A Little More on Joseph Smith and The U.S. Constitution

John has correctly observed that my comments in the October 9 Reading List could use some elaboration. Here's my effort in response.

First, a warning and a disclaimer: What follows may be too much "inside [Mormon] baseball" for some; and I am no expert on the statements of Joseph Smith.

If you're still reading, you must be willing to wade through this material with me. Here is the background: John asked me to respond to a blogger going by the name Philocrites, who offered some "advice to political reporters who want a question to ask [Mitt Romney] about the way his Mormon faith might inform his politics:"

[D]o some background reading on Joseph Smith's prophecy that the U.S. Constitution will one day "hang by a thread" and that elders of the Mormon Church will come in to rescue it. Six other Mormon Church presidents — who are considered "prophets, seers, and revelators," just like Joseph Smith — have also used this image, and it's a perennial fixture of popular Mormon discourse about politics. Romney must be familiar with the image — you don't grow up Mormon in America without hearing it — so I'd be curious how he interprets it.

I reject Philocrites' suggestion that reporters should ask Mitt Romney about Joseph Smith's alleged statement. What Joseph Smith may have taught about the Constitution is not Mitt Romney's job to explain, any more than it was John F. Kennedy's job to explain the statements of a pope who died 162 years before JFK ran for president.

Philocrites apparently does not see the issue that way. He notes that Mormons believe America is a "land of promise" [and that] "whatsoever nation shall possess it shall be free from bondage, and from captivity, . . . if they will but serve the God of the land, who is Jesus Christ." (Emphasis is Philocrites'.)

Philocrites tells why he thinks the question is fair game:

This a place where church doctrine directly addresses the U.S. Constitutional order. It suggests not only a theological interpretation of politics but a potentially theocratic politics that may well be contrary to liberal democratic pluralism. Can American Jews and Hindus and Muslims and Unitarians and Pagans and atheists and others participate in a national "covenant" with "the God of the land, who is Jesus Christ"?

By now many readers here may be totally confused as to what this is all about. My point is that whatever Joseph may have said about the Constitution, there is no "theocratic politics" within Mormonism that might inform Mitt Romney's views.

I'll begin with what is reported to be the most clear formulation of what Joseph is supposed to have said. Elder Harold B. Lee, a member of the LDS Church's Council of Twelve Apostles and later president of the church, said in a church general conference session a half century ago:

It was Joseph Smith who has been quoted as having said that the time would come when the Constitution would hang as by a thread and at that time when it was thus in jeopardy, the elders of this Church would step forth and save it from destruction. (Harold B. Lee, Conference Report, October 1952, p.18; no link available.)

Significantly, there is no clear evidence that Joseph Smith himself ever actually said that the U.S. Consitution would "hang by a thread," and that faithful Mormons would save it. Some early members of the Church reported hearing Joseph say something along those lines, and the reports may have taken on a life of their own, if this summary is correct. That "prophecy," often called the "White Horse Prophecy," is widely considered to be a product of Mormon folklore. You can find a fairly exhaustive study of the White Horse Prophecy here. (This blog isn't the place for an explanation of the nature of record keeping in the early Mormon period.)

All that said, such a statement does seem consistent with other statements attibuted to Joseph by several other contemporaries, as historian D. Michael Stewart wrote in 1976.

Philocrites himself notes that at least one Mormon commentator, a former U.S. Solicitor General, has said Mormons should not use Joseph's supposed statement to jump to hasty conclusions. He links to an address by Mr. Lee that thoughtfully summarizes the entire subject. I think Lee's address is entirely correct and will educate any reader quite well about Mormon views of the U.S. Constitution. My original comment in the post below turns out to be a summary of what Lee said:

In my view, this is another instance in which going beyond what our leaders have said can be misleading at best, and potentially fraught with mischief. Even though we have not been given the exact meaning of the prophets' statements about the Constitution hanging by a thread, the scriptures do define the conditions on which freedom in the land of America ultimately depends. I am satisfied that whatever else may eventually hang in the constitutional balance, this much is clear: The continuation of the blessings of liberty depends finally on our spiritual righteousness.

I have heard Lee's interpretation expressed by many other Mormon leaders and commentators throughout my life. We do not believe, nor has any LDS Church president ever taught, as far as I know, that Mormon politicians will somehow save the Consitution. To believe or teach such a doctrine would, in my view, be to "go beyond what our leaders have said," as Lee observed. Instead, it is clearly our belief that to the extent we are teaching our fellow Americans what we consider to be the true gospel of Jesus Christ, we are helping to save the country from destruction. That is hardly a shocking belief for a faith that calls itself The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints.

So does it matter what Romney thinks about all this? I don't think so. As a Mormon, Romney will probably do what he can, when acting in a religious capacity, to influence others to serve Jesus Christ. In other words, that's what he'll do when he's teaching Sunday School. He won't be doing that when he's acting as Governor of Massachusetts or as president of the United States.

More to the point, Romney is entitled to his private religious beliefs. Those beliefs simply do not include any notion that a Christian theocratic government should be imposed on the country. If Mormons did believe that, or there were some clear statement to that effect by a current president of the LDS Church, then it might well be fair to ask Romney about theocracy. But it just isn't so. In the words of Gertrude Stein, there is no "there" there.

Update: This Wall Street Journal piece (subscription required) reports further on the White Horse Prophecy, and provides furrther evidence of its folklorical nature.

Addendum: It has been suggested to me that perhaps my comments about Philocrates, whose real name is Chris Walton, constituted an attack on Mr. Walton rather than his arguments. I certainly did not intend my comments as such and apologize for any misimpression I may have created. After all, Mr. Walton may be wrong, but he's a graduate of my beloved alma mater, the University of Utah. That alone speaks volumes about his good judgment and excellent educational foundation. I hope I can get together with Mr. Walton someday for a bowl of Jello.