"Big Love vs. Polygamy" (The Corner) LDS (OPEN)

National Review ^ | March 9, 2009 | Kathryn Lopez

[greyfoxx39]

Monday, March 09, 2009 Big Love vs. Polygamy   [Kathryn Jean Lopez] 03/09 03:10 PMShare   HBO's Big Love to air LDS temple ceremony in upcoming episode Sunday March 15   ARTICLE FROM LOPEZ' LINK:

Big Love

 

Friday March 6, 2009

 

(At some point I will start thinking of nifty titles. In order to garner a lot of hits through searches, I imagine many will need to include "Britany Spears" or "Brangelina" or perhaps even.."Obama!")

So, Big Love has been terrific this season. It's always been pretty good, but a stride has definitely been hit of late.

Let's see what they're up to.

When it first appeared, Big Love took some flack from some quarters (I don't recall exactly who), citing it as a sign of the attempt to normalize polygamy at the very least, and at the very most normalize any kind of alternative living arrangement.

Well, score one for TV art because Big Love does nothing of the sort.

In fact, if you're determined to find social commentary or "messages" in Big Love it would be hard to avoid the sense that polygamy, whether it's lived out on the compound in full Prairie regalia under the Prophet or in the 'burbs under the smiling visage of the home improvement magnate, is extremely messed up. Exploits women. Imprisons them. Keeps the men busy with their big old time capsules, determined to make their mark here and in eternity through prodigious amounts of progeny. (viewers will understand. My favorite image: Bill, abandoned, trudging down the road carting his big old time capsule...alone.)

Enough about messages, though. Big Love, even with its soap opera-ish tendencies, is the spot to see some terrifically strong television these days - better stuff on film than you will find in almost any movie theater on any given weekend.

The history is convoluted and pardon me if I miss some nuances. I often miss - or forget - nuances.

 Bill Henrickson is our suburban patriarch, the product of a renegade polygamous LDS breakoff compound. I believe he was one of those boys that are tossed out of those groups at adolescence ("lost boys")  either because of some sin they commit or because they are competition for the old geezers who need some more young wives. Juniper Creek is the name of the compound and the flawless Harry Deen Stanton is the Prophet.

Bill had one wife, Barb, with whom he had three children. At some point before the show began, she had cancer, and as a result had a hysterectomy. I don't know if it was this specifically that prompted Bill's decision to dive into polygamy, but he did, taking as a second wife Nikki (also the daughter of the prophet). Finally, enter Margene, younger, who encountered the family first as a babysitter, I believe.

Barb is rather normal suburban. Nikki has been modified Prairie, pretty hard-core up until recently,  and Margene is the young, needy woman, daughter of a disaster of a mother, anxious to belong, for family.  I think there are six or seven children between them all, the oldest about to go off to college, the youngest an infant.

What they are about is living "The Principle" - basically the conviction that their task on earth is to produce as many children as possible for their family for both now and eternity.

The show produces skads of juicy, intricate subplots involving both the trick of passing, in a disapproving LDS culture, the impact of this on the children, as well as the shenanigans involving Juniper Creek..and then the power struggle between Bill and Juniper Creek.

Like most HBO shows, the series is exceptionally well-cast and fantastically written.

I can't do the whole thing justice, so I'll just focus on a couple of aspects. Fellow viewers, chime in:

When I say that the show has hit its stride this season, what I mean is that it is getting past the temptation to treat the polygamous situation in a jokey manner, as it often did during the first season, at least, invovling hijinks and Viagara. Well, the Viagara came into it this season, and it did involve hijinks, but it also involved Bill hitting a wall of sorts, so it was okay by me. I hate Bill.

No, what is going on now is a more serious exploration of the consequences of this life for the family, and the increasing difficulty of Bill's efforts to distinguish his "good" polygamy from the "bad" polygamy of Juniper Creek. We see it as clear as a bright Utah morning, and we are really just waiting for Bill - or at least one of those women - to see it, too.  He's cleaner-shaven, but in the end, really no better than Roman Grant.

Did I mention that I hate Bill?

You will not be shocked to discover that I'm most interested in the show's treatment of religion - and I have actually felt that to be lacking in the first two seasons as well.

In terms of the Henricksons, The Principle was, up to this point, really just tacked on, an occasional referent in conversations. It seems to me that this season, they're finally doing some serious exploration of what these people really believe. The hallmark episode in this regard was two weeks ago, when Bill hauled the entire family on a pilgrimage East, stopping at sites along the way important to Mormon history - with the idea being the Henricksons' fidelity to the original vision of Joseph Smith, a vision since whitewashed by the LDS. But along the way...what happens? Oh, I don't know - his oldest daughter deals with an out-of wedlock pregnancy, his oldest son has an awkward encounter with his youngest wife (an echo of what gets these young men into trouble on the traditional compounds), his youngest wife is dealing - not well - with the death of her mother, his middle wife still has a male co-worker back in the office in which she was temping on her mind (and, at least once, on her phone), and his first wife is generally dissatisfied. The episode ends at the Hill Cumorah Pageant in New York, and very effectively, as Bill kneels in despair, aching for a sign.

Now, I still have quibbles with the treatment of the Henricksons' religion. The big question mark for me is Barb, the first wife, who comes from a traditional (and somewhat powerful) LDS family. I have never really understood why she acceded to Bill taking more wives.

What is most fascinating to me  - and I think one of the show's strengths - is that it does not take the easy way out of exploring this situation in contrast to just the general framework of 21st century American culture, although that is entering into the picture, particularly in relationship to the children. But beyond that, the primary conflicts are between the Hendrickson and the LDS establishment, determined to whitewash its own history, on the one hand, and then on the other, the living expression of that history, in Juniper Creek. Bill Hendrickson wants his history...but not too much, it seems.

 

More at  http://blog.beliefnet.com/viamedia/2009/03/big-love.html#more

 

 

(Tribune article excerpted per FR posting rules)

LDS Temple secrets? 'Big Love' TV episode alarms Mormons

TV show to air Sunday reportedly depicts faith's endowment ceremony

By Vince Horiuchi

The Salt Lake Tribune

Updated:03/10/2009 07:14:00 AM MDT

http://www.sltrib.com/ci_11874222

"Big Love," HBO's television drama about a polygamous Utah family, will air an episode March 15 depicting a sacred and private LDS temple ceremony, prompting an official response from the church criticizing the network.

 

According to a TV Guide interview with series creators Mark V. Olsen and Will Scheffer published in this week's magazine, both said the episode will include the depiction of an endowment ceremony within a Mormon temple. Only LDS members with a temple recommend and in good standing may witness such ceremonies.

 

-SNIP-

 

"Olsen and Scheffer were editing the season finale Monday and unavailable for comment. They are expected to release a statement about the controversy today.

 

In response to the upcoming episode, which has not been seen outside the network, the LDS Church issued a statement Monday criticizing depictions of the church generally in the news media and Hollywood, and specifically in "Big Love."

 

"Now comes another series of 'Big Love,' and despite earlier assurances from HBO, it once again blurs the distinctions between The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints and the show's fictional non-Mormon characters and their practices. Such things say much more about the insensitivities of writers, producers and TV executives than they say about Latter-day Saints."

 

http://newsroom.lds.org/ldsnewsroom/eng/commentary/the-publicity-dilemma

[greyfoxx39]

Open threads are a town square. Antagonism though not encouraged, should be expected

Posters may argue for or against beliefs of any kind. They may tear down other’s beliefs. They may ridicule.

On all threads, but particularly “open” threads, posters must never “make it personal.” Reading minds and attributing motives are forms of “making it personal.” Making a thread “about” another Freeper is “making it personal.”

When in doubt, review your use of the pronoun “you” before hitting “enter.”

Like the Smoky Backroom, the conversation may be offensive to some.

Thin-skinned posters will be booted from “open” threads because in the town square, they are the disrupters.

http://www.freerepublic.com/~religionmoderator/

 

[greyfoxx39]

Ping

[GovernmentShrinker]

Presumably Mormon polygamists will be using the old temple endowment ceremony, which is way different than the current one. I’m sure the LDS leadership’s biggest concern is that plenty of their younger members (and some older ones who haven’t done proxy endowments in recent history and are out of the loop) who are blissfully clueless about all the changes, will be prompted to look into the differences and start questioning the legitimacy of the whole thing.

It’s really sad what’s become of the temple ceremonies or “ordinances”. I’m not LDS, but am very familiar with both the history and current practice. The temple ordinances were originally very inspiring to participants, who went through the ordinances first for themselves, and then on behalf of departed family members and ancestors who they really cared about. Then somewhere along the line, the LDS leadership decided that people weren’t spending enough time in the temples, and that this needed to be rectified since the temple ordinances are a key distinguishing feature of the religion. The result has been the compiling of massive lists of “names” from genealogical records (often little more than names, with often inaccurate or very sketchy genealogical information), and Church members constantly filing through the temple mechanically repeating ordinances for complete strangers, in a truly preposterous attempt to ensure that ordinances have been done for everybody who’s ever been born.

In recent years, the push keep temple activity high, especially for teenagers, who start out by doing baptisms, has resulted in the “recycling” of names, so that that dead people who have already been baptized by proxy in the temple once or twice are baptized yet again. And the reality of the baptism scene has become a group of teens or college students bused to the temple as part of a ward (congregation) activity, and literally hopping in and out of the baptismal font over and over again as “names”, including recycled ones, flash briefly on an adjacent computer screen to be read off rapid fire by the priest officiating over the baptisms. Honestly, Joseph Smith must be spinning in his grave, or on Kolob, or wherever he is. This is absolutely NOT what he had in mind.

[MEGoody]

So people actually watch this drivel? Well, they watch American Idol in droves, so why not?

[Elsie]

I’m lucky to have electriCITY; let alone CABLE!

[Elsie]

Presumably Mormon polygamists will be using the old temple endowment ceremony, which is way different than the current one.

WHAT!!??

Did God change something ELSE when I wasn't looking???

I NEVER get them dang MEMOS!

--MormonDude(At this rate I won't know WHAT to believe!)

[cajungirl]

It isn’t drivel. But you have to watch to know that.

[MEGoody]

Why is it not “Drivel”? What real benefit does it provide?

[dbwz]

Haven’t Mormons been targeted as being responsible for the defeat of the gay marriage amendment in California?

I can’t imagine that anyone with the title of “producer” will be portraying them in a positive light from here on in.

[greyfoxx39]

Read episode synopsis HERE

There are online sites on which it can be seen, but I haven't looked into that.

[MIchaelTArchangel]

Gee, I cannot figure out how anyone could survive having two wives. I have enough trouble with but one.

[GovernmentShrinker]

Personally, I don’t see any reason why God wouldn’t periodically update things, as human knowledge and understanding increases. However, a number of LDS Curch memebers have taken the specifics of the “original temple ordinances” (which Joseph Smith claimed to have “restored” and claimed were necessary to secure a place in heaven) VERY literally and seriously, and when they learned of changes, decided the whole Church must be a fraud, and left. Huge overreaction, IMO, but one with which current LDS Church leaders are quite familiar.

[thackney]

Add to that you either have to marry sisters or have two mother-in-laws.

[svcw]

update?
Doesn’t that imply there were mistakes made?

[Colofornian]

From the article: In response to the upcoming episode, which has not been seen outside the network, the LDS Church issued a statement Monday criticizing depictions of the church generally in the news media and Hollywood, and specifically in "Big Love."

Let me get this straight: LDS introduce polygamy into our culture and practice it for a century. Then they do the hand-off to their spiritual stepkids -- the fLDS -- who continue to practice it for another 70+ years.

All along the LDS and fLDS attempt to spiritualize this practice by surrounding it with a spiritual ritual. So, when the media merely imitates (non-reality) what the LDS have been doing for 170 years (reality), the reality polygamists have a cow over non-reality. (Oh, that makes a lot of sense)

[SENTINEL]

There are two separate aspects to Polygamy. One is the physical and logistical acts. Mainstream mormons don't do this anymore. They do on the other hand teach ETERNAL polygamy which brings up second and I think most damaging aspect of polygamy....The Psychological abuse of the girls and women. They are taught from a young age that the most they can hope for is to be wife #1 in the eternities, and that their husband can dump them from that position to be a servant of the others on a whim, or simply leave her behind altogether at the "Veil".

I am a former mormon, and can tell you there were many a night I would find my wife crying in secret in utter despair over this psychological abuse.

Brigham Young taught that Jesus was a polygamist and Mary was not a virgin. LDS/FLDS are equally kooky cults.

Apostle Orson Hyde: “I discover that some of the Eastern papers represent me as a great blasphemer, because I said, in my lecture on Marriage, at our last Conference, that JESUS CHRIST WAS MARRIED at Cana of Galilee, THAT MARY, MARTHA, AND OTHERS WERE HIS WIVES, AND THAT HE BEGAT CHILDREN. (Journal of Discourses, Vol. 2, page 210)

Brigham Young, answering critics who claimed polygamy as a relic of barbarism: “ Yes, one of the relics of Adam, of Enoch, of Noah, of Abraham, of Isaac, of Jacob, of Moses, David, Solomon, the Prophets, OF JESUS, AND HIS APOSTLES.” (Journal of Discourses, Vol. 11, page 328)

Brigham Young: “The Scripture says that He, the LORD, came walking in the Temple, with HIS TRAIN; I do not now who they were, unless HIS WIVES AND CHILDREN;...” (Journal of Discourses, Vol. 13, page 309)

Brigham Young once stated: "Now remember from this time forth, and for ever, that Jesus Christ was not begotten by the Holy Ghost" (Journal of Discourses, vol. 1, p.51).

"These name-titles all signify that our Lord is the only Son of the Father in the flesh. Each of the words is to be understood literally. Only means only; Begotten means begotten; and Son means son. Christ was begotten by an Immortal Father in the same way that mortal men are begotten by mortal fathers" Bruce R. McConkie (Mormon Doctrine, 1966, pp.546-47).

In the light of their understanding that God is a procreating personage of flesh and bone, latter-day prophets have made it clear that despite what it says in Matthew 1:20, the Holy Ghost was not the father of Jesus.... The Savior was fathered by a personage of flesh and bone, and was literally what Nephi said he was, "Son of the Eternal Father" (Dialogue: A Journal of Mormon Thought, Autumn, 1967, pp.100-101).

President Brigham Young had this to say concerning the birth of Christ: "The man Joseph, the husband of Mary, did not, that we know of, have more than one wife, but Mary the wife of Joseph had another husband" (Deseret News, October 10, 1866).

Just a word or two now, on the subject of blood atonement ... man may commit certain grievous sins —according to his light and knowledge—that will place him beyond the reach of the atoning blood of Christ. If then he would be saved he must make sacrifice of his own life to atone—so far as in his power lies—for that sin, for the blood of Christ alone under certain circumstances will not avail.... Joseph Smith taught that there were certain sins so grievous that man may commit, that they will place the transgressor beyond the power of the atonement of Christ. If these offenses are committed, then the blood of Christ will not cleanse them from their sins even though they repent. Therefore their only hope is to have their own blood shed to atone, as far as possible, in their behalf.... And men for certain crimes have had to atone as far as they could for their sins wherein they have placed themselves beyond the redeeming power of the blood of Christ (Doctrines of Salvation, vol. 1, pp.133-36).

"If any miserable scoundrels come here, cut their throats." - From red hot blood atonement sermon by Brigham Young, Journal of Discourses, Vol. II., page 311. At the conclusion of the injunction to "cut their throats, " "all the people said 'amen!' "

[greyfoxx39]

The LDS church seems to indicate that THEY are in charge of the message.....

Control the Message

[thackney]

Not necessarily.

Just because we didn't know every stage of the plan from the beginning doesn't mean it wasn't the original plan by our Lord.

I don't consider Christ correcting a mistake. Us weak and sinful humans normally need thousands of years of lessons before we are ready to accept the next level of instruction.

[GovernmentShrinker]

No, it implies that God is well aware that human culture is gradually advancing in knowledge and understanding, and that people’s spiritual needs may be best served by practices which make sense to them in the context of the times they’re living in. The “mistake” is on the part of people who imagined that the specific words, gestures, costumes, etc were the actual substance of the spiritual practice, rather than just a framework for the substance.

If you look back to the early 1900s, many very well-educated adults were heavily involved in secret societies that had very complex rituals, complete with costumes, and titles for positions in the organization that now sound completely preposterous to us. Many of these organizations have died out completely, some are struggling on with an ever-shrinking number of ever-older members, and some have updated themselves and continued to thrive without the costumes and titles.

Many of these societies, complete with wacky outfits and detailed rituals in which members were addressed by their outlandish titles, were quite spiritually uplifting to participants at the time, but their modern socioeconomic counterparts can’t read the manuals or look at pictures of the costumes without bursting out in a fit of giggles. But nonetheless, the underlying substance of the groups, and their effects on the lives and communities of their active members, were quite serious and meaningful.

[Elsie]

LDS introduce polygamy into our culture and practice it for a century.

LIAR!!

Bigoted LIAR!!

ALL of you HATEFUL Gentiles KNOW that GOD's Eternal Ordinance only lasted 47 years!!

--MormonDude(Officially; that is...)