"The Mormons"

Having recently watched "The Mormons," a two-part PBS documentary on historical and contemporary aspects of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, I was planning a hugely huge and deeply in-depth analysis of my impressions for my blog. However, I actually just got back from a Priesthood meeting (I myself am "A Mormon") and I feel that the Lord has better uses of my time than to regurgitate what countless others are producing on their blogs. So I'll just sum it up.

In a nutshell, I learned some new stuff, I found some new stuff to be offended by, and I walked away with the overall feeling that my faith had been strengthened. Briefly, the treatment of Joseph Smith as a contradictory character, saying some things and doing others, editing and revising his own experiences, displaying his human foibles on his sleeve shouldn't come as a surprise to anyone, including Church members. Although we don't focus on our leaders' weaknesses, did anyone ever except that Joseph was perfect? His shortcomings don't invalidate his experience or his teachings. Let's say he was an incredible liar and an outrageously power-hungry man (two things that could be inferred from the film) - but as long as he taught the law of God, those who followed him will be blessed and not tarnished by his personal conduct. It is similar to Christ's treatment of the scribes and Pharisees (see Matt 23:1-3), that as the official holders and teachers of the Word, though hypocritical and vain, they should be hearkened to, but not emulated in action. It's easy to attack a person's character, but how do you denounce their faith, and the fruits of that faith? Ok, enough about defending Joseph. I believe him and accept him completely, visions and teachings and lies and sins and all. His human weaknesses make him real to me.

The other main foci of Part I were contemporary polygamy (of course) and the Mountain Meadows Massacre. These issues will live with the Church forever, but I appreciate the Church's treatment of their depiction in the film, rightfully categorizing them as "elements of Utah history" and not necessarily inextricably tied to the Church. Most of Part II was very inspirational, focusing on personal experiences and faith. Some time was alloted to excommunicated members and the pain they go through as they are no longer affiliated with the Church. One woman in particular was excommunicated because of her persistence in speaking out. "I cannot be silent," I believe is what she said. When she's that committed to her own interpretations and conclusions of Church doctrine, then how can she be committed to the inspiration that comes through the small voice of the Spirit of the Lord? It's like blasting the radio and assuming that you'll hear your phone vibrate when your Father is trying to contact you. I think the excommunication in this case was necessary, although the Stake President's stifling treatment of the woman in question was unfortunate and definitely unnecessary. As a member of the Church, you are automatically, unconditionally and always a representative of it - all of your words, teachings and actions make a statement on behalf of the Church, and of Christ himself. This is a promise that members make every Sunday at service. So for a member, who has made sacred promises to stand as a witness of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, to persist in teaching and perpetuating personal findings that go contrary to the message of the Church and expect full fellowship by that Church is to walk on thin ice.

I've also scoured some of the forums that focused on this documentary over the last week, and it's the comments and sentiment and rhetoric expressed there that I feel is intriguing, perhaps more so than the film itself. Judging by the comments I read, there are three kinds of viewers of this documentary: really closed-minded Mormons on one side, really closed-minded anti-Mormons on the other, and a full spectrum of quiet people in the middle (I tend to lean to the closed-minded Mormon side, unless I can catch myself). Both extremes are very loud and write their comments to infuriate the other, so I won't give my opinion on them. To them, it wouldn't matter anyway. But to the quiet middle, I think this film is a catalyst for good. To the quiet Church members, it might challenge their faith with things they did not know, which leads to deeper soul searching and prayer and stronger faith; to the quiet non-Church members, it might challenge their own beliefs and contextualize the LDS Church, perhaps leading to further investigation of our faith. Both will take what they learned from the film and apply it to their lives, then take what offended them and throw it out the back door. And then they will move on. That's real religion, not just listening to a sermon, not debating a lot about theory and principles and precepts (which is what I'm doing right now) - it's talking a little, listening a little more and then doing much, all for the good of our fellow beings.