Fundamentals of Fundamentalists and Mormonism Part 2

While driving back to Salt Lake City from Phoenix, Arizona in 1989, I crossed the border into Utah as evening was approaching. Still five hours from home, and very tired, I thought I should find a place to stay for the night. It occurred to me that I might drop by Colorado City, Arizona-- the headquarters of the FLDS Church and say hello to two of my great-aunts who lived there. I knew that they would offer me a bed for the night and perhaps even an invitation to their church services the next morning.

Fortunately, that's exactly how it turned out. My aunt Marjorie seemed pleased to see me and told me they had a spare bedroom and insisted that I stay the night. The next morning, they asked if I wanted to attend church with them before returning home. I eagerly consented.

The services were interesting to me and confirmed what I had read about and heard from others. Men were called to speak to the congregation without prior notice and obviously without any preparation. One fellow talked about the dangers of modern dress--including makeup and men rolling up their sleeves. He suggested that there was no need to question the teachings of the prophet (i.e. "Rulon Jeffs") because God would not allow him to lead them astray. At that juncture, I really wanted to raise my hand and ask the speaker when such a policy came about; for if it was valid for Rulon Jeffs, why wouldn't it have been valid for Wilford Woodruff? However, I was their guest and that would have been bad form.

When the meeting concluded, I thanked by aunt for her hospitality and said I'd better be on my way. I asked about my other aunt and she said that a few years earlier there had been a split among the leaders and they were now in separate movements--the Timpson group was meeting in their own Church nearby. As I drove out of town, I thought I might drop in there as well.

There were a couple of surprises inside. The women in this group were considerably more attractive than those attending the previous meeting. I only was able to listen for about 10 minutes before the meeting ended. Some of my female cousins recognized me and rushed over to see what in the world I was doing down there. They took me to the front and introduced me to their prophet, Alma (Del) Timpson. "Nice name." I thought.

I asked him if he would mind if I came back at a later time and interviewed him. He agreed and invited me to return. (I did return the following October, but by that time he wasn't lucid enough to answer any difficult questions. He told me that whatever his associate said, I could rely on as though it came from him.)

After the introductions, my cousins invited me to come to their home for dinner. Even though I felt that I needed to be going, I again consented. It was early afternoon and I had the feeling that several of the giggling girls were wondering who this Gentile was and why were they being so nice to him?

We had a pretty typical Sunday dinner where there were about 20 people gathered around a lengthy table. Strangely, there weren't any adult men present--only women, teenagers of both sexes and lots of little kids. As the girls and women started clearing off the table, my cousin came into the room with a very large coffee pot, asking, "Who wants coffee?"

Everybody in the room that looked over the age of 10 shouted, "I do!" I have to admit, that was a big surprise, and I know that my face gave away my astonishment. My cousin paused and said, "Oh, you're in the Church and don't drink coffee--but we quite enjoy it. Are you sure you don't want some?"

I said, "No, thanks, but don't mind me..." I made a mental note to ask about that when I came back to talk to Del Timpson. I had noticed a coffee pot in the kitchen of the home I stayed at, but thought there had to be an explanation. There was an explanation: They don't live the Word of Wisdom.

As I returned home, I thought to myself, "Their meetings certainly don't reflect Mormon worship I know, where men, women and children offer discourses on gospel themes. The discourses I'd heard that day hadn't referenced any scriptures at all, or even any gospel topics. Their private observance didn't even countenance the 89th section of the Doctrine and Covenants where Mormons eschew coffee and alcohol. When I asked Rulon Jeffs why they didn't keep the Word of Wisdom, he said there were "more important" elements that concerned them. Del Timpson's surrogate said, "There's nothing better than a cold beer on a hot day."

Since that time, I've given a lot of thought about how far afield the FLDS have gone when compared to LDS faith and practice. As I noted in a previous post, John Walsh's claim that we share 95% the same theology is grossly inaccurate. He noted that 75% of our practice was the same, but in reality such a distinction isn't valid either. Our theology isn't separable from our practice.

I noted that their concept of authority is incompatible with LDS History. The same is true regarding other essential doctrines. The first Article of Faith written by Joseph Smith says, "We believe in God, the Eternal Father, and in His Son, Jesus Christ, and in the Holy Ghost." How does the FLDS theology measure up? Well, they believe that Adam (of Garden of Eden fame) is God the Father and that Joseph Smith is the Holy Ghost. I know what most people will say about that. They'll say that this merely reflects early Mormon thought (since Brigham Young believed that Adam was God). In reality such a position relies more on supposition than substance (too detailed for this entry--fodder for a later day), and fails to recognize the heresy of Joseph Smith being the Holy Spirit. This theological wrinkle was addressed by Brigham Young while the Mormons were still in Nauvoo. Someone had started preaching that Joseph Smith was the Holy Spirit so the 12 Apostles publicly condemned that concept in the official Church newspaper Times and Seasons:

Let no false doctrine proceed out of your mouth, such, for instance, as the doctrine that the devil and his angels will be redeemed: and that the tabernacle of our martyred prophet and seer, or of any other person, was, or is the especial tabernacle of the Holy Ghost, in a different sense from that considered in relation to his residence in other tabernacles. These are doctrines not revealed, and are neither believed nor sanctioned by the Twelve, and should be rejected by every saint. ( August 15, 1845-emphasis added.)

95% The same theology indeed.

A hallmark of LDS faith and practice is its emphasis and engagement in missionary work. Dissenters from Mormonism --and the FLDS movement is typical--rarely engage in proselytizing except among members of the LDS Church itself. Orson Hyde made that observation back in 1846:

...but when the spirit of apostasy takes possession of a man's heart, ...he cherishes no desire to convert and save the world, but is content to confine his operations to the church, which he slanders, defames, and, like a ravening wolf, tries to tear in pieces and destroy; and having no merit of his own to bring him into notice, he seeks to obtain notoriety by contention and debate, which the Lord declares are not of him, but of the devil. (Millennial Star , Nov. 20, 1846, p. 136)

Another early dissenter, Lyman Wight, took a group of about 120 followers to Texas in 1845. From that time until his death in 1858, his group basically disintegrated, while during the same time frame the other 11 apostles oversaw the conversion of more than 50,000 additional Mormons.

Similarly, the FLDS organization conducts no missionary activity in the sense in which it has always existed in Mormonism. Young men in the FLDS group do serve as "missionaries" for two years, but their activity consists of working for free for another member of the FLDS Church rather than preaching the tenets of their religion. Hardly comparable to the sacrifice of LDS families and missionaries.

When followers of Joseph Smith numbered in the hundreds, he organized them into a unit he called a "stake." Everywhere Mormons settled, "stakes of Zion" were established under the direction of the First Presidency. That organization continues today with over 6,000 stakes in the world. The FLDS organization has no First Presidency, no 12 Apostles, and no stakes. It has a "priesthood council" of seven men--an aberration that never existed in Mormonism. The fundamental Church organizational structure of Mormonism simply doesn't exist in fundamentalism.

Given these clear distinctions between LDS and FLDS faith and practice, I have to wonder what Carmon Hardy was smoking (if he's quoted accurately) when he said, "These fundamentalists [have] good reason to look upon themselves as the most faithful," and people might just think that the FLDS are the closest thing to Mormon Orthodoxy that you can find."