So in preparation for my baptism into the Community of Christ church in 2 1/2 weeks, I've begun reading Dale E. Luffman's The Book of Mormon's Witness to Its First Readers, published by Community of Christ Seminary Press earlier this year. Luffman's goal in this book to contextualize the Book of Mormon by drawing attention to the spiritual, intellectual and emotional climate in which Joseph Smith Jr. lived and to which he responded in the founding of his church. It's a laudable goal, and certainly a helpful one, considering the strong emphasis on historical criticism in the way Community of Christ students are taught to interpret the scriptures.
The thing that strikes me the most, as of page 42, is that despite everything I know about the racism, sexism, and lots of other isms which many have found in the Book of Mormon, the text passionately protests against classism. This emphasis on social justice makes a whole lot of sense, considering the increasingly progressive direction in which the church is heading. Smith created a religious movement which focused on empowering the poor, the marginalized, and the uneducated. The doctrine of continuing revelation means that everyone has access to the revelatory communication of God. The priesthood of all believers means that we emphasize organic and intuitive ministry - if you are called to the priesthood, you don't need a fancy seminary degree to minister to your community (which is especially helpful if that graduate education is cost prohibitive). This makes a lot of sense to me, and I have always taken pride in the way these beliefs and practices create a worldview which feels, to me, resonant and vibrant and earthy.
But while I am grateful for the countercultural flavor of the Book of Mormon, which of course leads to the Community of Christ's mission "to proclaim Jesus Christ and promote communities of joy, hope, love, and peace", I'm worried about Luffman's assertion that the book on which my church is founded is largely anti-intellectual. Luffman explores the deism and rationalism of Smith's time, and highlights the Book of Mormon's assumed correlation between education and the sin of pride. He refers to "the book's intolerance for rationalism". (40)
"...for the wisdom of their wise and learned shall perish,
and the understanding of their prudent shall be hid."
- 2 Nephi 27:26
I have always been intellectual, and I have always been proud; and while I never claimed to read every word assigned for my classes, it's possible I picked up enough to count as "learned". My three years of seminary were spent as a member of a Unitarian Universalist church, which celebrates the kind of naturalism and rationalism against which Joseph Smith Jr. was rebelling. Now I have a Master of Divinity degree and both training and experience in professional ministry, and I am joining a church which practices lay priesthood.
This isn't really a problem, of course; I know that Community of Christ values diversity in the gifts and skills of its members. All are called to participate in the ministry of the church and in the creation of Zion. I have no doubt at all that I will be able to bring my education to bear in contributing to the church's mission in whichever way I am called.
TL;DR - My actual point is this: The Community of Christ church today is very distinct from the first generation of Mormonism established by Joseph Smith Jr. We ordain women, we're starting to ordain LGBT members, we witness through work rather than proselytism, we are non-creedal, we engage in ecumenical relationships to promote peace and social justice. But then we're not all that different in essentials; it seems to me all of these progressive practices stem from exactly the same religious egalitarianism on which Luffman reminds us the LDS church was founded. We are still Mormon. So even as the CofC church grows its seminary and invests in the professional development of our church leaders (that's what the Mission Center courses and workshops are for, yes?) - is the Community of Christ worldview still flavored by the Book of Mormon's anti-intellectualism?
If so, I have a lot more work to do to fit in.
Of course, I suspect that the next 175 pages of Luffman's book will give relief to these concerns, or at least answer my questions. But as a very rational girl joining a profoundly intuitive faith, my worry seemed to justify this very long thought process.
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteI'm not as sure it is ant-intellectual, but perhaps more anti-"intellectual alone." however, I am drawing this thought more off of the early years of the Restoration movement more, than thinking specifically about the text of the Book of Mormon, so it might be anti-intellectual, but the movement it helped foster the formation of, moved out from there quickly. Perhaps in part due to the influence of Rigdon. In the 1830s we have the example of the Kirtland Temple where the church formed it's first Seminary along with a high school. In 1838 in Farwest, we find Rigdon describing one of the purposes of Temple is to provided the best education in the land accessible to all so it can no longer be used as tool for those with it to take advantage of those without.
ReplyDeleteWe have 1832- Doctrine & Covenants 85:36 saying study the good books, learn by study and faith, not just faith and not just intellectualism. With the formation of the 1st presidency in 1833, we get section 87- calling the 1st presidency to study, learn, be acquainted with all good books, languages, tongues and people...
Somewhere in the Reorganization we fell back away from embracing education, at least in areas related to faith, religion and theology, when I'm not sure but it has to be tied in part to the anti-Mormon and "we are the one true church" identity we formed. We formed Graceland College, Frederick Madison Smith had a Ph.D. and yet we formed a distrust of education, especially theological education by "other". So much so that when Wallace B started to prepare for leading the church, and he did his theological studies it was done somewhat secretively. As an institution we have come a long way back toward the embracing of education in areas of faith. As seen by appointees being required to study, and the creation of the Seminary. But, in the pews it can be a very different thing. In most places I don't find much resistance, but rather excitement that I studied and have my MDiv, however I have also encountered those with a strong issue with me having that education. An issue I think that has more to due with our early 20th century experiences and expression of identity than the sacred texts forming out of the early 19th... One individual at my official home congregation, has strong issues with my education which has caused a lot of behind the scenes tensions, and led me to step down from some roles I had in the congregation for my well being, and allow me to focus more on other aspects of ministry outside of the individual congregational setting.
So, I would say there is anti-intellectual world view of sorts that still is found inside us, at least when pertaining to religion, but I don't think the flavor is from the Book of Mormon, but more a later part of our story... Sorry if the above rambles and doesn't make sense, but I am writing in the middle of the night, when I should be asleep.... Your article reminded me as well, I still need to read Dale's book. I've read a few pieces here and there, but have yet to sit down and read it from start to finish.... You do have a lot of work ahead of you, but not to fit in,but rather to help the body be one that is closer to what it is called o be in the world...
Peace be with you,