Loading summary
Transcript17 lines
- [00:00]
A
When you want to look smart in Sunday school, if you want your friends to think you're cool, when you want to seem wise and not a fool, it's Christy's Corner. Well, welcome to a very special bonus episode. We didn't quite have time to fit in Christy's Corner into the weekly drop this week. Someone, I'm going to say, Richard, was long winded in the last episode, and that made it impossible for us to get to what everyone cares about most, Christie's Corner. So thank you for joining us for this bonus episode. I am your host, Dr. Garrett Dirkmot, and I'm joined by my erstwhile companion, Dr. Richard Leduc.
- [00:46]
B
Hello, Garrett. Thanks for having me to this inaugural bonus episode of Christie's Corner, where I don't want to be long winded. I will be quiet and allow you to jump straight in so that somebody can say something pithy about DNC83.
- [01:02]
A
I should tell you, I may have referenced in one of our other contents. I think it might have been when we were discussing Seven brides for seven brothers, someone whose name probably rhymes with Bleslie Blith sent a case of Campbell's chunky soup to my house.
- [01:32]
B
Oh, that's funny.
- [01:34]
A
Yep. So just so you're aware, on the bright side, it's the kind that Annika loves most. So I just need to tell her that the real reason why she's receiving this is the song bless your beautiful hide. So, speaking of marriage, do you see my transition there?
- [01:55]
B
Yeah, well done. Well done. By the way, between the Yoohoo and the Campbells, the Littners are coming strong with your food storage.
- [02:03]
A
Well, at least. At least a certain. A certain listener is. Yes, and I welcome it, you know, and from other listeners, like the ports, I can now dress in Yoohoo as well as drink it.
- [02:20]
B
Very good.
- [02:21]
A
Speaking of marriage, let's talk about doctrine covenant, section 83. And this is a revelation that's very short and we probably focus on it with some interesting parts. You can see even in the italicized part what they're looking to focus on. That widows and orphans have claim upon the church for their support. Women and children have claim upon their husbands. This revelation arises out of a question that comes from the idea of consecrated properties. Now, remember that following doctrine covenant, section 42, which we will get to someday on search these commandments. When will we get to section 42, Richard? Is that. Will we ever get to that?
- [03:07]
B
Not. I mean, it's. It's July, so. Not this year.
- [03:13]
A
I mean, so in 2029. We'll get to section 42.
- [03:19]
B
Yeah, we're going to sprinkle back in. I already have an idea for an additional premium that we're going to launch next year that I'm very excited about.
- [03:27]
A
We have several people worried that we haven't yet ratified the Constitution in the American history.
- [03:33]
B
One, we're going to ratify the Constitution before we get to section 42. That's a, that is a standard of truth promise.
- [03:41]
A
Well, section 42 outlines the consecration of properties, the law of consecration. And part of that being the idea of consecrated properties. As I've said before, part of the reason why you are going to eventually need to build, you're going to need to adopt the law of consecration isn't just because that way you can prove that you love something more than money to God. Although that's clearly a big part of it. The idea behind Zion is there's no rich and no poor that you're not going there to, you know, I've got the biggest mansion in Zion, you know, well, someone else is living in a trailer house next to you. That's not, that's not the idea of the city of Zion. But Zion is both a people and a place. So once you have the place, once you buy this land in Missouri, how do you ensure that the people are Zion people who live on it? You can buy a city all you want. Look, you can build a city dedicated to God and then life happens. I mean, the Massachusetts Bay Colony was founded by radical, radical Calvinist Protestants who were certain that God wanted everyone else on earth to burn in hell and that they were the light of the world. I don't know that you would call Massachusetts the most religious centered state in the Union anymore. My guess is that you would feel a little bit like, you know, that's, I mean, we can actually do this with Vermont. Vermont is founded by a bunch of religious zealots. It's the most religious place in the country in Joseph Smith's time and today has the highest percentage of atheists and non religious people living in it. And that's only in the space of a couple hundred years. Things shift over time. The way things were is not the way that they're always going to be. So how do I ensure as I'm building up this city of Zion that the people living in it have a minimum standard of worthiness? Because I can proclaim this to be a city all I want. And then, you know, Bill the adulterer moves in, buys lot 473, gets excommunicated for his adultery, gets a printing press and starts printing out anti Mormon literature in the City of Zion.
- [06:32]
B
Hypothetically.
- [06:33]
A
Hypothetically, how do you prevent that from happening? Well, the only way that you could prevent it is if the land isn't actually purchased by the people living there. If the land is owned by the church, so the entire City of Zion is owned collectively by the church, and then people settle on that property by commandment, and they receive a stewardship that gives them the rights to that property as long as they are faithful members of the church. And I've used these examples before, but I'll use them again because, hey, this is for Christie's Corner, and you need a good example to use. This is similar to, I mean, the closest thing you can find, two examples, a temple recommend. Now, theoretically, as a member of the church, everyone, you know, the fact that I'm paying tithing should grant me access to the church's buildings, right? Except that if I want to access the most holy spaces, the temples, there's a minimum standard of worthiness that I have to meet in order to be able to go to that temple because it's a sacred and holy place. If I fail to meet those standards, then I no longer have access to the temple. So my access to the temple is purely based upon my own personal righteousness. If I stop, you know, if I decide to start drinking a Lowenbrau after every one of our podcasts, and because of that, I no longer have a temple recommend, that I forfeited my ability to go into this consecrated space. Something that's an even better example is actually the Brigham Young University System. Whether it's byu, Idaho, Hawaii, or Provo, or whether it's, you know, Ensign College, the students who attend benefit from much reduced tuition rates. And in order to attend, they don't have to be members of the church, but they do have to agree to a minimum standard of worthiness. They aren't allowed to come to the school if they don't agree to that minimum standard of worthiness. And that's why it's an even better analogy if I know all of the U of you fans and, you know, our sitting U of U professors sitting here, you know, you know, angry that I'm using this analogy, that they're not going to be happy about it. But the BYU campuses anyway are at least theoretically open to anyone who is willing to meet the grade requirement, but also to keep that minimum standard of worthiness. And even if you're admitted, and even if you're Halfway through a semester, and even if you might even be the starting quarterback of a football team, even if you are already there, but then you stop meeting that minimum standard of worthiness. You no longer have the right to be a part of that, of that student body, because you agreed before you ever went, I will keep this minimum standard of worthiness. So the city of Zion, as they. As they start out settling in Missouri, in Zion, where they believe they're going to build the city, much of this land is purchased by the church. And people are settled on these lands, on these stewardship, these stewardship covenants. In fact, I thought, you know, just. Just because, you know, here's what you're not going to get somewhere else. I pulled up a Stewardship Covenant from 1832. Yeah, I mean, here's something that you won't have. And it really is like a contract. They call it a deed of stewardship. And this is from October of 1832. And this, you know, it reads like a 19th century land deed. Be it known that I, Edward Partridge, of Jackson county, the state of Missouri, bishop of the church of Christ, organized according to law and established by the revelations of the lord on the 6th day of April, 1830, have leased. Have leased. And notice that terminology they use, have leased. And by these presents do lease unto Joseph Knight Jr. Of Jackson county of the state of Missouri, a member of said church, the following described parcel land, and then it gives out the whole description of the parcel of land to have and to hold the above described property by the said Joseph Knight, Jr. To be used and occupied as to him shall seem proper. And as a consideration of the above described property, I, the said Joseph Knight, Jr. Do bind myself to pay the taxes and also to pay yearly under the said Edward Partridge, bishop of said church or his successor in office, for the benefit of the church, all that I shall make and accumulate more than is needful for the support and comfort of myself and my family. So you see how that contract works, that he's given access to this. And what Does Joseph Knight Jr. Have to do in return? Well, first of all, he has to pay the taxes on it to the government. And second of all, there's an expectation that, yeah, you end up raising 100 bushels of wheat off of property that should only raise 60, you're going to donate the excess to the church to help build Zion. And what are the other binding aspects of this contract? It's agreed by the parties that this lease and loan shall be binding during the life of said Joseph Knight Jr. Unless he transgresses and is not deemed worthy by the authority of the church, according to its laws, to belong to the church. And in that case, I, Joseph Knight, Jr. Do acknowledge that I forfeit all claim to the above described leased and loaned property, and hereby bind myself to give back the least and to pay an equivalent for the loan for the benefit of said church under the said Edward Partridge, bishop of the church or a successor in office. So now there is also again, this is Zion they're trying to build. There's another clause in Joseph Knight's favor that I, Edward Partridge, in consequence of infirmity or old age of Joseph Knight Jr. Agreed to provide for them themselves while members of this church. I, Bishop Edward Partridge of said church, do bind myself to administer to their necessities out of any funds in my hands appropriated for that purpose not otherwise disposed of to the satisfaction of the church. And further, in the case of the death of said Joseph Knight, Jr. His wife or widow being at that time a member of the church, has claim upon the above described leased and loaned property upon precisely the same conditions that her said husband had them as described above. And the children of said Joseph Knight Jr. In the case of the death of both parents, also have claim upon the above described property for their support until they become of age and no longer subject to the same conditions yearly that their parents were provided. However, that the parents were not be members of the church and in possession of the above described land. Right. So the kids can't steal the land from their parents. What that last part saying? So these leases were designed because of prophetic utterance from Doctrine and Covenant, Section 83, to make allowances for what happens when someone dies. Okay, so Joseph Knight Jr. Has this land and he's farming it. Those who have lost their husbands, Verse one. Women have claim on their husbands for their maintenance until their husbands are taken. And if they are not found transgressors, they shall have fellowship in the church. And if they are not faithful, they shall not have fellowship in the church. Yet they may remain upon their inheritance according to the laws of the land. All children have claim upon their parents for their maintenance until they're of age. And after that they have claim upon the church, or in other words, the Lord's storehouse, if their parents have not wherewith to give them inheritances. And the storehouse shall be kept by the consecrations of the church. And the widows and orphans shall be provided for as also the poor. Amen. So this revelation, sure, but it's dealing with the very Practical reality, what happens when someone dies and they were the ones that the consecrated land went to? Do we just kick their spouse off? No, they also get to maintain this land on the same principle as long as they pay the taxes and they are faithful members of the church. So maybe not the, you know, what everyone's willing to jump up and down and wave their hands for in Sunday school, but I think this is a, a really good example of a practical revelation that they didn't really think about at the time that the first revelation was given. They were all thinking about, oh, my goodness, how do we distribute consecrated properties? And they hadn't asked the next very practical question of, well, what happens if someone has a consecrated property and they die? What do we do then? Do we just, you know, come and evict the women and children that are there and say, sorry, guess maybe you shouldn't use as much mercury to treat your husband next time? No, there's allowance made for them. And frankly, I mean, revelations like this, I think are also faith promoting because they demonstrate that the Lord Jesus Christ cares about everybody, the women and the children, and through his prophet, designs a way to care about those people. For all the talk about how Joseph Smith is a false prophet and a charlatan and only cares about himself and duh, duh, duh, duh duh duh duh duh. Boy sure spends a lot of time and spills a lot of ink and spends a lot of money trying to make sure the poor people are taken care of. It's not really the sign of someone who's a charlatan and a liar. It's much more the sign of someone who's desperate to follow the footsteps of Jesus Christ. So that's your Christie's Corner for this week. I hope everybody enjoyed it. Thank you for listening to the Standard of Truth podcast, hosted by historian Dr. Garrett Dirkmont and Dr. Richard Leduc. If you know of anybody that could benefit from the material in this episode, please share it with them. Until next time.