Comments on: Society’s Salvation

By: Edje

Edje — Wed, 30 Apr 2008 20:14:02 +0000

Thanks for asking. These days, in particular, I’m avoiding my end of semester assignments. In general I’m going into the last year of a three-year master’s in History and figuring out how to market myself to Ph.D. programs; I might quote Steve (90).

By: Frank McIntyre

Frank McIntyre — Wed, 30 Apr 2008 19:00:28 +0000

Thanks, Edje. What are you doing these days, by the way?

By: Steve Evans

Steve Evans — Wed, 30 Apr 2008 18:21:43 +0000

Edje, it shows that you have uncommon patience and intellect. More power to you!

By: Edje

Edje — Wed, 30 Apr 2008 18:13:58 +0000

I, contra Steve, have found the past 30 or so comments quite interesting. I’m not sure what it says about my common-ness or my man-ness, but I say, “Carry on!”

By: Steve Evans

Steve Evans — Wed, 30 Apr 2008 17:36:44 +0000

(yawns, stretches, rubs eyes)

You guys still going on about this LT nonsense? Frank, you’ve already admitted you’ve read no direct LT literature. Brad, you’ve surely learned by now there’s no arguing with Frank. Can you all please start talking about something interesting and relevant? I say this from the perspective of the common man, who finds the last 30 or so comments to be a total drag.

By: Frank McIntyre

Frank McIntyre — Wed, 30 Apr 2008 17:25:46 +0000

“points out that Christianity cannot be invoked as a trump card against more progressive economic policies ”

Trump card? I think Christianity, and certainly Mormonism, makes very compelling arguments against lefty policy, but I am not sure that it was ever a trump card and, for some hypothetical person who thinks it is, I doubt exposure to LT would change their minds. But I guess that is an empirical question.

By: Brad

Brad — Wed, 30 Apr 2008 16:56:52 +0000

The only major political/economic policy implications I see flowing from taking LT seriously is that it challenges the axiomatic orthodoxy of classical liberal political economy. I don’t think LT compels in a positive sense any speciic policies, merely points out that Christianity cannot be invoked as a trump card against more progressive economic policies regarding taxation, income redistribution, state welfare, limitations on private property, corporate liability, monetary policy, etc. LT is an argument against the notion that Christianity = Classical Liberal Economic Policy, but not necessarily an argument that Christianity = Progressive or Marxist or Democratic Socialist or Keynesian or Liberal (Rawlsian) economic policies.

My own opinion on such matters is influenced by LT but also by a number of other variables, and I would not argue that my views flow necessarily and self-evidently from the imperatives of LT.

By: Frank McIntyre

Frank McIntyre — Wed, 30 Apr 2008 15:45:13 +0000

OK, so if your argument is that we must work out our salvation in a community of Saints. I agree. I am not sure what to make of the Zion as a withdrawal stuff since obviously we are currently expected to live in the world not apart from it. But should the prophet ask us to form such communities apart from the world, I’d be happy to oblige.

Here is, I think, an important point. A Zion community is formed of people who are righteous. If someone is not righteous and won’t repent then they are not going to be able to continue as part of the community. Thus the community is important, but because there is free entry and exit there is a composition problem when talking about it. Of course everyone in the community is saved and they are saved as a community, because anybody who doesn’t qualify has left!

If someone else is not meeting the requirements of the community, they don’t stop my salvation. If no one else in your country were righteous God could still save you and put you in a Zion community in the next life.

Anyway, now I think I have some sense of your position. I am told that many people think LT has political and, indeed, economic implications. What political implications, if any, do you draw from your views stated above?

By: Brad

Brad — Wed, 30 Apr 2008 15:17:51 +0000

Yes, I consider it communal salvation in that the possibility for an individual to meet its requirements is dependent upon others — on their collective, shared constitution of and participation in a set of socioeconomic relations that is not inherently sinful. Without Zion, there can be no individual salvation. And Zion is not just an aggregation of atomistic, individual choices. It is a particular kind of material relations in the here and now that stands against the kinds of material relations that prevail in the world as we know it. Zion is constituted not just through inward individual commitments; it is a product of how we live and interact materially and socially, politically and economically. If we cannot be one in material things, how can we be one in heavenly things? No one here, and no LT advocate that I’m aware of, has argued that salvation is exclusively collective or communal or social. The argument is that individual salvation in the fullest sense is inextricably bound up with with the socioeconomic structures and relations that prevail in society. Indeed, the ontologized distinction between the individual and the collective becomes less and less meaningful the nearer the discussion approaches what the Gospels — and more importantly the Restored Gospel and the temple — teach us about salvation and exaltation in their fullest senses.

By: Frank McIntyre

Frank McIntyre — Wed, 30 Apr 2008 14:57:14 +0000

“but that they participate in and uphold radically different kinds of socio-economic (no rich or poor, commonly held property, unity of purpose and mind, no manner of “-ites”, etc.) relations with one another and with the community as a whole than exist outside Zion.”

I’m glad I asked, because when I said “attach” and “live up to the ideals”, this is what I meant. Your quote above (assuming a careful definition of communal property) is what I mean by attaching: making a covenant to the community and keeping it. So now can you answer my question? I’ll paste it here again in case you lost track of it.

Suppose I, as an autonomous individual, of my own free will, attach myself to a Zion community along with others who do the same. Any person who fails to live up to the ideals of the community and does not repent is not saved. Those who, individually, obey the commandments and live up to the ideals of the community and repent are saved. Do you consider this communal salvation?