Posted on 03/15/2009 7:02:15 AM PDT by Colofornian
If The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints had not uttered a single word about this Sunday's episode of "Big Love," it wouldn't have exploded into the hotbed of controversy it has become. Now, a lot more people are sure to watch Sunday night's episode.
In a statement released on Monday, the Church criticized an upcoming scene inside an LDS temple that shows sacred practices, rooms and garb. "Certainly Church members are offended when their most sacred practices are misrepresented or presented without context or understanding," officials said.
No one outside of the network has seen the episode, including myself as of this writing. So how does anyone know that these practices will be "misrepresented or presented without context or understanding?"
For three years, the writers of "Big Love" have been nothing but responsible and accurate in their portrayal of Mormon characters, including a sympathetic teen-age church member who befriends one of the polygamist's daughters and a not-so complimentary characterization of a self-righteous brother-in-law who is at odds with the polygamist. After all, who hasn't met at least one self-righteous member of the Church -- or any church, for that matter?
Which leads me to the second point of re-enacting sacred ceremonies in a fictional program for mass consumption.
I can never pretend to understand the sanctity of divine LDS temple ceremonies. As my mother-in-law, who is a devout Mormon, told me: "It's like trying to explain to someone who's been blind from birth how beautiful the sunrise is."
But while I respect the sacred nature of these practices, I also believe nothing -- no church, religion, idea, government entity, or leader -- is above parody, satire, criticism and open discussion. Just because one group deems a subject too sacrosanct to discuss doesn't mean it becomes off limits to everyone else for inspection and debate.
That includes a cartoon depicting Muhammad, which Muslims deemed sacrilegious, or a re-enactment of the JFK assassination, which our film critic wrongly opined should be off limits in the movie "Watchmen."
Some of our contemporary culture's most meaningful and worthy commentary has arisen from TV shows that don't worry about offense, such as "The Daily Show" and "South Park."
HBO has no reason to apologize for offending anyone and is under no obligation to make its series the way the LDS Church wants it to. Its only responsibility is to make the most entertaining, thought-provoking and artistic series it can. So far, it has.
Vince Horiuchi's column appears Mondays and Fridays. He can be reached at vince@sltrib.com or 801-257-8607.
In reference to LDS church press release: No one outside of the network has seen the episode...So how does anyone know that these practices will be "misrepresented or presented without context or understanding?"
Secondly I can never pretend to understand the sanctity of divine LDS temple ceremonies.
There's no revelation from the Mormon god or prophets that's been canonized as saying, "Keep temple ceremonies/rituals under wrap." "Hide them."
For that matter, there's been no LDS canonized revelations in their Scriptures revealing content to even include in these rituals. (They've all been made up behind the scenes...and no temple activity is even described in 4 different LDS "Scriptures")
Most of early Mormonism arose minus temples. The Book of Mormon doesn't mention temples, let alone temple rituals. Most of the Mormon ward world around the world has no ready access to temples.
A bunch of us were in Bammer's garage when we learned that an upcoming "Big Love" episode would feature elements of the LDS temple ceremony. His only wife came out and read it to us from the newspaper.
She showed us the photo the newspaper had published of an actress dressed in Mormon temple clothing. After a withering look at the only Tribune employee present, she went back inside.
Because everyone in the garage was "go-to-church" Mormon, the reaction was interesting. It ranged from a simmering annoyance to nuclear outrage. How could television presume to display something Mormons consider so sacred that even a lot of Mormons aren't allowed see it?
Jaimee Rose of the Arizona Republic began a Friday article on this subject by saying: The mainstream Mormon faith had a collective freak-out this week over HBO's plans to show a sacred Mormon temple ceremony on Sunday's episode of "Big Love."
Nuclear outrage? Collective freak-out? Over a ritual not even mentioned in LDS sacred "Scriptures?" Over a ritual in a location not even mentioned in the Book of Mormon?
More of Smith's schizophrenia, there was a period that he lambasted Masonry (reflected in the bom). Then he embraces it, copies its ceremonies and calls it a revelation. The morg are shooting themselves in the foot with their protestations - it points to their "belief being more fiction than fact.
It’s good that it’ll be shown - hopefully people can see how different Mormon beliefs and practices are from historical Christianity.
(That includes a cartoon depicting Muhammad, which Muslims deemed sacrilegious)
Everyone on this thread shows how open minded you all are. That’s what we conservatives are. I would heartily agree with all of you if HBO had truly targeted any liberal sacred cows the way they target Christians of all stripes. Did they truly put anything on that offended Muslims? How about an expose on the ACLU, Planned Parenthood, or what the Teachers Unions have done to inner city kids? Until they do so, I will continue to accuse them of pure propaganda. The Mormon Church has been singularly attacked after the homosexuals’ defeat in Calilfornia. Tom Hanks, the producer of “Big Love” even called them “Un-American” before he later apologized. I can put 2 and 2 together. I hope we all take in the big picture and not allow one group of Christians to be smeared by the Liberals. We will all get our turn after that.
So does that mean that Mormons will go on a jihad and start chopping off heads? No, Mormons are real humans and not Muzzie vermin.
OK, first you need to inform us exactly what the "smear" is here? What is it? (It kind of goes back to the point made by this columnist: ...how does anyone know that these practices will be "misrepresented or presented without context or understanding?")
Have you seen the yet-to-be-aired show? What is the "smear" they show? What is the exact "pure propaganda" of this show to be aired tonight? (Inquiring minds want to know)
The Mormon Church has been singularly attacked after the homosexuals’ defeat in Calilfornia. Tom Hanks, the producer of “Big Love” even called them “Un-American” before he later apologized. I can put 2 and 2 together.
LDS contributed somewhere around 40% of the funds to pass the ballot initiative. (Kudos to LDS for that)
Two, LDS are only about 2% of the population and already have ostracized mainstream culture with its social shenanigans of past open racism and polygamy -- and that's past and future polygamy [and supposedly present in the colony of Kolob]. I say "future" because LDS leaders have taught in our lifetime that the Mormon jesus will re-institute polygamy when he returns.
So, yes, the provocative Mormons [please note that their social shenanigans provoked others; most of the time it wasn't the other way around] thereby become an "easy" identifiable target for homosexuals and the social left.
So, what's a social conservative to do?
#1 We should stand with the Mormons in defending them re: Prop 8.
#2 And -- we should acknowledge that for the past 153 years, the Republicans were way ahead of the Democrats in opposing slavery and polygamy. In 1856, the fledgling Republican party set its social agenda upon eradicating what they called then "the twin relics of barbarism" -- slavery and polygamy.
Too many FREEPER and other conservatives think that if we critique the LDS we are joining in the social left's campaign against Prop 8. The answer to that is "you need a history lesson." The Republican party has taken on slavery & racism & protecting monogamy since our very birth. This isn't some new "sudden" campaign. This is who we are at our core.
So keep all this in mind when LDS conservative social leaders play their historical victim card of "Woe is me. LDS have been oppressed and persecuted." A good chunk of what he's talking about is grassroots Republicans and their leaders fighting the Mormon polygamy and racist agenda from 1856 on.
'Tis too easy for them to play this victim card minus qualifications. For example, they could say, "Woe is us. A Mormon Democrat from Utah was elected to Congress in 1898. They wouldn't seat him. They sent him home. We're an oppressed, persecuted people."
But what's the Paul-Harvey-rest of the story? Well, what they likely won't tell you is that this elected candidate, B.H. Roberts, took a third wife around 1894 -- about 4 years after the LDS supposedly "shut the door" on polygamy. [And why won't tell you? Because LDS leaders and apologists have successfully propagandized into their minds that polygamy ended in 1890 and that was that...not mentioning that LDS leaders solemnized another 220-250 plural marriages between 1890 and 1910]
In 1898, riled-up Republicans and others delivered a 28-roll, 7-million signature banners to Congress to influence them to not seat Roberts. Congress u-turned Roberts back home.
This is our free republic heritage operating at full cultural speed ahead!
I also note that the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints does not support polygamy (anymore). Accordingly, the “Big Love” show is about as Mormon as the “da Vinci Code” movie was Catholic.
The development of the temple rituals seems to have been cobbled together from various sources. Here is an excerpt from "Line upon Line Essays on Mormon Doctrine" Salvation in the Theology of Joseph Smith by David John Buerger
Prior to mid-1831, Mormon teachings on salvation do not seem to have been Calvinistic despite Book of Mormon teachings regarding the "natural man" and God's chosen people. References to God's elect, a limited atonement, salvation for the "predestined," and the doctrine of "calling and election" are conspicuously absent and even argued against (see Al. 31:16-17). The Doctrine and Covenants's sole use of the phrase "calling and election" appeared in a June 1831 revelation (D&C 53:1, 7) which was similarly free from eschatological implications.
At some point between June and November 1831, however, LDS teachings regarding the concept of salvation changed. A precipitating event seems to have been the 3 June 1831 conferral of the "High Priesthood" on church elders.1 According to testimony in 1887 by Book of Mormon witness David Whitmer, the introduction of high priests, an event he considered to be an unfortunate aberration from scriptural sources, "originated in the mind of Sidney Rigdon," Joseph Smith's close associate: "Rigdon finally persuaded Brother Joseph to believe that the high priests which had such great power in ancient times, should be in the Church of Christ to-day. He had Brother Joseph inquire of the Lord about it, and they received an answer according to their erring desires."2
Official church histories contain no record of the kind of disagreement or controversy Whitmer here alludes to, and the significance of the event may have been perceived differently as time passed.
I see the phenomenon of " Official church histories contain no record of the kind of disagreement or controversy Whitmer here alludes to, and the significance of the event may have been perceived differently as time passed." occurred very early in mormon history.
The Mysteries of Godliness-A History of Mormon Temple Worship-Part Two Masonry
"We also know that the Mormon Church has a long history of feeding personnel to the US intel agencies, the CIA and FBI – J. Edgar Hoover started the Bureau with Mormon agents. Alex Shoumatoff in his book, for example, recounts running into Bill Casey in the VIP gallery of the Mormon Church in Salt Lake City one afternoon. That means there is a good chance monies pouring into church coffers could also be black budget earmarked:
“One afternoon in the summer of 1983, I sat in the VIP gallery [of Salt Lake City’s LDS church] with two fidgety men in their thirties and an old man, who turned out to be William Casey, then director of the CIA, and his Secret Service guards. The Central Intelligence Agency and the Federal Bureau of Investigation recruit heavily from the Saints, who make ideal operatives because they are extremely patriotic and have an aptitude for surveillance technology.”
And as I’ve noted in previous stories, when Robert Mueller took over as FBI Bureau Chief, he moved Darwin A. John -- the LDS church’s Chief Information Officer for more than a decade -- into the FBI CIO spot."
Suzanne Mazzur-LDS Church--Mexico Drug Money Connection?
Mazur has written several articles about connections between the LDS church and the U. S. Government.
Well, the true answer to this is "That depends on what context you're talking about."
Does the LDS church still support polygamy?
The answer is yes! In multiple ways! And that includes both earth and beyond earth!
Beyond earth: LDS believe polygamy exists in the afterlife. (So they think it's going on right now in the celestial kingdom -- what I call the "colony of Kolob.") Also, they claim this not only involves 19th and 20th century LDS polygamists who've died, but current Mormons who were serially sealed to a spouse in the temple "for eternity." If you had 3 wives -- and the first two died -- and you were sealed to each of them "for eternity" in the Mormon temple...if you reach the celestial kingdom...you'd be an eternal polygamist.
Earth Some LDS also believe earthly polygamy will be re-instituted:
"Obviously the holy practice (of polygamy) will commence again after the Second Coming of the Son of Man and the ushering in of the millennium." (LDS apostle Bruce R. McConkie, Mormon Doctrine, 1966 edition, see pp. 577-579 for context)
Other notes:
#1 McConkie's book was reprinted in the late 1970s and is widely available in LDS bookstores today.
#2 Another dimension of LDS "celestial" polygamy even many Mormons are not aware of is that the 3-wife scenario above could also apply to a woman with 3 serial husbands. If you're a Mormon woman who is sealed to multiple husbands in the LDS temple "for eternity" the "official" LDS take is that you'd be an eternal polyamorist!
#3 Yet another way the LDS church supports such celestial multiple-partner marriage is by not removing D&C 132 section from its "scripture"-level Doctrine & Covenants. It's this section that Joseph Smith used to give a "revelational" cover to its own covert adulterous affairs he started years before. It's this same section that the fLDS use to justify its continued polygamous activity.
So context is everything...and the context of this discussion is a TV show about polygamous unions where a plural wife is trying to get her plural union solemnized. Since I haven't seen the show, I'd have to guess that she's trying in tonight's episode to get it solemnized at least "for eternity" -- if not for time.
From the article:
“It’s like trying to explain to someone who’s been blind from birth how beautiful the sunrise is.”
__________________________________________
That is how I feel about explaining the Gospel of Grace to the LDS. It is difficult to understand the beauty of the Christ of the Bible to someone who has been blinded by LDS misinterpretation for a long time. Yet, I press on, for the Glory of His Name.
But why NOT?
I thought GOD told them this was to be an EVERLASTING ordnance?
“That means there is a good chance monies pouring into church coffers could also be black budget earmarked”
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Do you think other religions are allied this closely with the government or is it just the Mormons?
The question I responded to was "Do you think other religions are allied this closely with the government or is it just the Mormons?"
There have been mormons boast here on FR about the high number of their members in the intelligency agencies and FBI, considering the small numbers of their membership in the US population.
I know of no other religious entity in which their members take this vow, as mormons do as part of their temple ritual:
You and each of you covenant and promise before God, angels, and these witnesses at this altar, that you do accept the Law of Consecration as contained in the Doctrine and Covenants, in that you do consecrate yourselves, your time, talents, and everything with which the Lord has blessed you, or with which he may bless you, to the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, for the building up of the Kingdom of God on the earth and for the establishment of Zion
Which will come first for them? Church or Country?
Intense spiritual and emotional indoctrination and abuse with the threat of removal from the ability to become a god and threat of social rejection. places like www.exmormon.org and FReepers here can attest to that.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.