though not “mainstream” Islam, they are a peaceful group of 10 million and as part of their beliefs, they believe that we should not judge others on their beliefs.  I love their ideas of trying to “perfect” yourself.  There is no Original Sin and our consciousness is perfect, therefore we search through our lives to understand and embrace this perfect consciousness.

2. Eastern Orthodoxy

I have often said that if the Book of Mormon weren’t true, I’d have a hard time believing in Jesus of Nazareth.  It was the Book of Mormon that led me to believe in the Bible.  I wish we had books written by Jesus, or at least copies of the books about him from the original authors.  The idea that we only have copies of copies leaves me a bit queasy as far as evidence goes.  That having been said, if I wanted to stick with Christianity, I’d go for Eastern Orthodoxy.

I remember on my mission I got in quite a few “bashes.”  This wasn’t because I sought them out, of course, but because I was in West Texas, and there were many preachers and pastors out there who were attracted to us, just so they could argue.  Most of the time I feel like I did a great job of holding my own (thank you very much) but the only time I got floored, schooled, and beaten up in a bash was with a priest from an Orthodox Church.  His knowledge of early Christianity amazed me.  At the end of our “discussion,” I could have easily found myself saying, “Almost thou persuadest me to be an Eastern Orthodoxian.”  Or whatever they’re called.

I loved the idea of authority coming from the Apostles themselves.  The Orthodox Church seemed to be everything I loved in the Catholic Church without a couple of the annoying things that bother me about Catholicism (a more open canon, no pope, all Bishops are equal, less of the Church leadership is celibate, a “different” or more fluid idea of the Trinity).  To me, Orthodoxy seems like a purer, more mystical form of Christianity.  To find out more about Orthodoxy, read this excellent recent MormonMatters post.

3. Baha’i

Russell and I recently visited the service of a local Baha’i congregation.  It was small and it was in a local “Commonality House” that can be rented by whatever groups wish to attend.  I loved Baha’i because, while I was there, I truly felt loved and appreciated.  The whole idea of Baha’i is the unity and brotherhood of man.  They accept the teachings of Christ, Moses, Mohammed, and most other holy men.  However, they also accept the teachings of Bahá’u'lláh, a prophet of the 19th Century in Persia.  I love this religion because of how included I felt.  There was no dogma to speak of, just love for one another.  If any group truly demonstrates Christlike love for one another, I found it here at the Baha’i church.  The amazing thing I found is that when my Baha’i friends came to visit me at the LDS church, they were amazingly good at interfaith discourse.  They participated in lessons, they understood what was taught, and they were well-liked and loved by the people they met.  They’re truly an amazing group of people to say the least.

However, the advantages of this Church, I believe are also the disadvantages.  Russ and I have been putting off a full write-up of the Baha’i faith, but the thing I noticed overwhelmingly is that the faith had no teeth.  There were few rules, the congregation was encouraged to be themselves, attend other churches, and find what’s right for them, and search for truths everywhere.  I almost got the feeling I could be Baha’i and Mormon at the same time.  The few “rules” that they DID have seemed to only be suggestions.  A faith that doesn’t require any sacrifices and didn’t really teach a “way to live” seems impotent, at least to me.  If there were a natural disaster in town, I’d much rather trust the Catholic Charities than the Baha’i, unfortunately.  I loved all my friends from the Baha’i church, though, and would love to visit them all again sometime.

4. The Community of Christ

Ah, good old familiarity.  If I wanted to join a church and still have Nephi and Moroni and Joseph and Emma, I’d join the Community of Christ.  If somehow (I’m not sure how, but if somehow) the LDS Church were proven untrue in a way that still left the possibility open for Joseph Smith to be a prophet, I’d definitely visit the Community of Christ.  I love the Community of Christ because I’d still have Nephi the First (one of my personal faves), and I’d still be able to believe in Priesthood and Prophets.  The Community of Christ would give me a chance, not only to believe in these things, but explore them in new and interesting ways, because they are much more free-wheeling than the LDS Church.  They tend to place much of the search for truth in the hands of the believers.  This is easy to like, for me.  However, for the purposes of this discussion, I think choosing the Community of Christ might be cheating a little.

There are many other faiths I like to read about, but I’ll leave the rest of the discussion to you.

If the LDS Church weren’t true, and you DID have to join another Church, where would YOU go?

Just in case some readers don’t know, the Community of Christ is not one of the polygamist branches of Mormonism. They formed about 10 years after the LDS left Nauvoo, out of the saints who were not convinced that either Brigham Young or Sidney Rigdon should be the successor to Joseph Smith. They rejected polygamy especially, but also most of the theological evolution Joseph Smith went through during the Nauvoo period (i.e. ordinances for the dead, God as an exalted man, etc.).

Thus, from their beginning they were sort of founded on a very different profile than LDS. One of questioning authority and viewing a prophet as something more nuanced than the LDS view, something which LDS are only now beginning to experience in a mainstream way through things like Richard Bushman’s Rough Stone Rolling and the church-sponsored Joseph Smith Papers Project.

Without further ado, the list:

1. Pragmatic Priesthood
   Members are only given the priesthood when they are called to a position which requires it.  Teenagers are rarely ordained.  The priesthood is not considered a rite of passage for spiritual maturation, but a tool that is used when necessary to perform the Lord’s work.
2. A Democratic Canon
   We all agree that all human beings, even prophets, have the potential to be fallible.  The CoC leaders embrace that admission to the point that even new revelation from God is put to the membership at their bi-annual world conference to vote and either approve or reject as new scripture.  I don’t know if there is a corollary, but they also have a much more active canon than their LDS cousins.  The Doctrine and Covenants of the CoC only shares the first 120 sections or so with LDS, and yet they currently have 163 sections, with the latest one coming in 2007.  In the last 100 years, the LDS church has only added one document to the official canon.
3. Formally Trained Leadership
   In order to be an Appointee (an equivalent to a General Authority), a bachelor’s degree is required.  Once someone becomes an Appointee, they are admitted into an Advanced Leadership Study program which results in the equivalent of seminary graduate degree. Many callings actually have an application process where the needs of the position are measured against the talents and gifts of the candidate to provide a good match.  That process is combined with spiritual inspiration for the ultimate selection, but generally callings are qualified on the basis of a person having the appropriate skills for the job.
4. An Open Diversity of Opinion
   Just as with LDS, the Community of Christ membership hosts a wide diversity of opinions and beliefs.  There are CoC members who believe the Book of Mormon is a literal, historical translation of ancient scripture and there are those who see it as complete fiction which may or may not be useful as a source of poetic inspiration.  The primary difference is that the Community of Christ, at the leadership/authority levels, does not impose an orthodoxy upon its members.  They can freely and openly discuss these varied opinions in their public discourse and its just totally normal.  This cultural aspect actually harkens back to early church history when it was fairly common to see a public debate between Orson Pratt and Brigham Young (at the time was the Prophet) heatedly arguing some pretty core doctrines and walking away as friends and fellow saints in good standing.
5. Cyclical Leadership
   The modern leadership system in the Community of Christ is not a lifetime calling.  Even their prophets retire before death.  Current president Stephen Veazey is quite a young man, and I would guess based only on physical appearance that he may be younger than any LDS church president since Brigham Young, and younger than any current LDS apostle.  Some CoC apostles serve for only a couple years (their world conference, in which major priesthood business is conducted, is every two years).  The position of Pastor (like an LDS bishop) is only a one year call which has to be re-confirmed each year (I think most pastors get “renewed” for a while, though.)

Honorable mention: women in priesthood and leadership (but I’ve already written about this before), focus on peace and justice, and fearless approach to facing reality.

While I was much more than casually aware of church history previously, since becoming president of the church I have engaged in an extensive study of our story. I have explored books and articles from a wide spectrum of scholars, authors, and publishers, ranging from the faithful to the skeptical and in between. Truth has nothing to fear from scrutiny.

During recent decades there has been a mounting wave of added information as religious historians have gained access to more source material and have written with increasing frankness about various topics. Also, in the past few years, the media spotlight—including several high-profile television series—has been turned on to Latter Day Saint history because of the Mitt Romney campaign for the U.S. Presidency and the disturbing activities of LDS fundamentalist groups.

Because of my exploration of various credible works, and probing discussions with historians, some of my previously held notions have been challenged and adjusted in the face of additional knowledge. The “apologetic” approach to church history—presenting our story in as favorable a light as possible—is not sufficient for the journey ahead. That approach does not evidence the integrity that must be fundamental to our witness and ministry.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

President Stephen M. Veazey here

1. Do you think Pres Monson and our First Presidency have done the same as President Stephen M. Veazey have and explored books and articles from a wide spectrum of scholars, authors, and publishers, ranging from the faithful to the skeptical and in between?
2. Do you feel we believe Truth has nothing to fear from scrutiny?
3. The “apologetic” approach to church history—presenting our story in as favorable a light as possible—is not sufficient for the journey ahead. Would you agree with that?
4. Do you think will start moving to more of a pastoral approach described in Richard Bushman recent CES seminar?here

Please discuss

Recently I heard Robert Kirby say, “Humans are the only species than can actually think themselves stupider.” Oh brother, you nailed me.

A friend of mine recently shared the following analogy:

Some people are perfectly content to sit down in front of the TV, turn it on, change the channels, and turn it off and the end of the day and not know how the TV really works. The TV works that so that is all that matters. Then there is a small minority of people that are driven to take the TV apart and figure out how it works and see what it looks like inside. We are absolutely driven to do this, we can’t stand now knowing how the TV works, the TV will be in pieces for weeks, maybe months, as we work through all the pieces. The gospel is like the TV, some people, the large majority of people are handed the gospel, it works for them, and they don’t have to take it apart to be happy. Then a certain number of people, just because of the way their brain works, they have to take the gospel apart, to look at it from all angles, in order to be happy.

I think its clear where I fall in that story. But This story is not about over-analyzing or thinking too much or deconstructing TVs. It is about the balance of complimentary personalities.

My wife is on the other side. She does not need to take the TV apart. I’m actually not much of a complainer, really, I’m not. Yet, occasionally I will get to talking about something and I’ll reveal a little about how I am perceiving things in a critical way. In some of these cases my wife has heard me and has disagreed with me. She is perfectly capable of acknowledging and even criticizing flaws or issues, so its not that she’s being apologetic or ignorant. She will just tell me I’m making a bigger deal out of it than it really is. When this has happened, I am always somewhat surprised at how I end up truly defeated. She is usually right in these cases (even though I’m right most of the rest of the time ).

This is the incredible beauty of relationships, and especially spanning masculinity and femininity. Chinese culture describes this beauty with the symbol of the Yin Yang. Two incomplete and oblong shapes that come together to make the symbol of perfection: a circle. In the LDS church we hear a lot about how women are more spiritual than men, yet ironically we suggest that spiritually inferior men should lead the home. Heck, not just the home, the whole church. Women are only given authority over other women, in which cases you still end up with only one part of the Yin Yang.

Just think of what kind of trouble a room full of men, without the temperance of a feminine perspective, could rile up. If I were without the influence of my wife, I can only imagine the damage I might do. In the LDS church the affairs must be guided by the priesthood, and of course women do not hold the priesthood. Perhaps we don’t really appreciate what we are missing out on. Now, perhaps, we can.

I was present for a powerful talk by Susan Skoor, a member of the Quorum of the Twelve Apostles in the Community of Christ. This was my first encounter both with a woman who held the restored priesthood and one who was involved in church leadership at its highest level. I listened out of curiosity. Sort of a “What does that look like?” kind of thing. I walked away moved beyond description, and then other things just clicked. It changed the way I look at my wife, and the way I will see other women as well. It is really an experience in the value of diversity, and not just the expendable kind of value we find in a good day or a random act of kindness, but an essential value that you wonder how you survived without.

Since this is a Sunstone recording (2008 SLC Symposium), I can’t publish the entire talk, but it was great and I would recommend checking it out once they have it available on the website. (It was part of the perennially fantastic “Pillars of My Faith” session.) I selected a short highlight, with permission, that I hope will illustrate what I’m talking about. This clip is of Susan talking about the experience of being called as an Apostle. I should note that in her entire talk she spoke without any notes at all. Completely freestyle.

After listening, perhaps we could discuss the merits of having the balance of women in leadership, completely separate from the hurdle of doctrine or policy that exists currently. What are your feelings about the concept itself?

UPDATE: You can now purchase the full recording here.

This discussion got me to thinking about scriptures in general and I came up with an analogy that I wanted to bounce off folks. I think that the Book of Mormon’s relationship with the Old and New Testaments of the Bible can be compared to the relationship between the Aeneid (the great Roman epic) and the earlier Iliad and Odyssey (the great epics of ancient Greece).

The Iliad and Odyssey told heroic stories about a historic event, the Trojan War, but they are not literal histories. Fundamentally, the Greek epics were stories that transmitted inspirational teachings, values and models for living life in harmony with Greek religion. The Roman epic did the same for the Romans, but interestingly it did so by connecting Rome to the earlier Greek epics. In the Aeneid, the ancestors of the Romans are revealed to have been Trojans who fled to Italy after the events of the Iliad. Thus the Romans carved out a space for themselves in the world-view constructed by the Greek epics.

In the early 1800s, Americans were steeped in the stories of the Bible and their picture of the world was largely based on reading it literally. They knew the story of Noah and the Flood and imagined it recorded a history of the world covered in water. From that vantage, all the peoples of the world were believed to have descended from Noah’s three sons, Shem, Ham, and Japeth. Common tradition held that Shem’s sons had settled Asia, Japeth’s Europe and Ham’s Africa.

This picture of the world included a gaping hole for Americans on the frontier. The whole New World around them had been unknown to the writers of the Bible and was not accounted for in the scriptures. How did American Indians fit into the Biblical world-view? There was no clear answer. From which of Noah’s three sons were Indians descended and how did they get to America after the flood? Were they one of the peoples scattered at the time of the Tower of Babel? Were they a remnant of the Lost Ten Tribes of Israel? Were they the children of Gog and Magog or were they something else entirely? These and other questions loomed.

However, the Book of Mormon created a place within the Biblical world-view for the Americas by connecting ancient inhabitants of the New World to Bible stories like the Tower of Babel and the destruction of Jerusalem at the hands of the Babylonians. For believers who imagined that all the world descended from the family of Noah, the Book of Mormon created a particularly august lineage for American Indians, who were numbered among chosen people of the house of Israel.

We can draw one more comparison from the Greek and Roman epics. The Iliad and Odyssey were the product of pre-literate tradition, whose poetic forms were dictated by the nature of its oral composition. They sound like oral epic poems because that is what they are. The Aeneid, by contrast, was a literary composition, written by a single author. However, to create the same resonance and reverence, the author imitates the forms and language of earlier oral epics.

The Book of Mormon similarly uses the style and forms of the Old and New Testaments and the language of the King James translation of the Bible to invoke the spirit of scripture. And though the Biblical Testaments were compiled over the centuries from diverse sources, the Book of Mormon was revealed through a single conduit, just as Vergil was the sole author of the Aeneid.

What is the defining characteristic of scripture? If Job was not a historical person, is the message of the Book of Job diminished?

No I am not talking about Utah. I left Sam Brannan’s Zion for Joseph Smith’s Zion on April 11, 2008. I arrived at about 4 pm in Kansas City airport and almost froze to death waiting for the rental car shuttle. I had left 80 degree weather for 40 degree weather and began to wonder who really was the prophet? Obviously it was Brannan. The temperature never rose above 45 degrees, and we had snow in April!

I arrived in Independence about 4:30 pm and found the Independence campus of Graceland University. (Graceland is the Community of Christ equivalent of BYU, and its primary campus is in Lamoni, Iowa) I was early enough that I wanted to see “the” temple lot area.  I could see the spire of the Community of Christ temple reaching to the sky, and I knew that the lot was close to that. I found the Church of Christ (Temple lot) across the street from the Community of Christ temple. I knew nothing about this group except that they own the property that Joseph Smith had dedicated as the temple site for the city of Zion. I saw a sign for a visitor’s center and hoped they were still open. I was lucky enough to find William Sheldon giving a tour and explaining the beliefs of this interesting branch of the Restoration.  William “Bill” Sheldon is the oldest and longest acting apostle for the Church of Christ (Temple lot). (For more on this Restoration movement, see R. Jean Addams’ excellent article in Scattering of the Saints) Bill was, at first, quite defensive (or, as others told me, “he is always on the offensive.”) Once he realized I was not there to show him that my church was right, but that I was his student and wanted to learn from him, the atmosphere completely changed. He then became the teacher and from then on it was a very enjoyable experience. The Temple lot church’s visitor’s center, has two different cornerstones on display which they believe were placed by the early saints for the temple.

At 5pm we gathered at Graceland University in a beautiful auditorium that must hold a couple of hundred people. It was to attend a screening of the film, A Mormon President. Mike Riggs was kind enough to introduce the film. My impression of the film is that I don’t know what audience the filmmaker, Adam Christing, is looking for.  It seems to be more of a history of Joseph Smith’s bid for the presidency than Mitt Romney’s. I think that is unfortunate. Watching this film, I also realized how luck we Mormons were that Helen Whitney chose to do a film about us. 

After the film I was able to meet and visit with Robert Flanders of Nauvoo: Kingdom on the Mississippi fame.  Bob is a pure intellectual. He sees history clearly and is gifted in explaining his thoughts to a lay person such as myself. I was able to spend quite a bit of time with Bob through the three-day conference. I wish I had brought along a tape recorder to capture all of his interesting comments. A couple I can remember: Bob told me that Nauvoo was a complete failure no matter how one looked at it, and then gave a few examples. Bob then talked about Mormons as Christians and said that when he teaches others about Mormons, he tells them if it walks like a duck, etc., then it is a duck, and Mormons walk like Christians, etc. Bob then uses an example of a black woman who was stranded in the SLC bus depot where a Mormon woman asked her if she needed help. The Mormon woman took this lady into her home, fed her, clothed her, and helped her find a job. Bob’s favorable comments here have credibility since he is no longer a member of the Restoration movement but has been a Presbyterian since the late 1970s.

Next at 8 pm, Wallace B. Smith, the great grandson of Joseph Smith Jr., grandson of Joseph Smith III, and retired prophet and president of the Community of Christ presented his talk. It was incredible and will be made available in audio form and in printed form at the next conference. I will just give a couple of impressions. His honesty was overwhelming. He openly talked about issues that he faced as prophet of what was then named the RLDS church, as well as about issues that continue to face the church. These included the status of homosexuals in the church, the Book of Mormon as scripture, and the ordination of woman to the priesthood. His discussion of section 156 of the RLDS D&C was amazing and quite spiritual. He discussed the concern of having it voted at conference and the possibility that it could be voted down. People came together and affirmed the section as God’s word, and dramatic changes began to happen within the RLDS church. One of the questions in the Q&A period and Wallace Smith’s response was really amazing. He was asked if he edited his father’s revelations or if his revelations were edited. Wallace’s demeanor changed, and he spoke with authority as he said the revelations were his words and his words alone—no one edited those revelations except his secretary for grammatical errors. I was blown away at his honesty and spirituality at that moment. I have studied in depth the accounts of the 1978 revelation in the LDS church and found the differences startling. Also during the Q & A Bob Flanders made the comment that when he left the RLDS church he thought they had painted themselves into a corner doctrinally and historically through continuing to hold fast to the teachings of Joseph Smith and the Book of Mormon. After hearing Wallace Smith’s talk, he believed the Community of Christ was going to do just fine. The electricity in the room was incredible. After the Q&A, I went up to ask Wallace Smith to sign a couple of my books and he was gracious enough to do this. They were George Q. Cannon’s Life of Joseph Smith (1st edition) and Roger Launius’ Joseph Smith III: Pragmatic Prophet. In conversation, it came up about his contact with the LDS church leaders. He said that he met with Spencer Kimball a couple of times and had quite pleasant meetings with him.

On Saturday, April 12^th, 2008, we met early at 8 a.m. for a panel discussion on “The Future Status of the Book of Mormon in the Community of Christ.” Four things stood out for me at this session. (1) Having an intelligent conversation about the Book of Mormon as scripture, as Christian, what effect it has had on Native American members,  and its history both internally and as a modern work. (2) That an apostle of a restoration movement (Dale Luffman) would know that the book of Daniel in the Bible was written 400 years after it is claimed to be. (3) Mark Scherer as a true pastor and how that affects lay members of the church in dealing with these issues. Mark made the comment that members of the Community of Christ need to determine if will they follow the carpenter from Nazareth or the Prophet from Palmyra, asserting that by choosing the Nazarene they will do just fine. (4) The professionalism of the leaders in the Community of Christ.

I then attended four sessions from 10 a.m. to 5:30 p.m. They ranged from the Book of Mormon as a way to follow Christ, to the different movements in the Restoration, to women and the priesthood during Joseph Smiths time, to Book of Mormon authorship, to Mitt Romney’s campaign for the presidency. All sessions were stimulating and informative. The respect that was shown for differences in ideas and opinions was wonderful.

During one break between sessions, I introduced myself to Fred Larsen, prophet, seer and revelator for the Remnant Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints. Fred Larsen is the great great grandson of Joseph Smith Jr., the great grandson of Joseph Smith III, and the grandson of RLDS prophet Frederick M. Smith. Fred was kind enough to sign my copy of Dan Vogel’s Joseph Smith; the Making of a Prophet. He did this even though he admitted it was not his favorite book and that he disagreed with Dan’s conclusions. This is how kind and gracious of a man Fred is, and I found him to be quite interesting. Unfortunately I did not get to talk with him much because his wife was ill and he needed to get back to his home and take care of her.

At the dinner break I was invited by John Hamer to have dinner with him, Mike Karpowicz, David Howlett, Matt Frizzel, and Jan Shipps. We went to a restaurant that is owned by a member of the Community of Christ. It was excellent, and the food was not too bad either. David and Matt are both PhD. candidates in theology and/or history and members of the Community of Christ. Matt is the Community of Christ’s “Mission Center President” (“Stake President” in LDS lingo) for Chicago. The discussion was open and informative. We talked a bit about the early history of the Kirtland temple and the solemn assembly procedure. I was amazed at the knowledge at the table and the openness of the discussion. David laid out the events, and I brought up the amount of wine that was used to help with the visions and manifestations. No one seemed surprised or offended by my comments.

Jan had to speak at 8 pm, so we hurried and finished dinner. Jan’s presentation was brilliant. She shared with us a personal journey of hers with Joseph Smith’s Restoration movement. A couple of amazing insights included her experience at USU getting her bachelor’s degree. She commented that her history classes were misnamed. Even though the class was American history, Civil War history, or Western history, in reality they were Mormon history classes.  Jan also described the famous Mormon History Association meeting in Nauvoo where Reed Durham spoke about Joseph Smith and masonry. She described the emotions, events, and finds that led up to the presidential talk. The important find was Reed Durham discovering the weather vane in someone’s garage. I thought it interesting that Reed Durham happened to be the one to find the weather vane for the temple, clean it up, and take photos. I am not sure if the vane or the photos are still available? This image is all I could find.

She also described that as soon as Reed finished his talk, there was a loud sound of thunder and wind, followed by the lights going out in the Nauvoo Mansion house. Jan said there was dead silence before the lights finally flickered and came back on. She also said it was the only time she saw Leonard Arrington angry, and he said to her (referring to the likely fallout of Durham’s talk), “We have the archives open and now this will close them.” Jan also saw Durham’s talk as linked to Mark Hofmann’s decision to create his salamander letter.

On Sunday morning, April 13^th, 2008, we met at the Community of Christ temple and Ron Romig graciously shared with us some of the treasures of the archives and the museum. These treasures include two seer stones passed down from the David Whitmer family, a letter from Joseph to Emma, Kirtland Bank notes, the supposed daguerreotype of Joseph that is making its rounds on the internet (the one that is of a painting of Joseph), and multiple photos of Emma—and, to my delight, my favorite one in which she is holding Hyrum David as an infant. We also got to see the printer’s manuscript of the Book of Mormon, the manuscript for the inspired version, and the actual Bible Joseph owned for that inspired version. The books we saw, among other items, were Edward Partridge’s copy of the 1830 Book of Mormon, Oliver Cowdery’s specially bound 1835 Doctrine and Covenants, a Book of Commandments, Lucy Mack Smith’s history, the evening and the Morning Star, and an original 1835 hymnal. We saw Joseph Smith’s watch, Emma Smith’s wedding ring, a woman’s slip hand made by Emma, Joseph’s cane, sword, sheath, and epaulets, and a dressing chest. We also saw David Whitmer’s hope chest in which he stored the printer’s manuscript. In the museum, we also were able to see the first three editions of the Book of Mormon together, the actual front door from Liberty jail, and a Mark Hofmann forgery. I would say the most exciting artifact/document for me was the “caracters” document. I believe this is the real Anthon transcript, and my heart almost stopped beating as it went around the room. I cannot express my feelings because this was an experience that I could have only dreamed about. The people of the Community of Christ and Ron Romig are the greatest.

Just a note about the seer stones: Both stones came from the David Whitmer family.  A chocolate “egg shaped” flat stone was first inventoried at the RLDS church in 1940. It has three holes drilled into it for leather straps.  The other stone is oval and flat and one can see a picture of it in Mike Quinn’s Early Mormonism and the Magic World View. Both are pretty close in size. The oval stone looks much like the same stone material that Rick Grunder sold (and the photo of that stone can be seen at Rick’s site. Both stones are Native American gorget. The egg shaped stone is darker than the oval stone. I asked Newell Bringhurst if he had brought his hat so we could do some translating. Unfortunately he had left it at home. We were done at the temple around 11 am.

I next went on a search to find the Church of Jesus Christ (Cutlerites) meeting house and temple. This is a nice two-story white wood frame building on a piece of land about an acre in size. It sits in a low area south of the railroad tracks. As I drove away from the Independence area, I was overcome with emotion that I had been to a celebration of Joseph Smith and his legacy that had fed me intellectually, spiritually, and geographically. To have buildings of Community of Christ, LDS, Remnant LDS, Church of Christ temple lot, and Church of Jesus Christ (Cutlerite) all within view of one another is quite amazing. To see and feel the movement that started from a poor itinerant farmer boy and the diversity of that movement will never leave my mind.

I next went on a trek to find Liberty jail, about 30 minutes away from Independence. This was a much different experience. Liberty jail reconstructed is housed inside a much larger granite building. There are mannequins of Joseph, Hyrum, and the other prisoners. The only part of the jail that is original is the rock flooring that is covered with straw. I have to admit it was very depressing for me. To think of the conditions and hardship for the people in jail was emotionally distressing. I also had a hay fever flare-up from the straw, so that did not help.

I needed something to pick me up, so I drove to Westport just outside Kansas City and walked around the place that the Santa Fe Trail, Oregon Trail, and California Trail met. This was the drop off point for the pioneers heading west into the frontier. There is also a building that was owned by Daniel Boone’s grandson that had been the major mercantile store for these pioneers to buy their supplies. It is an amazing building. It is currently a bar, so it is open to the public to go inside a look around. The people were quite nice to me and I pictured myself going back to those early times.

To gather together and meet with people whom I have been friends with for years, or to just meet someone who feels like they have been a friend for years, is an amazing experience. That is exactly what happened for me during those three days.

And so it’s a kind of treat for me these days to get to visit a place where Mormonism and the landscape are coterminus. I just got back home from a 3-day trip to Utah County, Utah. Utah Valley University (as UVSC will soon be known) invited me to present at their annual Mormon Studies Conference and was generous enough to spring for the trip.

It goes without saying that Utah Valley is very, very Mormon. My book for the airplane this trip was American Vertigo — Bernard-Henri Lévy’s attempt to retrace Alexis de Tocqueville’s seminal travelogue.  Lévy’s observations traveling around America remind me that commenting on the foreignness of Mormondom’s heartland is surely a well-plowed furrow on the Bloggernacle. And yet I shall plow on.

Just as Lévy inevitably visited the Mall of America in the suburbs of my hometown of Minneapolis, so I too visited Orem’s Missionary Mall.

Beneath the giant inflated missionary (shouldn’t he have an inflated companion?), young men called to serve can buy all the durable suits their mission will require. The same strip mall has a “Sister Missionary Mall” store too, plus a Deseret Book, an LDS Distribution Services center, two food storage preparation stores, an LDS wedding dress shop, as well as my personal favorite clothing store: “KneeShorts.”

Of course we were able to get fry sauce at Burgers Supreme — is there any clearer sign that you’re in Zion? — but it was also available in bulk at the grocery store. The grocery store had two full racks of LDS greeting cards: “Congratulations on your Mission Call!”  There was even a Spanish section: ”Felicidade en tu Bautismo!”

Beyond all that fun, the real treat for me was the BYU library. The University of Michigan has a decent Mormon history library — probably about twice as many books as I have. Both are just a drop in the vast sea of books and periodicals lining row after row of shelves at BYU. I could hang out in the general book stacks contentedly for weeks without coming up for air. But little more than an hour was possible because an even more tempting treasure lured me deeper into the library: the special collections archive.

The archives house a vast trove of early Mormon materials. Just one example — I was able to access a box containing a couple dozen letters my ancestors wrote to each other in the 1860s and 1870s. (The actual letters, not copies.) The LDS branch of the family lived in Salt Lake valley and the other (who had left Mormonism) lived in Council Bluffs. In one letter, written by my great great grandmother, she described meeting a young man while attending school.  Sometime after the letter was penned this young man went on to become my great great grandfather.

As I was leaving special collections I ran into a scholar who had also come from out of state for the Mormon Studies conference. Having found his own priceless treasure, he told me, “Every minute I’m here is precious,” and added, “What’s shocking is how many people live in this valley and have never once taken advantage of the resources right here that we have to plan and travel to find!”

Too true!

Meeting together in person to exchange ideas, you ask? Haven’t you heard of the “internets” John Hamer? Hasn’t the awesome nature of the MormonMatters Blog made attending a Mormon studies conference IRL (in real life) as obsolete as reading a printed book?!

As incredible as online connections can be, you can’t imagine the fun you’re missing at a real life Mormon studies conference until you’ve been to one in person. I went to my first Mormon History Association conference in May of 2003 and I got hooked. Like the guy in the old Gillette commercials, “I love these things so much, I bought the company” — or my case with JWHA, it might be phrased: “I got roped into being responsible for the association.”

This year I’m planning to attend half a dozen of these conferences and I want to make the plug for two that I will be participating in this April.

First up: The MORMON STUDIES CONFERENCE at Utah Valley University (fka UVSC), April 1, in Orem, Utah. The topic: “Restoration Christianity: Commonality and Divergence in the Latter Day Saint Movement.”

This is going to be a fun little conference. Yours truly will be kicking it off with an overview of the whole Latter Day Saint movement — I’ve put together dozens of charts that I’ll use to explain how the hundreds of different Mormon churches connect historically. That should sell you right there, but wait — there’s more! Grant Underwood and Sally Barringer Gorden are joined by Steve Shields, author of Divergent Paths of the Restoration, Vickie Speek, author of the new book on the Strangites, Jean Addams, expert on the Temple Lot church, and Michael Van Wagenen, author of a book on the Wightites. Also presenting will be President Frederick N. Larsen, a great great grandson of Joseph Smith Jr. and Prophet of the Remnant Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints. If you want to talk about this topic and you live in Utah, you’re not going to get a better chance than this conference!

Next up: The RESTORATION STUDIES SYMPOSIUM in Independence, Missouri, April 11-13. For those of us in the Midwest, Mormon Studies can often seem far away. Here’s your chance to attend a great conference that’s in driving distance.

The Symposium is going to be little larger than the UVSC conference. Starting on Friday evening with a screening of “A Mormon President,” the opening address will be the President Wallace B. Smith, the great grandson of Joseph Smith and Prophet Emeritus of the Community of Christ. Smith will give his personal reflections on the transformation of the Reorganized Church in his lifetime. There will be a host of exciting sessions all day Saturday, concluding with an address Jan Shipps — whom I consider a mentor. Jan will share insights from her upcoming book, which synthesizes a lifetime of observations about the changes in Mormonism since World War II. I think this will be her most important book and you won’t want to miss her preview.

Sunday morning will include an insider’s tour of the Community of Christ Temple complex in Independence. At the tour’s end, church Archivist Ron Romig will open the vaults and display a number of treasures, including David Whitmer and Oliver Cowdery’s seerstones, the Anthon transcript, King James J. Strang’s sceptor, and much, much more!

If you can come to either or both of these, I’m very sure you won’t regret it. The best part of the experience is getting to meet all of these personalities in Mormon studies and sharing ideas with them directly. Hope to see you there.

The Temple staffmembers were excited, but skeptical. If Clinton were coming, wouldn’t they have heard from the secret service directly?

It turns out that there were quite a few Hillary supporters on the Temple staff. If the 14th Article of Faith in the LDS church is “We believe in the Republican Party…” it seems that the opposite is true in the Community of Christ. (If there are any Community of Christ members who vote Republican, they have the good sense to keep their mouths shut about it when their coreligionists are around.)

Six of us got up to a frigid and snowy Saturday morning and joined the Ohioans lined up to get into the Kirtland High School gymnasium. (We didn’t have far to go; KHS is next door both to the Visitor Center and to the house where I was staying.)

The doors opened at 8am and Bill Clinton was scheduled to arrive at 8:30. The High School band was playing a mixture of pop standbys (the Jackson 5′s “ABC”) and patriotic classics (“God Bless America”). Around 9:15 — still no Bill — everyone stood as the band played the national anthem. Finally at 9:30 it was announced that Clinton would be here… in 15 minutes.

Fortunately this promise was kept and the former president arrived just over an hour late. Just as fortunate, Ohio’s governor and lieutenant governor kept their introductions very short. There were about three or four rows of people standing between me and Clinton. However, I’m 6’4″ and Ohioans are not a particularly tall people, so I had a very unobstructed view. It was the first time I’d attended a presidential political rally since 1992, when then-candidate Bill Clinton addressed a huge group of students on the campus of the University of Michigan.

Clinton made his pitch well: He had 3 major reasons and about 27 sub-reasons to vote for Hillary. He continues to be a very likable, personable person who speaks well. He’s very intelligent, but speaks in a way that is approachable and folksy — probably deliberately so. (He said “the al-qaeda” about half a dozen times, even though I’m sure he knows very well that “al” means “the”).

He got laughs, applause and cheers — I gave him all three, even though I’ve already endorsed Obama. I don’t have any hard feelings. Meanwhile, I already predicted back on February 10 — when Hillary was still up 20 points in Ohio and Texas — that she’d lose both and would drop out soon afterward. That prediction was a lot more bold back then than it would be now, but we’ll soon see if I’m right.

I headed back over to the Visitor Center right after the rally, just in case Clinton decided to show up for the tour after all. However, the fact that he was already running an hour late meant that any fat in his schedule would have to be trimmed.

As we watched his motorcade drive off down Chillecothe Road, we realized that Bill Clinton would not be the first president since James Garfield to visit the Temple — at least not that day. That honor will have to wait until another day.

I knew it wasn’t. My work with the John Whitmer Historical Association for the last few years has allowed me to form close connections with a number of Community of Christ leaders. But since this had been preached from the pulpit as a fact, I wanted to respond with definitive facts. So I talked to my friend Barbara Walden who is the director of the Kirtland Temple, and I put the question to her directly.

Of course the answer, unequivocally, was no. But it’s no surprise that she’d heard the question before. This particular canard has had a long enough shelf life that the Community of Christ probably could justify adding it to an FAQ list on their website. My friend Steve Shields who works at church headquarters in Independence, Missouri, loves to tell a much better variant of this Kirtland Temple story. One of his LDS friends had it on good authority that the LDS church was “in negotiations” to buy the Kirtland Temple for the sum of $40 million. Again, Steve knew this wasn’t the case, but he called the office of the First Presidency to confirm or deny the rumor. Grant McMurray, who was then one of the counselors conferred with his colleagues. President McMurray told Steve that he could tell his LDS friend that the answer was, quote: “hell, no!”

This is hardly the only faith-promoting LDS rumor that is frequently repeated about the RLDS/Community of Christ. LDS Mormons seem to know a lot of facts about their Reorganized Latter Day Saint cousins. The only problem is that most of these facts aren’t facts at all.

Let me cover a few more myths that I hear all the time:

* The RLDS church only gave women the priesthood because they ran out of male Smiths to lead the church. False. It’s true that the Prophet Wallace B. Smith, great grandson of Joseph Smith Jr. — who is still alive and serves as Emeritus (or retired) President of the church — had daughters, but no sons. However, there are plenty of male descendents of Joseph Smith Jr. who are members of the Community of Christ and who are even major figures in the church. It would have been very easy to continue to keep the presidency in the Smith family. However, President Smith did not feel called to do so; rather, he felt called to end the practice.

* The Community of Christ scrapped the Book of Mormon in order to join the World Council of Churches (WCC). False. The Community of Christ has not scrapped the Book of Mormon. I do think people who view the Book of Mormon as a literal history book are in the minority in the Community of Christ. However, these same believers have a generally more sophisticated view of scripture in general. Much of the events of the Bible are not literal histories, from Adam and Noah to the Judean kings. There doesn’t have to have been a real person named Job to make the scripture inspired. What the Community of Christ has scrapped is the exclusivist claim to be “the one and only true church.” The church now understands that while its own heritage has been inspired by God, other churches and individuals have also been inspired and are valid.

* The RLDS church changed its name because it wants to become another Protestant church. False. Charles D. Neff, who was one of the more important RLDS apostles in the later 20th century was actually a convert. He told the story that when he first heard the name of the church, “The Reorganized Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints,” his reaction was, “that is a terrible name for a church.” And he was right. Frankly, the LDS church has a terrible name too. The church was established in 1830 as the “Church of Christ.” That name was indistinct and was often confused with other churches of the same name, especially the Campbellite Church of Christ (Disciples of Christ). So, in 1834, the name of the church was changed to “Church of the Latter Day Saints.” That change upset members who had come to believe the Campbellite doctrine that God’s true church must have Christ’s name in it, so in 1838 the name was changed to “Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints.” (The spelling “Latter-day Saints” was used occasionally in the early church, but LDS church only formalized that spelling in Utah.) “Reorganized” was legally added to the name in the late 19th century in order to protect church property from the Federal anti-polygamy legislation. The change in 2001 to “Community of Christ” was meant to evoke the church’s heritage (by returning close to the original name), while emphasizing one of the core values that Reorganized Latter Day Saints have always drawn from their organization: the special sense of community.

* The LDS church should not end priesthood discrimination on basis gender (or adopt any other progressive ideal); look at what happened to the RLDS church. Whereas the other myths are relatively harmless, I find this one to be pernicious. The problem with this comparison is that it assumes that at some point in the 1970s, the LDS and the RLDS church were in the same place and their different paths almost function like a controlled science experiment. The reality is that the organizations aren’t comparable and never were.

The two have always been composed of extremely different types of Mormons. RLDS members at their core are dissenters and free-thinkers — the Mormon value they have always put first is free agency. For the RLDS, William Law (the editor of the Nauvoo Expositor) is a hero because he fought against creeping theocracy and corruption in the church, even though it meant taking on Joseph Smith Jr. himself. The people who became LDS, by contrast, were the mass of movement’s obeyers. For the people who joined Brigham Young’s organization, William Law was a Judas. It doesn’t matter that he was exposing terrible abuses of authority because it is of paramount importance to obey the hierarchy, right or wrong: Enter into polygamy because the leader commands it; cease polygamy for the same reason.

The fact that the two groups have always had this fundamentally opposite market differentiation means that the LDS organization has nothing to learn whatsoever from the RLDS organization’s experience. It would be impossible for MicroSoft to emulate Apple’s business practices because Apple has always been a niche player, while MicroSoft is working as the broad-based establishment. Let’s say Apple successfully branded itself to a particular niche of young, trendy professionals. If MicroSoft attempted to ape that success with similar marketing schemes, it would most likely only succeed in alienating its much broader client base.

Does the Community of Christ’s experience (for good or ill) presage the results the LDS church can expect to reap when women are eventually ordained and welcomed into the leadership? In the words of the RLDS First Presidency, the true answer is: “hell, no!”