Brooks Blames Church For Elizabeth Smarts Captivity

[wenglund]

Does it or does it not state that virtue and chastity can be taken by rape/force?

I interpret it as referring more to the emblems of virtue and chastity rather than virtue and chastity, themselves.

Thanks, -Wade Englund-

Edited May 7, 2013 by wenglund

[Bernard Gui]

Does it or does it not state that virtue and chastity can be taken by rape/force?

Webster's 1828:

DEPRIVE, v.t. [L. To take away.] 1. To take from; to bereave of something possessed or enjoyed; followed by of; as, to deprive a man of sight; to deprive one of strength, of reason, or of property. This has a general signification, applicable to a lawful or unlawful taking.

BERE'AVE, v.t. pret.bereaved, bereft: pp.bereaved, bereft. 1. To deprive; to strip; to make destitute; with of before the thing taken away.

Me have ye bereaved of my children. Gen.42.

It is sometimes used without of, and is particularly applied to express the loss of friends by death. 2. To take away from.

[Scott Lloyd]

Is your real name Gene Simmons?

Or Wilt Chamberlain?

Edited May 7, 2013 by Scott Lloyd

[Bernard Gui]

http://www.lds.org/n...gotten?lang=eng

It wasn’t until I was reading a book by Jeffrey R. Holland, then president of BYU, that I found understanding in a verbalized form. In However Long and Hard the Way, President Holland discussed the analogy of life being a board. Each time we sin we drive a nail through that board. Unfortunately, many people think that when we repent the nails are removed, but the nail holes remain. He stated that no holes remain because after repenting we have an entirely new board. I found this analogy even more beautiful after realizing that the only holes that do remain are the ones in Christ’s hands and feet. His sacrifice was complete.

Edited May 7, 2013 by Bernard Gui

[Scott Lloyd]

I interpret it as referring more to the emblems of virtue and chastity rather than virtue and chastity, themselves.

Thanks, -Wade Englund-

That's certainly a valid way to look at it and, I would have to say, the way I have interpreted it over the years.

[Calm]

I acknowledge that, in context, that is the more likely impression.

However, it is possible to read it another way. Perhaps the Lamanite daughters were seduced by their Nephite captors and were willing participants, in which case it would have been correct to say they were deprived their chastity and virtue. Perhaps that's a long shot, but without having more facts, it cannot be ruled out.

Thankfully, LDS do not have to hold scripture to be inerrant. Mormon himself stated, "And now, if there are faults they are the mistakes of men; wherefore, condemn not the things of God, that ye may be found spotless at the judgment-seat of Christ."

I have no problem saying this was either a misconception of chastity/virtue that was unfortunately not uncommon in some past cultures (and unfortunately is still present in some today) or a mistranslation....either way we have modern day prophets telling us that victims have not lost their chastity if they have been raped or forced to participate in sexual acts in some fashion.

[Calm]

True - she doesn't directly indict the LDS church (she's still apparently an active member according to wikipedia).

She talks about her mission here: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/05/26/elizabeth-smart-missionary_n_867718.html

[cinepro]

Or Kareem Abdul Jabar?

Ummm..did you mean Wilt Chamberlain?

Edited May 7, 2013 by cinepro

[wenglund]

Also, if the words "virtue" and "chastity" are used to mean "not defiled" or "not violated", then rape can logically be viewed as depriving (illegally take from) a person of their virtue and chastity.

Thanks, -Wade Englund-

[Calm]

Virtue, n. moral goodness, force, efficacy, valor

Chastity, or Chasteness, n. purity of body, &c.

http://www.premierathome.com/library/Reference/Webster's%201806%20Dictionary.txt

http://1828.mshaffer.com/d/search/word,virtue

1. Purity of the body; freedom from all unlawful commerce of sexes. Before marriage, purity from all commerce of sexes; after marriage, fidelity to the marriage bed.

2. Freedom from obscenity, as in language or conversation.

3. Freedom from bad mixture; purity in words and phrases.

4. Purity; unadulterated state; as the chastity of the gospel.

VIRTUE, n. vur'tu. [L. virtus, from vireo, or its root. See Worth.] The radical sense is strength, from straining, stretching, extending. This is the primary sense of L. vir, a man.]

1. Strength; that substance or quality of physical bodies, by which they act and produce effects on other bodies. In this literal and proper sense, we speak of the virtue or virtues of plants in medicine, and the virtues of drugs. In decoctions, the virtues of plants are extracted. By long standing in the open air, the virtues are lost.

2. Bravery valor. This was the predominant signification of virtus among the Romans.

Trust to thy single virtue.

[This sense is nearly or quite obsolete.]

3. Moral goodness; the practice of moral duties and the abstaining from vice, or a conformity of life and conversation to the moral law. In this sense, virtue may be, and in many instances must be, distinguished from religion. The practice of moral duties merely from motives of convenience, or from compulsion, or from regard to reputation, is virtue, as distinct from religion. The practice of moral duties from sincere love to God and his laws, is virtue and religion. In this sense it is true,

That virtue only makes our bliss below.

Virtue is nothing but voluntary obedience to truth.

4. A particular moral excellence; as the virtue of temperance, of chastity, of charity.

Remember all his virtues.

5. Acting power; something efficacious.

Jesus, knowing that virtue had gone out of him, turned - Mark 3.

6. Secret agency; efficacy without visible or material action.

She moves the body which she doth possess,

Yet no part toucheth, but by virtue's touch.

7. Excellence; or that which constitutes value and merit.

- Terence, who thought the sole grace and virtue of their fable, the sticking in of sentences.

8. One of the orders of the celestial hierarchy.

Thrones, dominations, princedoms, virtues, powers.

9. Efficacy; power.

He used to travel through Greece by virtue of this fable, which procured him reception in all the towns.

10. Legal efficacy or power; authority. A man administers the laws by virtue of a commission.

In virtue, in consequence; by the efficacy or authority.

This they shall attain, partly in virtue of the promise of God, and partly in virtue of piety.

Edited May 7, 2013 by calmoriah

[Bernard Gui]

Or Kareem Abdul Jabar?

Or Kareem Abdul Jabar?

I think you mean Magic Johnson...

[Scott Lloyd]

Ummm..did you mean Wilt Chamberlain?

Yeah. Pardon. Both names popped up in a Google search and I inadvertently used the wrong one.

[cinepro]

I think the easiest explanation for the Moroni quote is that while Moroni was right about "virtue" (i.e. virginity) being precious and something to be highly valued for a young man or woman, he was wrong about whether or not the act of rape robs someone of theirs in a moral sense.

So it's a valid quote to show the importance of not willingly fornicating, but a little archaic in its application to the particular circumstance.

[Calm]

Also, if the words "virtue" and "chastity" are used to mean "not defiled" or "not violated", then rape can logically be viewed as depriving (illegally take from) a person of their virtue and chastity.

Thanks, -Wade Englund-

Whatever that scripture meant in its original form or to Joseph when he translated it, nowadays it will likely be read initially as virtue and chastity can be taken by force, leaving the individual virtueless and unchaste. People may go back and reread it and decide it means something else, but because of the very sensitive nature of the problem as outlined by Sister Smart, because of the very fragile nature of many rape and abuse victims, my belief is that it should not be used as a prooftext for the value of chastity and virtue. There are other options without that potential interpretation.

[smac97]

Saints -

So you believe that we should teach the value of chastity and virtue by using a passage in scripture talking about rape and abuse?

Clearly a better job of proof texting could have been done. Or we could continue right? What about the statement Spencer W. Kimball made: "It is better to die in defending one's virtue than to live having lost it without a struggle." So Elizabeth Smart clearly didn't live up to that expectation, right? She should have died defending her virtue? And of course that goes for any girl who makes a mistake (to use some of the analogies - becoming chewed gum, or having the icing licked off the cupcake, becoming damaged good, and so on). This is anything but a hopeful message for those who made mistakes (on their own) but think of the message it sends to a young woman like Elizabeth Smart. Do we have anything like this in the Young Men's manual? Do we ever speak of a young man's discretion as making him damage goods, or having lost that which is most precious and valuable? Not usually. This isn't just a Mormon thing, it is in general a woman thing.

Criticizing Brooks for bringing this up isn't terribly appropriate in my opinion - because in fact it is another of these very real issues.

Ben M.

I'll have to side with Ben on this one. I saw this article yesterday. And while Brooks is apparently trying to once again make the Church look bad, her criticism of the nature of the object lessons given to LDS girls is meritorious.

Joanna Brooks finds E. Smart's reaction to being sexually assaulted (shame and loss of self worth) to be a distinctly Mormon thing, yet such a reaction is common in victims of sexual assault. Further, Joanna Brooks claims she "wondered" why Elizabeth Smart ran away, with the implication that she "knew" it was because LDS teachings contributed to Smart's decision to not run away. However, it is a well-established fact that Brian Mitchell constantly threatened to kill Elizabeth Smart and her family if she ever ran away. Joanna Brooks doesn't mention this at all, and instead strongly implies that Smart's decision to not run away was principally or solely due to LDS teachings about chastity.

Joanna Brooks also manages in the article to find a way to fault the Church for teaching young women about modesty, for pete's sake. To paraphrase a line from the Disney movie, Pollyanna: "When you look for the bad in (the LDS Church), expecting to find it, you surely will." This seems to be how these articles are being written.

I think lessons about the Law of Chastity should include specific instruction regarding rape or sexual abuse not being a violation of the Law of Chastity or a reflection on the worth of the victim. I also think that lessons that analogize those who have been sexually active as lacking worth (a licked cupcake, chewed gum, etc.) should be totally abandoned as incompatible with the Restored Gospel. We are all of us sinners, and we do not lose our worth in they eyes of God when we sin.

Thanks,

-Smac

[Scott Lloyd]

Thankfully, LDS do not have to hold scripture to be inerrant. Mormon himself stated, "And now, if there are faults they are the mistakes of men; wherefore, condemn not the things of God, that ye may be found spotless at the judgment-seat of Christ."

I have no problem saying this was either a misconception of chastity/virtue that was unfortunately not uncommon in some past cultures (and unfortunately is still present in some today) or a mistranslation....either way we have modern day prophets telling us that victims have not lost their chastity if they have been raped or forced to participate in sexual acts in some fashion.

Hence the primacy of latter-day revelation over ancient scripture.

But I would not rule out other explanations, such as the one offered by wenglund, that the words used were intended to convey different meanings than what we are inclined to attach to them.

Language will always be an imperfect means of communication -- but for now, its about the best we've got.

[Scott Lloyd]

I think you mean Magic Johnson...

No. Cinepro was right. It was Wilt Chamberlain I had in mind, though Magic Johnson did occur to me.

[Calm]

I think lessons about the Law of Chastity should include specific instruction regarding rape or sexual abuse not being a violation of the Law of Chastity or a reflection on the worth of the victim. I also think that lessons that analogize those who have been sexually active as lacking worth (a licked cupcake, chewed gum, etc.) should be totally abandoned as incompatible with the Restored Gospel. We are all of us sinners, and we do not lose our worth in they eyes of God when we sin.

Well put.

[KevinG]

To be even more succinct - in a recent discussion with my adult daughters that touched on the topics of sexual abuse and coercion I said - "your [maiden head] is not your virtue".

[ERayR]

You seem to have missed the point entirely.

In the Young Women's Personal Progress material ( https://www.lds.org/...virtue?lang=eng ) we find this statement:

Study the meaning and importance of chastity and virtue by reading Moroni 9:9

What is Moroni 9:9?

And notwithstanding this great abomination of the Lamanites, it doth not exceed that of our people in Moriantum. For behold, many of the daughters of the Lamanites have they taken prisoners; and after depriving them of that which was most dear and precious above all things, which is chastity and virtue—

So we want our young women to understand that this thing which is most dear and precious above all things - this chastity and virtue - is something that a man can simply take from them against their will, right? That their value as chaste and virtuous daughters of God is at least in part dependent on their ability to avoid being raped? Do we really think that women have lost "that which is most precious and dear above all things" when they are taken advantage of (as Elizabeth Smart was)?

Perhaps you should reconsider your attitude.

Ben M.

I read that as a condemnation of the perpetrator and an admonition to be charitable and supportive of the victims. Anybody that teaches that in a way that brings shame on the victims is in grave error.

[KevinG]

I read that as a condemnation of the perpetrator and an admonition to be charitable and supportive of the victims. Anybody that teaches that in a way that brings shame on the victims is in grave error.

...Yes. This ^.

My first thought when presented with the argument that Moroni 9:9 was teaching rape = loss of virtue was "you are reading it wrong".

The things some people get from their inner voice really makes me worry about them - and this applies to zealous adherants as much as zealous critics.

Edited May 7, 2013 by KevinG

[wenglund]

Whatever that scripture meant in its original form or to Joseph when he translated it, nowadays it will likely be read initially as virtue and chastity can be taken by force, leaving the individual virtueless and unchaste. People may go back and reread it and decide it means something else, but because of the very sensitive nature of the problem as outlined by Sister Smart, because of the very fragile nature of many rape and abuse victims, my belief is that it should not be used as a prooftext for the value of chastity and virtue. There are other options without that potential interpretation.

That is certain a point to consider, though I hesitate to use "vulnerability to misinterpretation" as complete barrier to "prooftexting." If church leaders and teachers are inspired to use the quote in teaching about chastity, I believe it is perfectly valid to do so, and I see no need to rip them a new one, and any over-wrought interpretations and problems resulting therefrom may be dealt with on an as-needs basis.

There are literally millions of us who have had this scripture cited to us in relation to chastity, and who have been given object lessons using nails and candy and cup cakes, who have managed to get the intended point and have thus grown up quite healthy and well adjusted and even in many cases, gratefully chaste.

Thanks, -Wade Englund-

[ERayR]

...Yes. This ^.

My first thought when presented with the argument that Moroni 9:9 was teaching rape = loss of virtue was "you are reading it wrong".

Those verses are not addressing rape but as a warning against the mistreatment of the daughters of the Lamanites and others who are in our power to abuse.

[KevinG]

There are literally millions of us who have had this scripture cited to us in relation to chastity, and who have been given object lessons using nails and candy and cup cakes, who have managed to get the intended point and have thus grown up quite healthy and well adjusted and even in many cases, gratefully chaste.

There are also countless numbers of Saints who in failing to live the law of chasity, the word of wisdom, honesty or other gospel principles have learned about repentance and the atonement of Christ. They have undoubteldy learned that chastity is not a cupcake, a board or the physical state of one's reproductive system. Anyone who teaches otherwise misses the greater point of obedience to Christ's laws and the efficacy of His sacrifice.

[Scott Lloyd]

That is certain a point to consider, though I hesitate to use "vulnerability to misinterpretation" as complete barrier to "prooftexting." If church leaders and teachers are inspired to use the quote in teaching about chastity, I believe it is perfectly valid to do so, and I see no need to rip them a new one, and any over-wrought interpretations and problems resulting therefrom may be dealt with on an as-needs basis.

There are literally millions of us who have had this scripture cited to us in relation to chastity, and who have been given object lessons using nails and candy and cup cakes, who have managed to get the intended point and have thus grown up quite healthy and well adjusted and even in many cases, gratefully chaste.

Thanks, -Wade Englund-

I will reiterate here that the same Young Women manual citation that Ben McGuire gave us as an example of a poor use of Moroni 9:9 includes in the very same sentence a cite and a link to the passage in "For the Strength of Youth" that makes it clear rape does not make one guilty of unchastity.

Edited May 7, 2013 by Scott Lloyd