First, Joel Campbell at the Mormon Times (the online site sponsored by the Deseret News), with “HBO Big Love response shows ethical lapses, arrogance.” Campbell takes HBO and Big Love producers to task for “cross[ing] a very bright ethical line” by airing, in an upcoming episode, a scene set inside an LDS temple and depicting LDS temple ceremonies. Campbell suggests the series knowingly blurs the distinction between the LDS Church and fringle polygamist groups.
Vince Horiuchi at the Salt Lake Tribune wrote a response to Campbell’s column disputing the charge the show blurs identities.
The producers have done a very good job of making sure viewers are not confusing the polygamists with the mainstream church members. This season, Bill Henrickson’s (the polygamist played by Bill Paxton) brother in law is an LDS stake president and clearly at odds with the polygamous sect. Another LDS character is a loyal and understanding friend of one of Bill’s daughters who does not condone the practice of polygamy despite her strong friendship.
You might also want to read Horiuchi’s earlier post “Lotta Love for Big Love, Part 2,” to get a better idea of what the episode is about. But I have to be honest … his post with the new trailer for the upcoming Star Trek movie is more fun than either column. It’s Top Gun in the 24th century: Maverick gets a starship. Big Love will come and go, but Star Trek will always be with us.
posted March 12, 2009 at 11:05 am
“Big Love will come and go, but Star Trek will always be with us.”
Awesome.
posted March 12, 2009 at 11:05 am
The good news is that no one is really paying attention. Deseret News and Salt Lake Tribune are the usual Laurel and Hardy Utah comedy troupe. Other than an AP article, Mormon blog world, and comments by those who hate Mormons (and religion) no matter what, there isn’t much made of this by outsiders. It has been met with a collective shrug.
After it is shown (what little parts they will show. Its not like they would show an hour devoted to the whole ceremony) then the true impact can be witnessed. My guess. The collective shrug will continue.
posted March 12, 2009 at 1:07 pm
Since faithful Mormons promise not to disclose details about the temple ceremonies, HBO’s presentation could only be based on information from those who have broken this promise. By definition, these sources are undoubtedly untrustworthy and unethical. This alone should make them suspect.
Those of us who are temple going Mormons will neither supply, nor correct, the information HBO presents. HBO MUST rely on ex-Mormons, apostates and the disgruntled for its information — these are not reliable information sources in my opinion.
There is no way anyone who practices polygamy would be temple worthy or even allowed to retain membership in the L.D.S. (Mormon) Church.
The “authority” to marry a man to one wife is not the same as the “authority” to marry a man to more than one wife. No Mormon since the 1890 change has had the authority to marry any man to more than one woman. So, in the Mormon view, none of these so-called polygamist marriages are valid, religiously or legally. None of these “polygamists” are Mormons.
Membership in the L.D.S. Church is not a vague identification or feeling of alliance; it is an actual membership record. You either have a membership record or you do not. You either are a Mormon or you are not. There is no gray area. If you try to practice polygamy your membership is canceled and you are kicked out of the Church (excommunicated).
Polygamists are not Mormons period. Since their marriages are neither valid nor legal, real Mormons consider the polygamist lifestyle not only illegal but immoral as well. No one doing something illegal and immoral would be allowed inside a temple or allowed to retain Mormon membership.
The whole “Big Love” story line is completely implausible.
posted March 12, 2009 at 1:30 pm
Krista…
Apparently in this episode, Barb (who is spiritually struggling and facing an excommunication for being in a polygamous relationship) borrows/steals a family member’s temple recommend to enter the temple.
Geez. There went your whole argument.
It’s perhaps better to just not comment on something you know nothing about.
posted March 12, 2009 at 4:37 pm
Re: “Mormons”. Unfortunately, the same argument could be used by Catholics, for example, to claim that all non-Catholics are not Christian. Ironically, the Catholics are relatively latitudinarian in that regard, the Protestants not so much.
posted March 12, 2009 at 7:20 pm
“No Mormon since the 1890 change has had the authority to marry any man to more than one woman.”
That might be the most uninformed one I’ve ever read. Several presidents of the church AFTER the “manifesto” continued condoning and, in some cases, participating in plural marriage ceremonies. The U.S. ones are a little vague but post-manifesto plural marriages in Canada and Mexico are well documented.
“Polygamists are not Mormons period.”
Please…this is as rude as the Christian churches saying that Mormons aren’t Christians. Of course they are Mormons.
That reminds me of when Hinkley said that there wasn’t such a thing as a “fundamentalist Mormon”….and then found out later that Mark E. Peterson coined the phrase. He never did get his foot out of his mouth for that one.
posted March 12, 2009 at 7:46 pm
After this episode, with her stealing a temple recommend to get in (which in itself shows that she doesn’t obviously care much for being honest or being worthy to enter a temple), the church may have to up its security from bar codes to pictures on recommends.
posted March 12, 2009 at 9:52 pm
Vince Horiuchi has penned another column on this subject:
No need for an HBO apology on ‘Big Love’
posted March 13, 2009 at 12:28 pm
Bruce in Montana–so what’s your point?
posted March 14, 2009 at 10:17 am
Bruce, Of course some members continued to practice polygamy, They were probbly excommunicated for doing so. There were members who broke off from the church because they wanted to continue that practice and other reasons. Therefore we have the (Reorganized Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day-Saints, The fundamentalist Mormon Church etc) That is why we say they are not truly Mormons / or members of the Church of Latter-Day-Saints. Why do you think there are so many Christian Churches? Someone doesn’t like what the other teaches so they just start up their own church. Now, I ask, when they do that are they still members of the church they broke off from? Some of the breakoffs from the LDS church don’t even resemble the early LDS church except that they want to practice polygamy.
posted March 15, 2009 at 10:41 pm
The LDS church hasn’t condoned polygamy since 1890.
posted March 16, 2009 at 12:49 am
It is amazing that those of you writing to condemn Big Love, did so before the episode even aired. You didn’t even wait to see what was portrayed or even shown. From a non-Mormon’s point of view and someone who actually watched the show, I don’t believe that what was shown was distasteful or portrayed Mormons in a poor light at all.
What does portray Mormons in a poor light is your blinded following of what church leadership tells you to say and how to act. To not watch this episode but to strike out in misguided postings on web sites and organize boycotts. It is this behavior that leads so many of us to view Mormons suspiciously and never want to deal with such narrowed minded members who are always demonstrating how little they can think or act on their own.
posted March 22, 2009 at 11:31 am
Do ficticious polygamous TV marriages ‘lead’ to ficticious same-sex TV marriages?
posted March 22, 2009 at 11:22 pm
When did the church issue the Manifesto — claiming the end of Mormon polygamy?
Church leader Wilford Woodruff issued the Manifesto in 1890. Many members were caught by surprise. Only three apostles approved the Manifesto in manuscript and half the church’s top quorum were barely supportive when they met just before the church conference to discuss the newly published document. (Dialogue, Spring 1985, pp 46-7)
Did the Mormons follow the Manifesto ending polygamy?
No, many did not. In fact, church President Joseph F. Smith’s wives bore him 13 children after the Manifesto, even though he publicly testified he was not “cohabiting” with them. (Dialogue, Spring 1985, p.83)
At least 3,300 children were born to Mormon men who married polygamously with official LDS Church authority from 1890 through 1904. (Dialogue, Spring 1985, pp. 3-104)
mormon doctrine Church Apostle Bruce R. McConkie stated: “Obviously the holy practice (of polygamy) will commence again after the Second Coming of the Son of Man and the ushering in of the millennium.” (Mormon Doctrine, 1966 edition)
Let’s at least be honest mormons. The truth will set you free. Tell the truth and let the chips fall where they may
posted March 22, 2009 at 11:27 pm
Let’s at least be honest LDS.. The truth is the truth. Tell it and let the chips fall where they may and not censor those that may try and tell the truth though we don’t wish them to, that too is dishonest:
When did the church issue the Manifesto — claiming the end of Mormon polygamy?
Church leader Wilford Woodruff issued the Manifesto in 1890. Many members were caught by surprise. Only three apostles approved the Manifesto in manuscript and half the church’s top quorum were barely supportive when they met just before the church conference to discuss the newly published document. (Dialogue, Spring 1985, pp 46-7)
Did the Mormons follow the Manifesto ending polygamy?
No, many did not. In fact, church President Joseph F. Smith’s wives bore him 13 children after the Manifesto, even though he publicly testified he was not “cohabiting” with them. (Dialogue, Spring 1985, p.83)
At least 3,300 children were born to Mormon men who married polygamously with official LDS Church authority from 1890 through 1904. (Dialogue, Spring 1985, pp. 3-104)
mormon doctrine Church Apostle Bruce R. McConkie stated: “Obviously the holy practice (of polygamy) will commence again after the Second Coming of the Son of Man and the ushering in of the millennium.” (Mormon Doctrine, 1966 edition)