Mormon Socialism

[RobinFinderson]

Setup:
After Christ was resurrected and had ascended into heaven for a pit stop on his way to the Americas, the apostles organized a church which practiced a form of Socialism.

After Christ wrapped up his business with the Nephites/Lamanites, his apostles organized a church which practiced a form of Socialism.

When Joseph Smith designed the modern church, and when Brigham Young picked up the torch after him, they implemented a form of Socialism.

And under all of these Zion building leaders, "There was no poor among them."

When I was growing up, Mormonism's swing toward hard-right politics was already a matter of history. Socialism was an EVIL that sold a lot of books with the Deseret label.

Premise:
For as long as I can remember I had been taught that the law of consecration had been attempted, but had failed due to the weaknesses of men, and that it would be fully instated once again when Christ returned to rule in all of His glory.

Question:
What is the revelation or doctrinal basis for this idea that The Law of Consecration as a type of socialism is a failed project that could only be lived under direct rule by Christ?

Or am I misrepresenting The Law of Consecration? I guess technically all temple ordained LDS are living The Law of Consecration, only they haven't been asked to give everything to the church as had been required by the saints in the past.

More info by our resident experts would be appreciated. TIA.

[byu71]

Setup:
After Christ was resurrected and had ascended into heaven for a pit stop on his way to the Americas, the apostles organized a church which practiced a form of Socialism.

After Christ wrapped up his business with the Nephites/Lamanites, his apostles organized a church which practiced a form of Socialism.

When Joseph Smith designed the modern church, and when Brigham Young picked up the torch after him, they implemented a form of Socialism.

And under all of these Zion building leaders, "There was no poor among them."

When I was growing up, Mormonism's swing toward hard-right politics was already a matter of history. Socialism was an EVIL that sold a lot of books with the Deseret label.

Premise:


For as long as I can remember I had been taught that the law of consecration had been attempted, but had failed due to the weaknesses of men, and that it would be fully instated once again when Christ returned to rule in all of His glory.

Question:
What is the revelation or doctrinal basis for this idea that The Law of Consecration as a type of socialism is a failed project that could only be lived under direct rule by Christ?

Or am I misrepresenting The Law of Consecration? I guess technically all temple ordained LDS are living The Law of Consecration, only they haven't been asked to give everything to the church as had been required by the saints in the past.

More info by our resident experts would be appreciated. TIA.

So you are suggesting that we let the religious leaders of the LDS church decide how to allocate the assets in America. Also assign where people should live and the kind of work they should do. I am OK with that. You might have trouble getting it accepted by evangelicals, muslims, catholics and atheists, but let's see what we can do. Maybe a first step would be for you to donate a sizeable sum to the Romney for President campaign.

[RobinFinderson]

So you are suggesting that we let the religious leaders of the LDS church decide how to allocate the assets in America.

I'm interested in the history of Mormonism's transition out of socialism.

[byu71]

I'm interested in the history of Mormonism's transition out of socialism.

Interesting question. My guess would be that it would be the same as the growth out of male domination. Polygamy and even the ban on wearing of levi's at BYU being changed. Certain norms are appropriate for certain times.

I appreciate the fact from a cultural aspect the church has the ability to change and adapt to meet those times, but as to specifics in the case of a move away from socialism, I don't know.

One positive thing a religious society has if it isn't influenced by the non-religious, there whole society does have a motivation to succeed aside from the materialism motive. I guess you could point to the Warren Jeff's clan as a form of socialism that succeeds when they are left alone.

[TripletDaddy]

It is interesting that we would discuss the Church's transition out of socialism the week after I go to Church and the Bishop tells the congregation that we need to up our fast offerings to cover the cost of all the financial assistance the ward is doling out to families that need the money.

There is also a very active thread about making sure we continue to pay our tithing, presumably so that the Church can continue to collect 10% of our income and then redistribute it as it sees fit.

Thank goodness the Church has transitioned out of socialism!

[RobinFinderson]

One answer to my question might be this:

Mormonism hasn't given up socialism at all (The Law of Consecration). Members who have gone to the temple have already consecrated all of their material possessions, time and talent to the church. It ALL belongs to the church in the only way that really matters -- it has been consecrated for the church by a covenant.

While it may have been consecrated to the church, the church has implemented a system of personal stewardship. Members are trusted to take care of the church's stuff.

If this is the case, then here is my question -- shouldn't it be incumbent on the covenanted member to will all of his/her earthly possessions to the church after death? That would ensure that consecrated stuff didn't end up in the hands of unruly apostate children.

[beelzebabette]

You make me tired. The law of consecration's a failed experiment, Mormons have transitioned out of socialism, socialism's back (poof!) and members are consecrating possessions & talents to the church, members are entrusted with the Church's stuff, now a covenanted member should will all earthly possessions after death.

I missed the part where I gave my possessions to the church, and it gave them back for my stewardship. I guess I was confused in thinking that I was building the kingdom of God in the manner I best knew how based on the instruction I've received, communication with the divine, and my best judgment.

[RobinFinderson]

I missed the part where I gave my possessions to the church, and it gave them back for my stewardship. I guess I was confused in thinking that I was building the kingdom of God in the manner I best knew how based on the instruction I've received, communication with the divine, and my best judgment.

It was part of the temple ceremony, so I better not go into more detail. Listen close the next time you attend.

[beelzebabette]

It was part of the temple ceremony, so I better not go into more detail. Listen close the next time you attend.

http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/consecrate

I'll venture a guess I've attended more recently than you.

[PaloAltoCougar]

It was part of the temple ceremony, so I better not go into more detail. Listen close the next time you attend.

This actually explains a lot. Having understood "consecrate" to mean "convey title to", RF signed a quitclaim deed to his estate on the way out of the temple his first time through. No wonder that in his post-membership phase it's been difficult to build up much of a real estate or securities portfolio; he started with nothing.

[RobinFinderson]

http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/consecrate

I'll venture a guess I've attended more recently than you.

I'm not sure what you are getting at. When you consecrate your material possessions, I assume they remain consecrated even after you die. Then why not will them over to the institution to which they were consecrated to build up? Isn't this how the church established its capital foundation in the first place?

[byu71]

This actually explains a lot. Having understood "consecrate" to mean "convey title to", RF signed a quitclaim deed to his estate on the way out of the temple his first time through. No wonder that in his post-membership phase it's been difficult to build up much of a real estate or securities portfolio; he started with nothing.

LOL.This why I have come to believe Robin is a chain yanker. I will admit I like to play along, but he really can't be serious with some of his analogies.

When it comes to envying the rich, he reminds me of my old bud Mike Waters.

[LA Ute]

Confusing terms

The differences are subtle, but as I understand it, the law of consecration is communitarian, not socialist. Read Building the City of God by Leonard Arrington, which I am told is the definitive work on communitarianism among the early Mormons in Utah.

*****

Socialism:

a theory or system of social organization that advocates the vesting of the ownership and control of the means of production and distribution, of capital, land, etc., in the community as a whole.

Communitarian:

A member or supporter of a small cooperative or a collectivist community.

*****

In the case of consecration, one hands one's property over to the Church, not the state, and entry into it is entirely voluntary on the part of the individuals who choose to become part of the cooperative. That voluntary part is the critical distinction. Socialism is not voluntary, on an individual level, at least.

I'm sure there are others here who know lots more about this than I do. Educate us!

[Guest]

The differences are subtle, but as I understand it, the law of consecration is communitarian, not socialist. Read Building the City of God by Leonard Arrington, which I am told is the definitive work on communitarianism among the early Mormons in Utah.

*****

Socialism:

a theory or system of social organization that advocates the vesting of the ownership and control of the means of production and distribution, of capital, land, etc., in the community as a whole.

Communitarian:

A member or supporter of a small cooperative or a collectivist community.

*****

Who controls the means of production has always been a distinguishing feature in my mind.

[Sleeping in EQ]

For those interested in the history of this stuff, B.H. Roberts' biography of John Taylor is a must. John Taylor put an end to Brigham Young's United Order communities.