« Well Below Prime | Home | Pots Shocked and Dismayed to Learn Kettles Also Able to Call Things Black »
April 6, 2006
High Councilman Calls Eleventh Article of Faith "No Longer Relevant"
Remember when I vowed that I'd never get sucked into another icky discussion with Mormon women who WANT to be feminists, but can't quite bring themselves to acknowledge the problems inherent in patriarchy? Well, I am happy to say I've managed to avoid doing that--however, I somehow forgot that something much, much worse than Mormon wanna-be feminists is bona fide Mormon priesthood holders!
Yeah, that's right, Holly's been smacked down by an avuncular servant of the lord, who finds it hard to understand why she feels the church is A) intellectually inadequate and B) inhospitable to someone like her--and this despite the fact that he all but calls her a slut! There will be more on all this later--I'm planning an entry, but it involves uploading photos, and because my software is old, I always have problems getting the photos the right size.
In the meantime, I thought I'd post something I came up with for the Sugar Beet, a (now defunct) website of Mormon satire, that expresses what I think of most Mormons' attitude toward tolerating other people's religious and ethical beliefs.
FYI: today is the anniversary of the founding of the church. That's right, 176 years ago today, on April 6, 1830, Joseph Smith hung out in some old guy's living room (Peter Whitmer Sr, to be exact) and officially organized a church which had as its basic tenet the claim that Joseph Smith was the one and only person on the face of the earth authorized to know and transmit God's will to the rest of us. And hey, in case you thought accepting bullshit like that might be a sign that you're a bit gullible, well, let me tell you, a high-minded Mormon man has told me recently that that just ain't the case!
****
(Pima, AZ) In a recent talk to the Pima Fourth Ward, High Councilman Layton Bryce warned members not to be led astray by too much emphasis on the Eleventh Article of Faith, which states, "We claim the privilege of worshiping the Almighty God according to the dictates of our own conscience, and allow all men the same privilege, let them worship, how, where, or what they may."
Bryce began his talk by reading the passage, then stating, "Sometimes people use the Eleventh Article of Faith as an excuse to refrain from doing missionary work. They say, 'I don't want to force my beliefs and opinions on people I have to live and work with. My friends and neighbors know what I believe, and if they're interested, they'll come ask me.'"
"But that attitude doesn't really fit in with our ideas about missionary work, brothers and sisters," Bryce added. "We know that we need to convert the world to the true gospel. I'm not saying we should force people to be Mormon, but we need to do all we can to persuade and teach people as to the right way to believe."
Bryce explained that the Eleventh Article of Faith was necessary in the early days, when the Church faced oppression and had not converted millions of people to the truth. "But now that the truthfulness of the gospel is accepted by so many people, that particular article of faith is no longer relevant in the ways that it once was."
Bryce went on to say that, "The events of September 11th have underscored the danger of letting everyone worship God as they see fit. There could always be some extremist who believes that worshiping God involves killing innocent people."
Reaction to the talk was mixed. Marge Pepper stated, "I definitely felt the Spirit as President Bryce was talking. I have always been bothered by the Eleventh Article of Faith. First of all, it doesn't start with 'We believe' like all the others, and I never could see why we should just let everyone else believe whatever they want when we know the Church is true. It would be better if we just got rid of it--after all, twelve is a much nicer number than Unlucky 13."
However, Roger and Joan Cannon both expressed concern over the message. "I thought Free Agency was central to the Gospel," Joan said. "It's as if he's forgotten the story of the War in Heaven, where it was decided that we all needed to be able to choose what we accept."
"What's President Bryce going to do, anyway?" her husband Roger asked. "Write to the Brethren and ask them to delete that passage from the scriptures?"
Upon hearing of such objections, Bryce dismissed them. "My talk has nothing in common with Satan's plan in the pre-existence. Remember, Satan was evil and wanted to thwart God's plan, while I am simply trying to help God accomplish his plan in the most straight-forward way possible. After all, I did say that we shouldn't force anyone to be Mormon."
Posted by holly at April 6, 2006 2:04 AM
I think His Imperial High Ass, King W must adhere to this AoF. Sounds squeakily similar to his foreign policy of spreading democracy in the world. Yuck.
This makes me sad. It is hard enough to be a feminist when, like me,you are not religious, were not brought up religious,and when the significant people in your life support feminist causes. I don't think it's fair that Mormons who leave get punished for speaking and living the truth.
Let me say that Mormon missionary activity mostly makes the Church look stupid to people like me. After all, if I don't intend to buy, what's all the salesmanship about? I think it mainly serves the purpose of allowing Mormons to aggrandize themselves as a persecuted majority of right thinkers in a sea of unbelief, as people slam doors in their faces and ignore them in plazas and street corners around the world. They're right up there with the less prestigious Jehovah's Witnesses, another group of right thinkers.
This is a little confused, I know, which is why I need more input from you, Holly, and I'm looking forward very much to your pictures, etc. To outsiders, the Mormons will always seem secretive.
To help lower the bar, I have to say that you can't spell Mormon without moron. I'll be interested to read your smackdown post once you're ready to roll with it. The Sugar Beet bit was great.
Interestingly, or not, Larry (I haven't read your book but I hear it's good)King is on and talking about Mormons and polygamy. But Reba's on too - oh what to do.
Yeah, Larry King is married to a Mormon. He has given the church some of its very best press.
I hope what I post in the next few days satisfies some of your curiosity, Hattie--though I suspect it might create even more. There's a lot of strange shit to uncover in the church.
I thought about what I said in my comments previously. Although I revel in being irreverent and sometimes irrelevant, I didn't mean it to sound as heartless as it may have. Having a mom on the mild side of religious zealotry (Roman Catholic garden variety) may not have been my first choice.
And you -- making me think, tsk tsk.
I have to say, this is the one AoF that I never fully understood. As you point out, it starts with "We claim the privilege" as opposed to the other 12, which are strong and declarative by using the words, "We believe..." (Although, as missionaries, we were taught that using the word "believe" was weak and we should always use "know," which is stronger and conveys a conviction of knowledge and certainty. As in "I know God lives..." versus "I believe God lives...")
AoF 11 is the only AoF that isn't definitive and declarative. It's open-minded and tolerant. It's ecumenical. It's wishy-washy. It's odd and out of place in a sea of creeds. It's very UU...
Creeds and declarations are generally the result of some external force demanding information and clarification from some internal entity. In this case, the church was/is an oddity and needed to explain itself to its neighbors who were being overwhelmed by land grabs, voting blocks, and whacked out theological behaviors and beliefs (i.e. polygamy, angels with golden books, etc.) The result is a set of declarations that are meant to set down in the simplest terms what the organization believes. And then there's the odd-wo/man-out: AoF 11--which tells the world that, in addition to our beliefs, we have a creed that tells you what our attitude and behavior is going to be toward our "friends of other faiths," to use a Gordon Hinckley phrase.
The sad thing about AoF 11 is, it's probably the least adhered to and least comprehended AoF by the majority of Mormons--especially those based in the Intermountain West.
As for proselytizing and pounding the pavement, AoF 11 is largely nullified, or at least muted, by the belief, based on revelation, that "the field is white, all ready to harvest."
Of course, the Articles of Faith were supposedly penned as a revelation, too. Now what do you do with that contradiction?
Janet wrote,
AoF 11 is the only AoF that isn't definitive and declarative. It's open-minded and tolerant. It's ecumenical. It's wishy-washy. It's odd and out of place in a sea of creeds. It's very UU....
The sad thing about AoF 11 is, it's probably the least adhered to and least comprehended AoF by the majority of Mormons--especially those based in the Intermountain West.
As for proselytizing and pounding the pavement, AoF 11 is largely nullified, or at least muted, by the belief, based on revelation, that "the field is white, all ready to harvest."
I agree with you, Janet. All of those ideas were part of what I was trying to get at when I wrote the piece for the Sugar Beet. AoF 11 seems to me to be pretty much insurance, a way of saying, "Well, we officially believe you can believe whatever you want--look, it's IN WRITING, OFFICIAL!" But everything else in Mormon doctrine and practice makes it clear that anyone who doesn't accept Mormon practice and belief is going to go to hell. OF COURSE the Mormons will let you languish in blighted ignorance if you really insist on it, but they're going to do everything they can to convince you to become Mormon, give you ever last chance to change your mind. How generous of them!
By the way, to the clever, clever anonymous person who used the email address jew@tolerance.org and left a commment consisting of all previous comments with the word "Mormon" changed to "Jew" (I guess in an attempt to show that...Judaism is as goofy as Mormonism? That Judaism isn't as goofy as Mormonism, since it doesn't involve proselytzing? The effect was murky): I claim the right to criticize every last doctrine and practice of the religion I grew up in, supported with thousands of dollars in tithing money, and proselytized for in Asia. If you don't like the fact that after 26 years as a practicing Mormon and serving a mission in Taiwan I came to the conclusion that much of Mormonism is ridiculous bunk, that's your tough shit.
And the 11th Article of Faith, my membership in the Mormon church and my understanding of the US Bill of Rights have taught me this: I MUST respect your right to believe whatever you want. However, that in no way obligates me to respect your beliefs themselves.
You can believe that the Grand Canyon contains proof that God created the world in six days. You can believe (as Mormon doctrine teaches) that dark skin is a sign of God's disfavor. You can believe that the moon is made of green cheese. You can believe that Germany didn't send millions of people to die in the gas chambers during the 30s and 40s. You can believe that God wants men to lead and women to serve. You can believe that George Bush didn't decide until the very last minute that we were going to war with Iraq. You can believe all that and more. I, however, can believe that you are ignorant and foolish for believing those things. It's not only my right under the constitution, but my right as someone able to engage in critical thinking.
Holly wrote:
"I, however, can believe that you are ignorant and foolish for believing those things. It's not only my right under the constitution, but my right as someone able to engage in critical thinking."
I would just add: it's your right and duty...
(you don't need to post this if you don't want to...)