This past August marked my second year of being out of the Church. For the most part I'm doing well. The only current goings-on I know about the Church are what my LDS family members and friends post on Facebook. Most of the time they're inspirational quotes from Church leaders, and I usually scroll past those posts. Occasionally something will catch my attention that I just roll my eyes at, like this past General Conference when some guy made up the word "ponderize" to try to make a point, and six or seven of my Facebook friends started using that word. Stuff like that is really gimicky, and I just move on. But every once in a while something catches my attention and it affects me strongly; that happened this past Thursday, and that's what I want to talk about here today.
In one of my first posts of this blog I listed the social reasons why I left the Church, and the first thing on the list was that the dress code and modesty standards skew members' views of sex and their understanding of sexuality. What led me to that conclusion was an article I read online entitled "Men, Sex, and Modesty." Well, this past Thursday I saw an article written by a woman named Tracy entitled "Perverting Modesty" that one of my Facebook friends "liked", and it was from the same website where the "Men, Sex, and Modesty" article was found, only written two years earlier. It talks about how the Church's standards of modest dress affected Tracy, who was a convert to the Church.
Here is the article: http://bycommonconsent.com/2011/07/09/perverting-modesty/
When I read that article, bad memories and feelings came flooding back to me. It broke my heart to read about Tracy's experience. To read about the embarrassment she felt when some "well-meaning" woman told her that the dress she was wearing—which made her feel pretty and was nice enough to feel specialùwas inappropriate, hurt my heart.
Reading this article on Thursday reminded me of an unexpected experience I'd had the day before.
I wear this shirt around the house sometimes: https://www.pyramidcollection.com/itemdy00.aspx?T1=PB5103+BL+2X3X because it's one of the styles I like, and now that I'm not a member of the Church I can wear whatever I want. Wednesday I wore this top with a recently-purchased floor-length red skirt. I'm overweight and so I often don't feel very attractive; but I was surprised to find that as I wore that outfit around the house that day, I felt tall, I felt poised, and I felt pretty. When my husband came home from work, he saw me and said I looked voluptuous, and that added to how good I felt. But earlier that afternoon I'd had a strange experience. I had walked out the front door and around the side of the house to bring a bag of trash to the trash bin, and I realized that I was hyper-aware of what I was wearing. The only people outside were a woman my age with her young child, and I don't think the woman even saw me, but in my mind I felt like all the neighbors could see me from their houses and that I was being judged for what I was wearing, both because it's not something people usually wear, but also because of the amount of skin I was showing (midriff and shoulders). It was then that I realized that the Church's standard of modest clothing still affects how I think others see and judge me.
I talked a little bit in my "Control" post last year about my problems with the Church's attempts to control its members' sexuality. I'm going to elaborate on the topic specifically regarding clothing by using my own personal experiences, because since writing that post, I've come to better understand the issue of the Church's dress standards.
The Church has very strict dress standards for its members. I was regularly taught that our body is a temple where the spirit of the Lord can reside if we're clean and virtuous, and we're supposed to keep our body covered to please the Lord. Any time members start reading the Book of Mormon over again, they usually make
it to at least Jacob, and in Jacob 2:28 we read, "For I, the Lord God,
delight in the chastity of women. And whoredoms are an abomination
before me; thus saith the Lord of Hosts." There are other scriptures
from the Bible that also talk about the virtue of women: Proverbs 12:4 says,
"A virtuous woman is a crown to her husband: but she that maketh ashamed is as rottenness in his bones," and Proverbs 31:10 says, "Who can find a virtuous woman? for her price is far above rubies." The way a girl or a woman dresses is a superficial and utterly wrong way to
judge her virtue, but that's the reality of LDS culture.
As a teenager I was taught that it's up to us girls to keep boys' thoughts pure by keeping ourselves modestly clothed, which included wearing shirts that had sleeves that at least covered the shoulders, and shorts and skirts that were no higher than the knees. This caused me to believe that boys were so easily aroused that shoulders and knees were enough to put immoral thoughts in their heads. I also was instantly resentful of any Mormon girls who showed up to church or school wearing shirts that showed their shoulders (or more) and skirts that came up to the mid-thighs. In my mind, they were taught the same standards that I was, and now they were going to get the attention from boys and I wasn't, because of how they were dressed. It seemed to me that they were trying to get the boys interested in them by dressing that way. I got that idea from the "For the Strength of Youth" pamphlet, which says in its Dress and Appearance section: "Never lower your dress standards for any occasion. Doing so sends the
message that you are using your body to get attention and approval and
that modesty is important only when it is convenient." Whether or not that was the case with each girl, I don't know, but I believed it; I believed that's what those girls were doing, and I thought it was unfair. I'm just glad I never said anything to them about what they were wearing; if I had, I would regret it now.
As a woman I see that the problem is just as bad for adult women. Matthew 5:28 (and 3 Nephi 12:28) says, "But I say unto you, That whosoever looketh on a woman to lust after her hath committed adultery with her already in his heart." As we women remember from our Young Women lessons, men are overly-sexual and the sight of shoulders and kneecaps are enough to get them sexually aroused and lustful. Thus, any woman who knowingly dresses immodestly at church is causing other women's husbands to commit adultery in their hearts. Not all women consciously realize that's what's going on, but subconsciously that fear is absolutely there.
The Church leaders don't have to constantly remind adult women of the need to dress modestly. The temple garment ensures that hem lengths will be a certain length, because having garment sleeves and legs sticking out from underneath clothing looks stupid. But not only that, the judgmentalness (is that a word?) of other women will be enough to keep women in check. As Tracy showed in the "Perverting Modesty" article, there are plenty of women in the Church who are more than willing to point out clothing of ours that's "inappropriate" and "immodest". Shaming can go a long way in regulating behavior.
Once I left the Church, almost like magic I was no longer judgmental of women wearing spaghetti straps or skirts that came above the knees. I distinctly remember one day shortly after leaving the Church, I saw a woman walk past me in a store wearing a tank top and I thought, "Her shoulders are showing... and it's fine! ... She looks fine."
That was a turning point for me. Over the next few weeks I discarded my old Church-dictated modesty standards and I examined my wardrobe and played around with hem lengths, determined to discover what was flattering on my body and what helped me look my best. And guess what? The styles that make me look my best and that make my body look the most proportional are considered "immodest" by Church standards. And I found myself not caring, because I actually looked good now! I had been looking disproportional all these years and I never noticed because up until then I had only been concerned with "modest" hem lengths and good colors on me. And it turns out that my husband doesn't care, either. I asked him on Thursday night how he would feel if I wore yesterday's outfit in public, and he said quite honestly that he'd be fine with it; it wouldn't bother him at all. I asked him why not, and he said he didn't know. I suspect it's because he knows I'm not out there trying to seduce people with showing some skin. He knows this is my style (I wear it often at home) and that I'm comfortable in it, and I'm guessing he likes that I'm comfortable enough with my body to express myself in the way I dress, and that I would have no ulterior motives if I wore outfits like that in public.
I admire the people who aren't afraid to express themselves in public through the way they dress, even if they're what American society considers "unconventional" styles. It takes courage to go against the norm, and I'm working up to it myself. Unfortunately, members of the Church aren't as free to do so. If you go against the Church's approved dress standards, you risk getting ostracized by the members (mostly the women; it's different for the guys), and because the social aspect of church is such a big part of the LDS experience, you will very quickly find yourself on the outside of all social circles. You'll probably get called into the bishop's office for a little chat, too, which is embarrassing. Your options are to conform, to not conform and get ostracized, or to leave.
I truly hope the leaders of the Church will reevaluate this fixation and obsession with dress standards, because these standards are very superficial and they are what causes such judgmentalness among the girls and women of the Church. And yes, there is causation there. But I know it will never change. The Church likes to pride itself on standing out from the rest of society, of staying firm to "God's" dress standards while the rest of the world changes their fashions, and of "being in the world but not of the world." Not only that, but the Church also has scriptures like this: "What I the Lord have spoken, I have spoken, and I excuse not myself; and though the heavens and the earth pass away, my word shall not pass away, but shall all be fulfilled, whether by mine own voice or by the voice of my servants, it is the same." (D&C 1:38). So as long as the Church leaders feel that these dress standards should stay the way they are, then they're supposedly speaking for the Lord, and so nothing will change. And millions of girls and women will continue to be taught that they are directly responsible for keeping the minds of boys and men pure, and they will continue to judge one another's virtue and interpersonal intentions based on the length of their clothing.
The author of the article spoke the words of my heart when she said: "I wish I could erase this twisted idea of modesty from my experience." I've shed a lot of the Church's view of modest dress
from my mind, but part of me is still affected by it as I found out last week, and I still have a
way to go before it truly doesn't affect my life anymore. I want to feel free to express myself through my clothing without worrying about who's judging me for showing more shoulder or more leg than is Church-appropriate.
Monday, October 26, 2015
Sunday, April 5, 2015
Religion Needs to Be About Peace
I've been thinking a lot about religion for the past week or so. Mormonism specifically because this weekend is General Conference and I hear my husband listening to the talks on his computer, but also Buddhism because this past Friday my husband and I went to see the performance art program called Shen Yun, which is a celebration of thousands of years of Chinese music and dance, and Buddhist principles are thrown in there.
I came to the conclusion long ago that no one knows what happens when we die, no one knows the true nature of the heavens, the dimensions, or the purpose of life. And therefore all religions are putting forth their best guess as to what's going on and what will happen.
Today I was frustrated with my husband because he continues to believe a religion which I've found to be false and invented by a conman. I vented to him about the Mormon church this afternoon, a topic I usually avoid with him because it only leads to contention. But then I realized that he hasn't thought to question the validity of the Church because it works for him; it gives him purpose and it makes him happy. I haven't had the same experience with the Mormon church and that's why the Church doesn't work for me. Christianity in general will not work for me because it teaches that we're constantly sinning, whether because of misdeeds or because of not doing something that we're supposed to be doing, and that we need to rely on the Grace of God to have any hope of being redeemed and saved. I'm still angry about all the years I spent feeling guilt and self-loathing just for being human and having human faults and desires.
The conclusion I reached today is that people need a religion that works for them, one that gives them purpose, makes them happy, and helps them feel peace in this life. For some people, that's Christianity. For some, that's Buddhism. For some, that's Islam. And I need to work on respecting others' beliefs even if they're not ones I share. I'm fairly good at showing respect for other religions, but Mormonism is still a sore spot for me and it's hard to respect a religion that gave me so much unhappiness for the majority of my life. I'm working on it though, and today's realization is helping.
Hopefully one of the religions of the world has it right (the "it" being the right answers to life's questions). But since there's no way to know for sure until we die, then I need to find something that will give me peace and happiness. I am starting to come to grips with the possibility that evolutionary science has it right—that humans are part of an evolutionary process that's been going on for millions or billions of years—and the thought is a lonely one and it makes me feel isolated and utterly pointless. Because if you look at life through a strictly physical, biological, evolutionary lens, then I'm only here to help continue the survival of the human species by raising my children as part of the next generation. I don't have a great mind that can comprehend the cosmos; I have no special skills that can help the human race thrive and not kill itself off or destroy the Earth. I'm just an average person taking up space and oxygen and resources. Like I said, that's a lonely way of thinking and it makes me feel completely pointless but I have to accept that this, too, is a possibility and that maybe there is no "happily ever after" that religions preach.
Well, I'm going to investigate other religions to see if there's one whose principles will help me live the rest of my life with peace in my heart and in my mind since this life, as far as I'm concerned, is all that matters.
I came to the conclusion long ago that no one knows what happens when we die, no one knows the true nature of the heavens, the dimensions, or the purpose of life. And therefore all religions are putting forth their best guess as to what's going on and what will happen.
Today I was frustrated with my husband because he continues to believe a religion which I've found to be false and invented by a conman. I vented to him about the Mormon church this afternoon, a topic I usually avoid with him because it only leads to contention. But then I realized that he hasn't thought to question the validity of the Church because it works for him; it gives him purpose and it makes him happy. I haven't had the same experience with the Mormon church and that's why the Church doesn't work for me. Christianity in general will not work for me because it teaches that we're constantly sinning, whether because of misdeeds or because of not doing something that we're supposed to be doing, and that we need to rely on the Grace of God to have any hope of being redeemed and saved. I'm still angry about all the years I spent feeling guilt and self-loathing just for being human and having human faults and desires.
The conclusion I reached today is that people need a religion that works for them, one that gives them purpose, makes them happy, and helps them feel peace in this life. For some people, that's Christianity. For some, that's Buddhism. For some, that's Islam. And I need to work on respecting others' beliefs even if they're not ones I share. I'm fairly good at showing respect for other religions, but Mormonism is still a sore spot for me and it's hard to respect a religion that gave me so much unhappiness for the majority of my life. I'm working on it though, and today's realization is helping.
Hopefully one of the religions of the world has it right (the "it" being the right answers to life's questions). But since there's no way to know for sure until we die, then I need to find something that will give me peace and happiness. I am starting to come to grips with the possibility that evolutionary science has it right—that humans are part of an evolutionary process that's been going on for millions or billions of years—and the thought is a lonely one and it makes me feel isolated and utterly pointless. Because if you look at life through a strictly physical, biological, evolutionary lens, then I'm only here to help continue the survival of the human species by raising my children as part of the next generation. I don't have a great mind that can comprehend the cosmos; I have no special skills that can help the human race thrive and not kill itself off or destroy the Earth. I'm just an average person taking up space and oxygen and resources. Like I said, that's a lonely way of thinking and it makes me feel completely pointless but I have to accept that this, too, is a possibility and that maybe there is no "happily ever after" that religions preach.
Well, I'm going to investigate other religions to see if there's one whose principles will help me live the rest of my life with peace in my heart and in my mind since this life, as far as I'm concerned, is all that matters.
Monday, February 2, 2015
I Miss It
Having the house to myself for three hours on Sunday is nice, but there are times like today where I miss going to church.
I miss going to church expecting to be edified and spiritually strengthened. Sunday School was my favorite hour of church because for me it was the most intellectually stimulating. I used to read the next week's lesson during the week and gain my own insights into the scriptures so that I could actively participate in the lessons and actually get something out of church. I always liked being in class with people who had insightful things to say and who I could tell also read the lesson or the scripture passages for that lesson.
I miss the security of believing that what I was being taught was true, that my church really did have all the answers even if I didn't fully understand them yet. Even if I struggled with pieces of doctrine here and there, the core parts of the gospel were something I could hold onto and they would give me strength and a certain amount of peace.
I miss believing the same things that my husband does. We are still respectful of each others' beliefs and we still have a good marriage, but it's different now. We've gone from believing that our marriage will last for time and all eternity, to knowing that it's for this life only—for him because I'm no longer sealed to him, and for me because I realize that this life might be the extent of my existence.
There's a quote I read in the Cosmos book that has stayed with me for the past few months. "Part of the resistance to Darwin and Wallace [evolution theorists] derives from our difficulty in imagining the passage of the millennia, much less the aeons. What does seventy million years mean to beings who live only one-millionth as long? We are like butterflies who flutter for a day and think it is forever." (p. 27) I've already come to grips with the idea that there's a very good chance that there is nothing after this life, that once I die this really might be the end of my existence. Believe me, it hasn't been easy. I'm not afraid of death though, I'm mostly just curious to find out the truth—to find out which religion got it right, if any. That's assuming that I still exist after I die. If I cease to exist, well, that's that I guess.
Right now I suffer from thoughts and feelings of pointlessness, and I will probably have those in varying degrees for the rest of my life. I'm able to look past them if I get enough sleep at night and if I have other things to take my mind off of them, and it's actually helping me appreciate this life more.
Sometimes I wonder if I could ever go back to church, if the nice feelings of security and community I had felt there could make up for the doctrines that I no longer believe in. But I know I can't. People go to church because the Church teaches things they believe in. I don't believe in what they teach, and so even if I were to attend church again, I would feel out of place; I don't belong there anymore. So for now I'll just be glad for people who have something to believe in, and I'll keep trying to make my life worthwhile.
I miss going to church expecting to be edified and spiritually strengthened. Sunday School was my favorite hour of church because for me it was the most intellectually stimulating. I used to read the next week's lesson during the week and gain my own insights into the scriptures so that I could actively participate in the lessons and actually get something out of church. I always liked being in class with people who had insightful things to say and who I could tell also read the lesson or the scripture passages for that lesson.
I miss the security of believing that what I was being taught was true, that my church really did have all the answers even if I didn't fully understand them yet. Even if I struggled with pieces of doctrine here and there, the core parts of the gospel were something I could hold onto and they would give me strength and a certain amount of peace.
I miss believing the same things that my husband does. We are still respectful of each others' beliefs and we still have a good marriage, but it's different now. We've gone from believing that our marriage will last for time and all eternity, to knowing that it's for this life only—for him because I'm no longer sealed to him, and for me because I realize that this life might be the extent of my existence.
There's a quote I read in the Cosmos book that has stayed with me for the past few months. "Part of the resistance to Darwin and Wallace [evolution theorists] derives from our difficulty in imagining the passage of the millennia, much less the aeons. What does seventy million years mean to beings who live only one-millionth as long? We are like butterflies who flutter for a day and think it is forever." (p. 27) I've already come to grips with the idea that there's a very good chance that there is nothing after this life, that once I die this really might be the end of my existence. Believe me, it hasn't been easy. I'm not afraid of death though, I'm mostly just curious to find out the truth—to find out which religion got it right, if any. That's assuming that I still exist after I die. If I cease to exist, well, that's that I guess.
Right now I suffer from thoughts and feelings of pointlessness, and I will probably have those in varying degrees for the rest of my life. I'm able to look past them if I get enough sleep at night and if I have other things to take my mind off of them, and it's actually helping me appreciate this life more.
Sometimes I wonder if I could ever go back to church, if the nice feelings of security and community I had felt there could make up for the doctrines that I no longer believe in. But I know I can't. People go to church because the Church teaches things they believe in. I don't believe in what they teach, and so even if I were to attend church again, I would feel out of place; I don't belong there anymore. So for now I'll just be glad for people who have something to believe in, and I'll keep trying to make my life worthwhile.
Tuesday, November 4, 2014
My Thoughts on the Polygamy Essay
One of my college roommates commented on this article in her Facebook news feed yesterday, and so it showed up in my news feed. It's from yesterday's Salt Lake Tribune, and it's written by a Mormon female psychologist named Kristy Money who has worked in prisons to rehabilitate sex offenders. I originally didn't want to write my thoughts about the Church's polygamy essay that I linked in my previous post, but there is a part of her article that helped put into words the anger I've been feeling about Joseph Smith and polygamy, so I want to share that part of her article and open up about my thoughts and feelings regarding the Church's practice of polygamy.
(the old link became unavailable, so I found another copy of it from Nov. 19.) Here it is:
http://www.sltrib.com/opinion/commentary/2014/11/19/op-ed-lds-church-should-make-clear-smith-was-wrong-to-take-14-year-old-wife/
This is what she said that resonates with me:
And that is EXACTLY what Joseph Smith did! And THIS is what infuriates me about the entire polygamy topic.
Relationship of Trust
Joseph Smith was in a position of authority—he was the leader of the Church, the mouthpiece of God, and his followers trusted him. They believed him when he said he had revelations from God and visits from angels. He was also a charismatic person, and people naturally followed him and wanted to be near him and to believe what he said.
Convincing victims that his proposal wasn't wrong
Here is the quote from the church's essay,
Ensuring that victims remain silent
From the essay regarding the early plural marriages in Nauvoo:
The leaders of the Church lied to their members. Members heard rumors and wondered, "What's going on here? Are our leaders really practicing polygamy?" and the leaders of the Church flat-out lied to them and told them no. But they were sneaky about it. They said that the official doctrine of the Church was monogamy, and that's why so many people think polygamy started in Utah under Brigham Young, because that's the first time the leader of the Church came forward and publicly announced that it was a practice commanded by God. Joseph and his buddies practiced it quietly and he told the girls and their families to keep quiet about it, which many of them did.
********************
The question is: are the plural wives and fellow leaders of the Church considered victims? And my answer is yes, many of them were victims. I'm sure there were some women who were more than happy to have sex with the charismatic leader of their church and community. But look at what the Church's essay says regarding some of their reactions to the news of this "revelation from God":
Helen Mar Kimball (the 14-year-old): it was one of the "severest" trials of her life.
Heber C. Kimball: "I never felt more sorrowful. I wept days... I had a good wife. I was satisfied."
Brigham Young: "it was the first time in my life I had desired the grave."
Lucy Walker: "Every feeling of my soul revolted against it."
Zina Huntington Jacobs: "I made a greater sacrifice than to give my life, for I never anticipated again to be looked upon as an honorable woman."
To me, that absolutely says victim. These people knew in their hearts and souls that Joseph's proposal was wrong. But the article goes on to describe how these people came to terms with this "commandment" that was revealed to them: they prayed about it. And after days of weeping and praying, they all received personal revelation that this was a correct principle and that Joseph was right, and they moved forward with polygamy free of conscience.
But here's the thing about prayer: if you pray hard enough and pour out your heart long enough, you'll feel okay with anything. Your brain will eventually come up with a rationale to help you deal with what's been put in front of you, and religious people will interpret that as an answer from God (I'm speaking from personal experience here—that's how I was able to be okay with the early Church's practice of polygamy for so many years). These people believed Joseph was a prophet who spoke for God. They wanted to believe that he wouldn't ask of them something that was wrong. And sure enough, after much prayer, each one of them became okay with his proposal.
Those girls who didn't become victims were the ones whose parents saw through Joseph's lies and they left the Church because of it. I have absolute respect for those people because they saw Joseph for what he was: a sexual predator who was using his position as the leader of the Church to sexually prey on the girls and women of his church.
********************
Many people, including some of my family members, want to know why I have such strong feelings about this topic and why I'm making such a big deal about it. "It happened more than 170 years ago and right now polygamy isn't part of the Church; why are you so hung up on this?"
This is why: 1) it questions the validity of Joseph Smith as a prophet of God, and 2) it calls into question the validity of all of the Doctrine and Covenant revelations, which the Church is founded on.
1) Every four years when the Church studies the Doctrine and Covenants and Church history in church meetings, this scripture inevitably gets talked about, and I've heard it many times, "Joseph Smith, the Prophet and Seer of the Lord, has done more, save Jesus only, for the salvation of men in this world, than any other man that ever lived in it." (Doctrine and Covenants 135:3). The Church puts Joseph Smith right below Jesus Christ in order of importance to the salvation of men! The Church glorifies Joseph Smith, it reverences him, and the leaders will forever sustain his revelations as from God Himself. But if people were to admit that Joseph made up the revelation on plural marriage to justify his pursuits to have sex with a bunch of women, then they would have to admit that the commandment wasn't really from God, despite the 37 times in that revelation that the speaker specifically refers to himself as the Lord (that in itself is a little telling—it comes across as the speaker trying really hard to convince the reader that he is who he says he is). And if that commandment wasn't really from God, then how many other commandments were also not from God? If they aren't God's commandments, then Joseph Smith was not a prophet of God and he was, instead, a conman.
2) The entire Doctrine and Covenants is now questionable, and that's the book of scripture that most of the LDS church is founded on. The way the Church is organized, the duties that the different leaders have, they're all spelled out in the Doctrine and Covenants as revelations directly from God to Joseph Smith. The very nature of God and the three Kingdoms of Glory (the Church's version of the afterlife) are spelled out in the Doctrine and Covenants. The Book of Mormon is the face of the Church—it's what missionaries hand out to people they want to convert to the Church, and Church leaders frequently encourage members to gain a testimony of the Book of Mormon. But I've never heard leaders tell members to gain a testimony of the Doctrine and Covenants. The Pearl of Great Price, sure, but not the Doctrine and Covenants, and that, more than any other book of LDS scripture, represents the LDS church. The only reason that the Church can claim it is God's true church is because of the revelations in the Doctrine and Covenants. But if Joseph Smith made up the revelation about plural marriage, then it's quite likely that he made up much more than that, and that would mean the LDS church is not God's church-- it was Joseph Smith's church.
These are my reasons for feeling so much anger toward the early Church's practice of polygamy. I firmly believe that Joseph Smith used his power and authority as the leader of the Church to sexually prey on the girls and women of his congregation, and I'm furious that it worked so effectively. Kristy Money's article regarding the Church's essay has a different point to make; it wasn't to paint Joseph Smith as a sexual predator. But her description of the "victim grooming pattern" describes exactly what Joseph Smith did and the Church's own essay gives the evidence, and it's a much MUCH bigger deal than members would like to admit.
(the old link became unavailable, so I found another copy of it from Nov. 19.) Here it is:
http://www.sltrib.com/opinion/commentary/2014/11/19/op-ed-lds-church-should-make-clear-smith-was-wrong-to-take-14-year-old-wife/
This is what she said that resonates with me:
"I've worked in a prison rehabilitating sex offenders. I'm well-versed in victim grooming patterns. These include establishing a relationship of trust (often with age/other authority), convincing victims that their proposal isn't wrong, and afterward ensuring that victims remain silent."
And that is EXACTLY what Joseph Smith did! And THIS is what infuriates me about the entire polygamy topic.
Relationship of Trust
Joseph Smith was in a position of authority—he was the leader of the Church, the mouthpiece of God, and his followers trusted him. They believed him when he said he had revelations from God and visits from angels. He was also a charismatic person, and people naturally followed him and wanted to be near him and to believe what he said.
Convincing victims that his proposal wasn't wrong
Here is the quote from the church's essay,
"When God commands a difficult task, He sometimes sends additional messengers to encourage His people to obey. Consistent with this pattern, Joseph told associates [the families of the girls he wanted to take as plural wives] that an angel appeared to him three times between 1834 and 1842 and commanded him to proceed with plural marriage when he hesitated to move forward. During the third and final appearance, the angel came with a drawn sword, threatening Joseph with destruction unless he went forward and obeyed the commandment fully."An angel came with a drawn sword and threatened Joseph with destruction unless he took plural wives! That is complete and utter crap!! Joseph manipulated the members of the Church by using their belief that angels had come down to him in the past and given him instruction (i.e. the angel Moroni who directed him to the golden plates where the Book of Mormon originated) to convince them that this was another instance of heavenly messenger instruction. And the ones who believed him became his victims.
Ensuring that victims remain silent
From the essay regarding the early plural marriages in Nauvoo:
"Participants in these early plural marriages pledged to keep their involvement confidential... Nevertheless, rumors spread. A few men unscrupulously used these rumors to seduce women to join them in an unauthorized practice sometimes referred to as 'spiritual wifery'. When this was discovered, the men were cut off from the Church. [The key word here was "unauthorized"; it was a perfectly acceptable practice to the leaders of the Church as long as they were authorized by Joseph to do it. The Church has labeled these men as unscrupulous, but the practice was the same]. The rumors prompted members and leaders to issue carefully worded denials that denounced spiritual wifery and polygamy but were silent about what Joseph Smith and others saw as divinely 'celestial' plural marriage. The statements emphasized that the Church practiced no marital law other than monogamy while implicitly leaving open the possibility that individuals, under direction of God's living prophet, might do so."
The leaders of the Church lied to their members. Members heard rumors and wondered, "What's going on here? Are our leaders really practicing polygamy?" and the leaders of the Church flat-out lied to them and told them no. But they were sneaky about it. They said that the official doctrine of the Church was monogamy, and that's why so many people think polygamy started in Utah under Brigham Young, because that's the first time the leader of the Church came forward and publicly announced that it was a practice commanded by God. Joseph and his buddies practiced it quietly and he told the girls and their families to keep quiet about it, which many of them did.
********************
The question is: are the plural wives and fellow leaders of the Church considered victims? And my answer is yes, many of them were victims. I'm sure there were some women who were more than happy to have sex with the charismatic leader of their church and community. But look at what the Church's essay says regarding some of their reactions to the news of this "revelation from God":
Helen Mar Kimball (the 14-year-old): it was one of the "severest" trials of her life.
Heber C. Kimball: "I never felt more sorrowful. I wept days... I had a good wife. I was satisfied."
Brigham Young: "it was the first time in my life I had desired the grave."
Lucy Walker: "Every feeling of my soul revolted against it."
Zina Huntington Jacobs: "I made a greater sacrifice than to give my life, for I never anticipated again to be looked upon as an honorable woman."
To me, that absolutely says victim. These people knew in their hearts and souls that Joseph's proposal was wrong. But the article goes on to describe how these people came to terms with this "commandment" that was revealed to them: they prayed about it. And after days of weeping and praying, they all received personal revelation that this was a correct principle and that Joseph was right, and they moved forward with polygamy free of conscience.
But here's the thing about prayer: if you pray hard enough and pour out your heart long enough, you'll feel okay with anything. Your brain will eventually come up with a rationale to help you deal with what's been put in front of you, and religious people will interpret that as an answer from God (I'm speaking from personal experience here—that's how I was able to be okay with the early Church's practice of polygamy for so many years). These people believed Joseph was a prophet who spoke for God. They wanted to believe that he wouldn't ask of them something that was wrong. And sure enough, after much prayer, each one of them became okay with his proposal.
Those girls who didn't become victims were the ones whose parents saw through Joseph's lies and they left the Church because of it. I have absolute respect for those people because they saw Joseph for what he was: a sexual predator who was using his position as the leader of the Church to sexually prey on the girls and women of his church.
********************
Many people, including some of my family members, want to know why I have such strong feelings about this topic and why I'm making such a big deal about it. "It happened more than 170 years ago and right now polygamy isn't part of the Church; why are you so hung up on this?"
This is why: 1) it questions the validity of Joseph Smith as a prophet of God, and 2) it calls into question the validity of all of the Doctrine and Covenant revelations, which the Church is founded on.
1) Every four years when the Church studies the Doctrine and Covenants and Church history in church meetings, this scripture inevitably gets talked about, and I've heard it many times, "Joseph Smith, the Prophet and Seer of the Lord, has done more, save Jesus only, for the salvation of men in this world, than any other man that ever lived in it." (Doctrine and Covenants 135:3). The Church puts Joseph Smith right below Jesus Christ in order of importance to the salvation of men! The Church glorifies Joseph Smith, it reverences him, and the leaders will forever sustain his revelations as from God Himself. But if people were to admit that Joseph made up the revelation on plural marriage to justify his pursuits to have sex with a bunch of women, then they would have to admit that the commandment wasn't really from God, despite the 37 times in that revelation that the speaker specifically refers to himself as the Lord (that in itself is a little telling—it comes across as the speaker trying really hard to convince the reader that he is who he says he is). And if that commandment wasn't really from God, then how many other commandments were also not from God? If they aren't God's commandments, then Joseph Smith was not a prophet of God and he was, instead, a conman.
2) The entire Doctrine and Covenants is now questionable, and that's the book of scripture that most of the LDS church is founded on. The way the Church is organized, the duties that the different leaders have, they're all spelled out in the Doctrine and Covenants as revelations directly from God to Joseph Smith. The very nature of God and the three Kingdoms of Glory (the Church's version of the afterlife) are spelled out in the Doctrine and Covenants. The Book of Mormon is the face of the Church—it's what missionaries hand out to people they want to convert to the Church, and Church leaders frequently encourage members to gain a testimony of the Book of Mormon. But I've never heard leaders tell members to gain a testimony of the Doctrine and Covenants. The Pearl of Great Price, sure, but not the Doctrine and Covenants, and that, more than any other book of LDS scripture, represents the LDS church. The only reason that the Church can claim it is God's true church is because of the revelations in the Doctrine and Covenants. But if Joseph Smith made up the revelation about plural marriage, then it's quite likely that he made up much more than that, and that would mean the LDS church is not God's church-- it was Joseph Smith's church.
These are my reasons for feeling so much anger toward the early Church's practice of polygamy. I firmly believe that Joseph Smith used his power and authority as the leader of the Church to sexually prey on the girls and women of his congregation, and I'm furious that it worked so effectively. Kristy Money's article regarding the Church's essay has a different point to make; it wasn't to paint Joseph Smith as a sexual predator. But her description of the "victim grooming pattern" describes exactly what Joseph Smith did and the Church's own essay gives the evidence, and it's a much MUCH bigger deal than members would like to admit.
Monday, October 27, 2014
The Church's Honest Essay about Polygamy
One of my ex-Mormon friends posted this link on her Facebook wall the other day. It's from the LDS church website, and it talks honestly about polygamy in the early days of the church.
Here's the link: https://www.lds.org/topics/plural-marriage-in-kirtland-and-nauvoo?lang=eng
Growing up in the church here in America I heard most of these things in bits and pieces throughout my life, while some of them I hadn't heard before until I read the Emma Smith book last year. I don't want to write my thoughts or feelings about this article because reading it brings up a lot of anger that I've had for a long time regarding this subject, and writing about it will make me even angrier. But I wanted to share it here for anyone who wants to read official Church articles about it and they won't have to go searching for it.
I'm actually glad the Church put out this article. I'm glad they're being honest by including the pieces of information that makes the Church and Joseph look bad. They're showing both sides of the story, and I appreciate that.
Here's the link: https://www.lds.org/topics/plural-marriage-in-kirtland-and-nauvoo?lang=eng
Growing up in the church here in America I heard most of these things in bits and pieces throughout my life, while some of them I hadn't heard before until I read the Emma Smith book last year. I don't want to write my thoughts or feelings about this article because reading it brings up a lot of anger that I've had for a long time regarding this subject, and writing about it will make me even angrier. But I wanted to share it here for anyone who wants to read official Church articles about it and they won't have to go searching for it.
I'm actually glad the Church put out this article. I'm glad they're being honest by including the pieces of information that makes the Church and Joseph look bad. They're showing both sides of the story, and I appreciate that.
Monday, October 13, 2014
The Cosmos
It's been over a month since I left the huge source of negativity that was the ex-Mormon Facebook group, and I've continued to feel better. But a couple of weeks ago it hit me that while I do feel better, I don't have anything I can read that gives me a deep sense of comfort the way that people in religion do.
I started searching for a book that was the agnostic's equivalent of the Bible, something that's universally uplifting and encouraging without being based on a particular religion. I wrote a Facebook post about it, and my sister suggested that if I'm looking for something uplifting then perhaps I shouldn't exclude religion. Almost no one on my Facebook friends list knows about this blog and so they don't know what I've gone through. Most of them probably don't even know I left the Church. So in response to what my sister wrote, I briefly explained where I am with religion:
One of my friends suggested the book Cosmos and its accompanying television series by Carl Sagan, and in looking at the synopsis they both looked fascinating, so I bought them both. I've started reading the book, and Mc and I are watching the TV series together.
I'm loving them so far! It shows us what we know from our scientific exploration of this world and of the cosmos. It's incredible to see where we fit in our own galaxy alone—we're on the far edge of one of the spiral arms—and where our galaxy fits in with the surrounding galaxies and the expanses of space.
I love this part of science. Cosmos is showing me what IS, what we KNOW and what we have SEEN through our telescopes on Earth and the ones we've sent out into space (albeit from the 1980's). All religion can do is make promises of a "happily ever after" if we do what scriptures and preachers tell us that some invisible man in the sky wants us to do. In watching the beginning of the TV series and reading the first few chapters of the book, I feel like I've been under a religious cloud all my life, only seeing far enough out of our atmosphere to see the sun, moon, and some of the brightest stars. But my eyes are opening to so much of what's outside our little world, and I'm left in amazement.
I haven't read a whole lot of other-world fiction, but there are a couple of books that I read a few years ago that gave me a hint of this grander view of ourselves. One of them was Red Mars which took place on recently-colonized Mars. The other was Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy (the entire 5-book trilogy) ;) where the main characters were on Earth for only a chapter or two and then the Earth was gone and the readers were introduced to new species and places along with the main character. You were left with the feeling that Earth was very small and insignificant (described only as "mostly harmless" in the Guide) compared to all that's out there. That's how I feel now from watching and reading Cosmos, but I like it.
And yet it also makes me sad that I won't live to see the time when the human race makes space travel a regular occurrence for average people, when we meet an extraterrestrial race, and when we perhaps find and even settle on a new world that can support our body's needs. And I hope that we as a race don't kill ourselves off before that happens!
I started searching for a book that was the agnostic's equivalent of the Bible, something that's universally uplifting and encouraging without being based on a particular religion. I wrote a Facebook post about it, and my sister suggested that if I'm looking for something uplifting then perhaps I shouldn't exclude religion. Almost no one on my Facebook friends list knows about this blog and so they don't know what I've gone through. Most of them probably don't even know I left the Church. So in response to what my sister wrote, I briefly explained where I am with religion:
"No one really knows for sure where we came from before we were born, or why we're here, or what happens to us after we die. All religions have their beliefs, but no one actually knows. The Mormon church claims that "all churches have some light and knowledge and truth, but we have the whole truth"; I left the Mormon religion a year ago, and shortly afterward I came to the conclusion that NO ONE knows these things for sure until they die.
Over the past month or so I've been thinking long and hard about if I could believe in any religion, and right now I can't, because I'd be willingly choosing to follow a religion which doesn't know big-picture stuff for sure-- and yet claims that they do-- and I'm not ready for that.
I've been reading a lot of classic books lately, and while I enjoy reading them, they remind me of the struggles that are part of human nature, and they make me sad. I need something I can read which will uplift me and help me see the good in the world but that isn't filled with religious guesses. Christians can turn to the Bible for comfort and for answers; Mormons have their Book of Mormon; Muslims have the Quran; but as an agnostic I have nothing like that, and that's what I'm searching for."
One of my friends suggested the book Cosmos and its accompanying television series by Carl Sagan, and in looking at the synopsis they both looked fascinating, so I bought them both. I've started reading the book, and Mc and I are watching the TV series together.
I'm loving them so far! It shows us what we know from our scientific exploration of this world and of the cosmos. It's incredible to see where we fit in our own galaxy alone—we're on the far edge of one of the spiral arms—and where our galaxy fits in with the surrounding galaxies and the expanses of space.
I love this part of science. Cosmos is showing me what IS, what we KNOW and what we have SEEN through our telescopes on Earth and the ones we've sent out into space (albeit from the 1980's). All religion can do is make promises of a "happily ever after" if we do what scriptures and preachers tell us that some invisible man in the sky wants us to do. In watching the beginning of the TV series and reading the first few chapters of the book, I feel like I've been under a religious cloud all my life, only seeing far enough out of our atmosphere to see the sun, moon, and some of the brightest stars. But my eyes are opening to so much of what's outside our little world, and I'm left in amazement.
I haven't read a whole lot of other-world fiction, but there are a couple of books that I read a few years ago that gave me a hint of this grander view of ourselves. One of them was Red Mars which took place on recently-colonized Mars. The other was Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy (the entire 5-book trilogy) ;) where the main characters were on Earth for only a chapter or two and then the Earth was gone and the readers were introduced to new species and places along with the main character. You were left with the feeling that Earth was very small and insignificant (described only as "mostly harmless" in the Guide) compared to all that's out there. That's how I feel now from watching and reading Cosmos, but I like it.
And yet it also makes me sad that I won't live to see the time when the human race makes space travel a regular occurrence for average people, when we meet an extraterrestrial race, and when we perhaps find and even settle on a new world that can support our body's needs. And I hope that we as a race don't kill ourselves off before that happens!
Monday, September 8, 2014
I Left the Facebook Group
This past weekend I decided to quietly leave the ex-Mormon Facebook group that I had joined a couple of months ago.
Getting rid of negativity in one's life is essential for peace and happiness, and this Facebook group has been a huge source of negativity in my life for the 6 or 7 weeks I was in it. Some people need a group like this for support, for comfort, and for a feeling of being with others who have similar experiences. But this group was bringing me down instead of making me feel better. Lots of the things people post are sarcastic, but others share stories that are full of pain and anger, and it's very hard for me to read things like that over and over again. I've given some encouraging words here and there, but ultimately there's nothing I can do, and I'm unhappy in the meantime. I even found myself often having negative feelings toward Mc because he is a member of the Church; I didn't feel that way before I joined the Facebook group, and I didn't like that I was feeling this way toward him.
The bottom line is: I left the Church for my own reasons, and that's enough for me. All of these blog posts have been my issues with the Church, not others' issues. I've found myself checking Facebook multiple times a day, going to this Facebook group to see what people were saying, to learn things that others knew about the Church that I've never heard before. But now I've found that I am mentally worn out from finding out more and more information from the Facebook group. The more I find out about the negative things of the Church, the more unhappy and discontent I am with... well, with life in general.
I never intended the Facebook group to be a part of my healing process, and for the month-and-a-half that I was in it, it never became part of my healing process. It was nice seeing almost 2,000 other people who believe what I do now, but I don't have a connection with most of them (I've only actually met 3 or 4 people who are also in the group) and I was being saturated with information that wasn't helping me to leave the Church behind me, which is ultimately what I want to do.
Like I said: some people need a group like this for support, and to each their own; I truly hope they're getting what they need from it. Right now I want to go to my Facebook homepage and not see 20+ notifications every time I login from a group which is mostly negative and which will constantly remind me of the unhappiness I experienced while in the Church. I want to keep my Facebook account for staying in touch with family and friends, and that's what it is once again.
Already I feel so much negativity gone from my mind and out of my life, and I needed it; I feel much better. Almost like magic, the negative feelings I was feeling toward Mc are gone, and I'm so very happy about that.
Getting rid of negativity in one's life is essential for peace and happiness, and this Facebook group has been a huge source of negativity in my life for the 6 or 7 weeks I was in it. Some people need a group like this for support, for comfort, and for a feeling of being with others who have similar experiences. But this group was bringing me down instead of making me feel better. Lots of the things people post are sarcastic, but others share stories that are full of pain and anger, and it's very hard for me to read things like that over and over again. I've given some encouraging words here and there, but ultimately there's nothing I can do, and I'm unhappy in the meantime. I even found myself often having negative feelings toward Mc because he is a member of the Church; I didn't feel that way before I joined the Facebook group, and I didn't like that I was feeling this way toward him.
The bottom line is: I left the Church for my own reasons, and that's enough for me. All of these blog posts have been my issues with the Church, not others' issues. I've found myself checking Facebook multiple times a day, going to this Facebook group to see what people were saying, to learn things that others knew about the Church that I've never heard before. But now I've found that I am mentally worn out from finding out more and more information from the Facebook group. The more I find out about the negative things of the Church, the more unhappy and discontent I am with... well, with life in general.
I never intended the Facebook group to be a part of my healing process, and for the month-and-a-half that I was in it, it never became part of my healing process. It was nice seeing almost 2,000 other people who believe what I do now, but I don't have a connection with most of them (I've only actually met 3 or 4 people who are also in the group) and I was being saturated with information that wasn't helping me to leave the Church behind me, which is ultimately what I want to do.
Like I said: some people need a group like this for support, and to each their own; I truly hope they're getting what they need from it. Right now I want to go to my Facebook homepage and not see 20+ notifications every time I login from a group which is mostly negative and which will constantly remind me of the unhappiness I experienced while in the Church. I want to keep my Facebook account for staying in touch with family and friends, and that's what it is once again.
Already I feel so much negativity gone from my mind and out of my life, and I needed it; I feel much better. Almost like magic, the negative feelings I was feeling toward Mc are gone, and I'm so very happy about that.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)