Mormon Coffee

During the month of August, a number of Christians took turns standing in 100-degree heat in order to offer a “temple newspaper” to anyone willing to open his or her car window. In addition, these Christians held simple signs advertising the website address (www.sacredorsecret.com), which proved to be an effective tactic helping allure 50-100 daily visitors to the site that offers a PDF file of the newspaper along with articles showing why Mormonism is not the same as “Christianity.”

Many Mormons feel that our approach is synonymous with a “protest.” For instance, the LDS temple leadership always referred to us as “protestors” to the media. Yesterday I was talking to several Christians about this recent outreach. One of them sided with the Mormons, saying that he too felt our outreach was a “protest.” Our conversation went like this:

Joe: “How was what you were doing not a protest?”Me: “If we were protestors, then what were we ‘protesting’?”

Joe: “The Mormon Church.”

Me: “You need to understand that we did not have bullhorns or giant signs calling Mormons evil people. Our handheld signs merely listed a web site address. We said nothing unless we were spoken to first, and we spent most of the time out there merely smiling while watching for car windows being rolled down because the occupants wanted one of our newspapers.”

Joe: “But you were still in opposition to the Mormon Church.”

Me: “The main purpose for our being there was to communicate to the nonMormons that there was another side of the story that they were not being told inside. We didn’t use web site signs until last year because the temple visitors were transported in buses, meaning we couldn’t even offer newspapers to them. Our goal is to merely provide information to those who might be interested. If you don’t want the information, then don’t take the newspaper and don’t go to the web site. This approach has proved to be successful.”

Joe: “But isn’t your very presence a protest?”

Me: “Would you say that the Dominoes pizza guy holding up a sign that says ‘We have $5 pizzas’ is ‘protesting’ Papa Johns?”

Joe: “But what if the Dominoes guy stands in front of Papa Johns with the sign? Would this not be a protest?”

Me: “The Dominoes guy can stand outside Papa Johns with this sign and hope that people might go to his pizza store rather than the competitor’s. But if the sign he holds is merely advertising his product, I’m not sure how this can be classified as a ‘protest.’ Surely you wouldn’t say he was ‘protesting’ Papa Johns despite his position right outside the Papa Johns store. Our outreach is merely informational and is not meant to be a ‘protest,’ as it is defined in today’s usage.”

I then went on to explain that we had a presence at the Sacramento temple only during the open house. Once the temple was closed to visitors, we too would leave. We purposely don’t go to LDS chapels or temples and hold signs at these places because, quite frankly, this really wouldn’t be an effective way to evangelize.

So why are we at the temple open houses? It is because Mormon Church leaders are very clever to make their temples look as Christian as they possibly can. For instance, they post pictures of Jesus throughout the building while very clearly calling themselves “Christian” in the promotional video shown to all guests. Unfortunately they just don’t provide honest information as they deny the fact that Mormonism denies or distorts every fundamental teaching of the historic Christian church.

I believe that these outreaches are too important for the Christian church to close its proverbial eyes and not provide information that will better help an interested individual make an informed decision. No, it’s not a protest. It’s what we call evangelism. When the Christian church loses its ability to stand for truth, it will have lost its salt and light. I hope to never see that day arrive.

Comments (5)

Now that Warren Jeffs, the leader of the nation’s largest polygamous group, has been arrested, some observers had apparently anticipated that his followers would have paraded through the streets, rejoicing that they were now free from this man’s control. Instead, however, it seems to be “business as usual” in the border towns of Hilldale, UT and Colorado City, AZ, where most members of the Fundamentalist Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints (FLDS) reside.

Let’s consider the facts why this is the case. First, we need to understand that the majority of the people who belong to the church actually prefer this lifestyle as compared to other alternatives. For instance, most of the men must think it’s pretty sweet having two, three, or even four women taking care of their sexual needs, not to mention the additional benefits for older men who take very young brides.

And how many of these polygamous husbands have to cook their own dinners? I doubt few of them know how to sew, and I certainly can’t imagine a household with three or four wives where the husband is doing the laundry. Probably most important, there must be a feeling of power gained from raising your own harem and producing a kingdom of kids who will pass your name down to future generations. Perhaps there are some negatives in leading a polygamous lifestyle, but–and let’s be honest here, men and women–there sure seems to be a lot of positives for the husband.

Meanwhile, many of the polygamous wives would certainly feel threatened if polygamy were no longer an option for them. The majority of these wives grew up in this lifestyle, and the odds are that they were involved in arranged marriages. (In fact, this is how Jeffs initially got into legal trouble, since the most serious charge against him is arranging marriages of 13-year-old girls to men three or four times their age.)

The polygamous wife is most likely married to the only husband whom she has ever known. While she certainly has to share the man with his other wives, there has to be security knowing that your needs are met through this unique union. So what would you expect a 34-year-old polygamous wife–a woman with five kids, an eighth grade education, and no intellectual or social skills outside the home–to do? Raise her hands up in celebration of Jeffs’ arrest and declare her independence? Hardly. As far as the kids, what is their option? Run away? To where? The idea of surviving outside the community must be terrifying to the majority of the children who don’t have many options available to them.

Another fact to consider is that the psychological control of Jeffs and the other church leaders is strong. Even in jail, I’m sure Jeffs will have a way to keep a thumb on the goings-on of this group. When Leo Ryan, a California congressman, visited the People’s Temple compound in the South American country of Guyana, he invited anyone from the group to return with him to the United States. Only a few took him up on the invitation. Then, before Ryan could fly away on November 18, 1978, Jim Jones had his guards kill Ryan and his entourage before ordering his 900+ followers to drink Kool-aid laced with cyanide. Why did they follow such a suicidal man and not escape when they had the chance? This is a question that still can’t be fully answered by sociologists.

I would have to say that Jeffs was not much different in style than the man whom he emulated, Joseph Smith, Jr. I won’t provide details on how Smith was able to manipulate his followers, but let’s just say that every time Smith found himself in some type of jam with outsiders, he was somehow able to convince his people to follow him to the next state. A persecution complex was utilized that made the people identify with their prophet, following him at all costs. I would be willing to bet that Jeffs’ underlings are telling their people how the prophet is being unjustly imprisoned by the government for religious beliefs! This persecution complex will make the people hunker down and not budge in their devotion to their leadership.

Finally, I believe that these polygamous cities are so cut off from the rest of the world that they have lost their sense of reality. When the Berlin Wall fell in 1989 and the former Soviet Union was opened to the West, it was apparent that most of these people who lived behind the Iron Curtain all of their lives—having listened only to propaganda and little else—were ignorant of the truth.

Just as Paul wrote in 2 Corinthians 4:4 that “the god of this age has blinded the minds of unbelievers, so that they cannot see the light of the gospel of the glory of Christ, who is the image of God,” something special has to take place before a person can see the true Jesus. It’s going to take the prayers of God’s people and perhaps a thrust of evangelistic efforts if there will ever be a hope for these people to ever understand the true forgiveness of God. Many outsiders have already been helping the “Lost Boys,” young FLDS men who were driven out of their homes during these past few years because they were competition for the new teenage girls who were going to be made available for marriage. In the same way, the Christian church should make itself available to help others from this church who live in such harmful situations with no place to go.

I expect that a new FLDS leader will be appointed soon–if he hasn’t been chosen already–and continue leading in Jeffs’ absence. I also anticipate that the church will maintain its fight for the right to break the law. My prayer is that something bigger than the arrest of Warren Jeffs will take place in these communities, and soon.

Last Friday night (September 1st) I caught the first segment of Anderson Cooper 360 Degrees. The show “Polygamy in America: Cult or Calling?” was, predictably, about Warren Jeffs, the recently arrested leader of the polygamous Fundamentalist Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints.

Anderson Cooper broadcast portions of a “rare audio recording” of Mr. Jeffs preaching to his followers. The first excerpt was about first wives and their need to be submissive to their husbands. I’m sure that for many viewers this was upsetting enough, but it was the second excerpt that really caught my attention. From the program transcript (Mr. Cooper’s intro to the second excerpt and beyond):

COOPER: Jeffs also spews hate, warning his believers of a wicked world.W. JEFFS: You see some classes of the human family that are black, uncouth, or rude and filthy, uncomely, disagreeable, and low in their habits, wild and seemingly deprived of nearly all of the blessings of the intelligence that is generally bestowed upon mankind.

COOPER: Brent Jeffs is the nephew of Warren Jeffs. Here’s how he describes his uncle.

BRENT JEFFS, NEPHEW OF WARREN JEFFS: He puts on a front like he’s a very nice man, a very giving man, very happy, but underneath all that he’s very dark and very evil.

Warren Jeffs’ words are indeed shocking. I don’t know the context of his remarks, but I do know those words did not originate with Warren Jeffs.

While Anderson Cooper is probably not aware of this (it was never mentioned during the remainder of the show according to the transcript), in this portion of the recording Mr. Jeffs was quoting Brigham Young nearly word for word.

On October 9, 1859 Brigham Young delivered a sermon in the Salt Lake City Tabernacle in which he preached on the “disagreeable” people of African descent. Here are his remarks in their greater context:

You see some classes of the human family that are black, uncouth, uncomely, disagreeable and low in their habits, wild, and seemingly deprived of nearly all the blessings of the intelligence that is generally bestowed upon mankind. The first man that committed the odious crime of killing one of his brethren will be cursed the longest of any one of the children of Adam. Cain slew his brother. Cain might have been killed, and that would have put a termination to that line of human beings. This was not to be, and the Lord put a mark upon him, which is the flat nose and black skin. Trace mankind down to after the flood, and then another curse is pronounced upon the same race–that they should be the “servant of servants;” and they will be, until that curse is removed; and the Abolitionists cannot help it, nor in the least alter that decree. How long is that race to endure the dreadful curse that is upon them? That curse will remain upon them, and they never can hold the Priesthood or share in it until all the other descendants of Adam have received the promises and enjoyed the blessings of the Priesthood and the keys thereof. Until the last ones of the residue of Adam’s children are brought up to that favourable position, the children of Cain cannot receive the first ordinances of the Priesthood. They were the first that were cursed, and they will be the last from whom the curse will be removed. When the residue of the family of Adam come up and receive their blessings, then the curse will be removed from the seed of Cain, and they will receive blessings in like proportion. (Journal of Discourses, 7:290-291)

When Warren Jeffs repeated Brigham Young’s words, was he really warning of a wicked world as Anderson Cooper suggested? Could be. Or Mr. Jeffs, as their current prophet, may have been teaching his followers to heed the words of a man they all revere as a previous true prophet of God.

Of course, members of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints also revere Brigham Young as a true prophet of God. I wonder what Mormons think, or how they feel, to hear Warren Jeffs described as “spewing hate,” and “very dark and very evil,” in connection with his repetition of the official teachings of Mormonism’s second prophet and president.

Since LDS officials continuously and vigorously insist that Warren Jeffs and his church have absolutely nothing to do with Mormonism, perhaps Latter-day Saints just don’t know.

Comments (3)

The recent arrest of Warren Jeffs, prophet of the Fundamentalist Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints, has The [non-fundamentalist] Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints concerned again about public perception of the Mormon Church and polygamy.

The LDS Church issued a statement on Tuesday reiterating its claim that the term “Mormon” is “universally understood to refer to the 12-million member Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints.” Therefore, the Church wants the media to stop using the word “Mormon” in connection with any LDS group that adds an extra letter to the acronym of their name (e.g., FLDS - Fundamentalist Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints; or TLDS - True Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints; or RLDS - Restoration Latter Day Saints).

In addition, this request to restrict the use of the term “Mormon” to Latter-day Saints (note the hyphen) should be understood to also exclude any other group that traces the source of its doctrine to LDS founder Joseph Smith (e.g., the True and Living Church of Jesus Christ of Saints of the Last Days; or the [Original] Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints [i.e., Strangites, who prefer to be called Latter Day Saints but will also allow the term "Great Lakes Mormons").

The LDS news release attempts to clarify this complicated issue for the media:

Quite simply, calling Warren Jeffs a Mormon is misleading and confusing to the vast majority of audiences who rightfully associate the term “Mormon” with members of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints.The following information may be helpful in further drawing the distinction:

Warren Jeffs Is Not a Mormon
Warren Jeffs is not a member of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints and never has been.

Mormons Do Not Practice Polygamy
The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints discontinued the practice of polygamy in 1890.

There Is No Such Thing as a "Mormon Fundamentalist" or "Mormon Sect"
The term "Mormon" is a nickname commonly applied to members of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. There is no such thing as a "Mormon fundamentalist," nor are there “Mormon sects." A correct term to describe these polygamist groups is "polygamist sects." The inclusion of the word "Mormon" is misleading and inaccurate.

Associated Press
The Associated Press Stylebook states, "The term Mormon is not properly applied to the other Latter Day Saints churches that resulted from the split after [Joseph] Smith’s death.”

The LDS news release suggests journalists consult the LDS style guide when reporting on the LDS Church. The style guide says:

The official name of the Church is The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. This full name was given by revelation from God to Joseph Smith in 1838.While the term “Mormon Church” has long been publicly applied to the Church as a nickname, it is not an authorized title, and the Church discourages its use.

Is everyone getting this?

Boiled down, I guess what the LDS Church is saying is We are not ‘Mormons’; but if you insist on using the word, it may only be used when talking about us. No wonder the media is confused.

Furthermore, consider this. The Church says the word ‘Mormon’ is not “authorized,” but it is “rightfully” associated with Latter[hyphen]day Saints. My question is: Why does the LDS Church assume the authority to “authorize” the proper use of that word? What about the Latter Day Saints [sans hyphen] who are pleased to describe themselves as Mormons? This LDS assumption of authority reminds me of an experience I had in 1999.

I was participating in a Christian outreach outside the LDS St. Paul Temple. For several days our small group had offered literature to cars as they left the parking lot at the side of the building. One evening we had several extra people; so two of us moved to the sidewalk outside the front of the temple. After a few minutes an agitated LDS security person arrived and informed us that we could not stand there because it was not the “authorized” spot. We asked, “Authorized by who?” The LDS man had no answer; nobody had the authority to “authorize” where we could stand on public property to exercise our First Amendment rights.

Nor does the LDS Church have the authority to “authorize” who may or may not use the term ‘Mormon,’ or how it is to be used.

I agree that words ought to have specific meanings and ought to be used properly according to their precise definitions in order to promote effective communication. Yet this situation seems wryly ironic. Against the protests of those who define the word “Christian” according to historic doctrinal criteria, the LDS Church insists it has the right to call itself a Christian church while defining the term “Christian” however it so chooses. Given that, it seems that the Mormon Church should accept the prerogative of Latter Day Saints (or anyone else, for that matter) to define and call themselves ‘Mormon’ if they are so inclined. After all, turnabout is fair play.

Comments (6)