Tuesday, October 15, 2013

Personal Epiphany







Just prior to turning 41 I filed for divorce. This was an agonizing decision I had wrestled with for several years. Losing my bid as plaintiff in court I spent the ensuing months possessed of considerable anxiety over the propriety and consequences of the decision and its subsequent loss. I was fearful of having taken a course in life for which there was no remedy for my children, and had consigned myself and them to an endless misery. The struggle to find useful purpose in 19 years of non-functioning marriage consumed my daily thoughts. I had failed miserably to be a decent father on more than one occasion. Against this backdrop I found myself suddenly extricated from the trivialities of bachelor living to another existence. On the night of November 8th, 1991 I retired to bed much earlier than usual. The date is peculiar as it was the 56th wedding anniversary of my deceased parents, the same day of the week, the same time of evening of their ceremony, and at the time of this experience I had not any knowledge of these details. The last thing I remember seeing before falling asleep was looking at my alarm clock which read 8:30PM.


The next thing I was conscious of was walking north on the sidewalk outside the house where I grew up. This house was demolished as were most of them on the street by the 1970s. Presently my parents walked up from behind and “spoke” to me about going into the house to discuss important matters. After some unknown length of time discussing my marital situation with my mother we exited the house back in the direction they had arrived and we made ascension into another place via a swirling dark vortex. There were a number of people who were also entering and departing. It all seemed so natural and ordinary. The moment we entered the blackness, we moved at such speed I don’t remember anything of the journey, only the arrival at a quarried stone building used for consultation--the kind people engage in to obtain a clearer sense of purpose.

We arrived at a room on an upper floor and my mother instructed me to enter through a door to our left where I would be visited shortly by way of their prior arrangement. I would guess the room was on the order of twenty to thirty feet on each side. I was alone and the room was empty and windowless, but well lit without evidence of artificial lighting.  Presently the door opened and a man came in, dressed in simple white robes.  He was taller than I, about six feet.  He had a strong build without looking excessively muscular, and walked with perfect confidence.  His hair was white with some moderate curling, and it appeared to flow down around his head like a waterfall.  Within a moment I recognized him, not from his facial features, but from the aura of his countenance.  I suddenly remembered we were friends and that we had spent time with each other often before I had entered mortality. It was a flood of warm memories instantly unlocked.  As He approached me I knew him to be Jesus and the same overwhelming, enveloping love I had experienced with my mother years earlier flowed from His being.  Only His was much stronger and radiated farther out.  I was also aware of His immense age.  He had been alive for a very long time in terms of planetary years.  My impression was at least a quarter million, but there is no way to quantify it in mortal terms. I was not nearly as old as He.

I was filled with deep feelings of respect and esteem for Him, and He for me. I felt a measure of awe, and filled with a wonderful sense of value in being privileged to have had His friendship all of my existence. The conversation though mental and extremely fast went something like this:

Jesus: (With considerable affection and slight humor) “You know we could have had this visit a lot sooner, but your attention was so riveted on your mistakes and guilt none of us could reach you. We’ve been waiting.”

Smee: (Feeling a lot of remorse and humiliation) “I did not know who to trust, not for lack of trying to find intelligent help. I tried really hard in spite of all the adverse situations to do the right thing, and made a serious mess of my paternal stewardship. I fear my children may never recover from my mistreatment of them, and then the divorce turned out far worse than I had anticipated. What hope have they now of growing to adulthood without serious relationship issues? I feel really hopeless about their prospects for a functional life. I can’t help wondering if I could have found some way to hang on in spite of their mother’s indifference to our emotional needs.”

Jesus: (brilliant with love, acceptance, confidence) “I know about all you have gone through, all you have done for good and ill, about your children, their struggles, and their fate. They will be fine, you have not damaged their lives “beyond repair”, and they will be attended to while in the flesh, just as you have been. None can judge or condemn you for your mistakes and their evil consequence but you alone. It is not mine to do either, but only mine to extend the helping hand to those who are willing and in need, to lead them through the door of transcendence. The measure of mortality is not in the mistakes men make, any lack of conviction, will, or power to control. It is not through merit nor my “grace” as the world perceives it that Man obtains transcendence and redemption. The purpose of mortality is not after the manner of Man’s conception, and therefore the value of the soul is not predicated upon the concepts of fallibility nor merit. Rather mortality’s purpose is to experience powerlessness and by it magnify the virtue of compassion and love, for love is the very essence of power in all of Creation. The measure of your life will not be in the misdeeds nor the good deeds you have achieved, to be weighed in a balance scale. It is solely by the amount of love you have administered to those who need it, that their own flame dies not. Your fallibility and its consequences are redeemed through my love as it is in all love, as you permit it to have influence in your life. The purpose of life is in how much you grow in love, for these mortal experiences are but a process in this journey of Being. The only harm you can commit is refraining from loving others when they require it, and erecting prison walls of guilt, remorse, and unforgiveness about yourself. To do so delays growth and produces exquisite, unnecessary torment from which not even Man’s God can deliver.

So that you may find rest to your soul, let us review your life from the beginning. Let us examine your choices and the growth you have obtained from them. You shall see the whole of your life, all that it was before mortality, all that is has been to now and may be until you die the mortal death, and where these choices are leading you to.”

Smee: (gaining courage and hope) “Lead on Lord. Restore my soul. Show me who I am.”

Presently the walls seemed to fade away and in their place scenes from my life appeared.  It was panoramic, only all around me.  It was like stereoscopic vision, with multiple scenes happening, past, present and future, each with their own issue and events pertinent to a particular cusp.  I had never imagined it would be possible to learn on such a scale.  Here we think, read, and speak in serial form.  There, it was in parallel, the mind multitasking each subject with complete ease.  As I learned from observation and a kind of interactive process with what I saw (the scenes changed according to what I wanted to understand), I marveled at how there seemed to be no limitation to the amount of information the human mind could process at once.  It has taken a number of years since this review to unzip all those packets of entwined learning and put them into a serialized form I could articulate.  Even then it has been very difficult to put into words for there is often no analog of experience in mortality with which to describe those things.

The whole of my life was there before me, behind me, all around. I could analyze and evaluate all I wished to while at the same time absorbing the meaning of each experience and knowing its value. I saw my earliest experiences up to entering the physical body, all that had transpired in it, numerous possibilities yet to be chosen, the transition of dying, and returning home. It was like conversing with a congregation of souls and not losing focus with a single individual, all the while correlating the meaning and significance of each person’s communication into an integral whole. It was real-time; being in tune with Creation, being in touch with life. This panoramic review continued for quite some time. It seemed but only an instant, yet in retrospect encompassed subjectively most of the “day.”

At length when I was satisfied, understanding that which I had seen, I had another question, like a yearning.

Smee: (great curiosity and thirst for understanding) “Lord, I want to know why we are, what we are to become. Where can I go from here, after mortality is finished? Is it possible for such a seemingly insignificant person as I among innumerable souls, many of whom possess great capacity, to amount to something of value to the whole of Man’s existence? What IS Man’s Destiny?”

Jesus: (laughing with delight) “Those are big questions that are not easily answered. To gain those answers, one must learn many new ideas, and that requires experiences of growth. But come along, let us visit some of the different levels of progression that Man has achieved. Let us behold the marvels of that which they have attained. It will be a fun experience!”

Smee: (terribly agitated with excitement) “Yes! Let’s go see what others have become! I want to see what if any, limits there are to what I may achieve, and how much happiness can be created.”

So with Jesus close by my side we traveled great distances over the next “day”, stopping to observe  many places throughout this region of space, how other souls had chosen to realize their potential. Most of those localized civilizations we observed from a distance. There was little interaction with them because of my lack of sufficient growth to comprehend the nuances of their objectives. Our perceptions and understanding of Creation comes in stages of development. This is hard to explain. The Universe is endless. It is not possible to take it all in. If I were to guess, we went to the local group of galaxies. I’m pretty sure it was not limited to just our own, which is relatively young. But the scenes were magnificent. Beautiful creations everywhere, both in Nature, and that which Man had invented. There was a level of happiness and love in each one unique to their enterprise unparalleled in anything I had contemplated or beheld before. Satisfied that there was plenty to keep me occupied for a very long time, and prospects for happiness and beauty unlimited, we returned to the same room we had departed from.

Feeling immensely edified and enlarged, saturated with awe and wonder at those scenes I had observed, I wanted to keep them forever in my heart and mind. I had to ask:

Smee: “Going back to my mortal life, can I retain what I have learned from our adventure?”

Jesus: (very amused but steadfast) “Knowing now what you do about yourself, do you believe you can refrain from trying to manipulate life and avoid the painful experiences to come? Do you believe you can still realize the full growth you want by circumventing the hardest parts and still arrive at the person you want to be?”

Smee: (dismayed and acquiescing) “You are right. I could not resist trying to avoid the painful parts. I would only succeed in making my life and the lives of others more complicated. But I don’t want to go back to that feeling of hopelessness and despair for the future. I need to know I will get through all those things and mortality will turn out well. How can I know I am making the right choices?”

Jesus: (brilliant again with His love and compassion) “Most of these things will be suppressed in your memory, particularly what you have observed in our journey together. This is necessary so that you will not be overwhelmed by them when you experience the challenging events to come. The torment of the contrast will make them all the more difficult and cause you to shirk them. However, you can be permitted to remember particular portions of what you have seen and learned after the critical moments have passed, so that you can know you are still heading in the direction you want to go.”

Jesus extended His hand and touched me with His index finger on the forehead between the eyebrows, and then again midway on the breastbone while speaking thus:

Jesus: “I seal these memories in your mind and heart, to be held in reserve until the end of mortality. You will know and remember only that which is needful to sustain you in tribulation, to give you hope and peace to your soul. You will not be alone, but can receive of my presence as you desire to be comforted.”

His touch changed me in ways I cannot describe. I felt transformed, as if a part of me was supplanted with something greater. It was a sense of surety, of confidence and self-assurance. In a way it felt like being reunited with my pre-mortal self. The emotional impact was almost overwhelming. I felt myself return to my physical body briefly, restless with a remorseful agitation for the person I had been, and then leaving that distraught person behind. Instantly I was back in His presence, feeling whole.

Jesus: (exuding joy and gaiety, pointing to the room’s corner behind Him a long table appeared, laden with comestibles) “Let’s celebrate this time together. Here is a banquet of fruits and vegetables to refresh ourselves.”

At this juncture my parents entered the room and we all feasted to our satisfaction upon the most exquisite tasting food I’d ever had. Jesus then departed to attend other matters. The next thing I remember was arising from sleeping in a second floor bedroom of the old house mentioned earlier. I trotted down the stairs which were adjacent to the kitchen. Somehow I knew mother was there, and seeing her she greeted me. I asked her where dad was and she said he had matters to attend to. I was disappointed. I had not heard him utter a single word the entire time. I had hoped we could discuss those issues that had bothered me when living in that house, and now he was gone.

I asked mother if any of what I had experienced actually happened, or if it was all just a fabrication of my own dreaming. She said it indeed did happen, just as I had experienced it in every detail, and that I should not deny it, for it would be cause for regret. She had been preparing something to eat for us and I sat with her enjoying a breakfast I could not remember having done since a young boy.

I awoke in a manner similar to the previous time she had visited with me. It was an event of strange disorientation, a kind of vertigo, but not of physical balance. It was somewhat like stepping between two moving trains, one traveling at a different height and speed, combined with a sense of awareness of location changing over a great distance. I was there, then rapidly and with the sensation of extreme movement, like stepping onto a people mover at an airport, I was here. I felt the sense of elapsed time change, and was instantly awake and alert. Opening my eyes I saw the clock which glowed with the time of 12:30 AM.

There have been moments over the intervening years I've cursed having experienced this epiphany. Before it happened, it was never something on my mind, the transcendence of a spiritual quest. All I wanted was answers to some basic issues that had plagued me since my earliest childhood memories. Like many people who have passed through their Near Death Episode and struggled with adjusting to living in this world of flesh, I've had my moments too. I don't like in the aggregate being here. I love the living beings on this planet more than I did before. The beauty of this planet is extraordinary in its depth and variety. I went through a period of increased sensitivity to light, irritation with hard raucous music, and an increased revulsion of news broadcasts or TV/movie programming that focuses on denigration of the human soul. I no longer have any interest in religion. It is a creation of Man, and its method of operation is domination and control of the human soul. Contrary to popular belief of the religious, it is the most stifling activity man can engage in to prevent spiritual growth.

There have been sudden moments of illumination of people's lives I hardly knew and knowing from it the troubles they would have if they didn't relinquish their lust for control of life. I wrestled, and at times continue to wrestle with depression during personal setbacks or that of other people who lose their health, spouse, or friends. I'm not one of those people who can say I am better for having been through this. There have been times when it has been a light to my footsteps, imparting courage and confidence to those who falter from their own burdens. At times the love of Jesus has sustained me in full confidence, rarely for myself, but to lift up the dispirited. There are still certain things that scare the bejesus out of me, but none of them to do with death. The thing I fear most is a protracted illness, fraught with pain and disability, that would encumber those closest to me with an impossible burden. I have been a helping hand over the years to such people and their family. It is not an easy task to lift up the hands of those who've lost their courage and spirit from travail.

Perhaps someone may find the answers here that I was searching for. The one thing that has stuck with me all this time is the extraordinary certitude I have about it. Religion was never my source of faith or conviction. For me, the answers I received imparted a clarity of understanding that surpasses all other forms of learning. May this story help restore a sense of personal value to an ailing soul.

SethSmee

Friday, September 27, 2013

Conspiracies and Common Sense

                                       

                                                        In the Mirror
 “For the Lord worketh not in secret combinations, neither doth he will that man should shed blood, but in all things hath forbidden it, from the beginning of man. And now I, Moroni, do not write the manner of their oaths and combinations, for it hath been made known unto me that they are had among all people, and they are had among the Lamanites. And they have caused the destruction of this people of whom I am now speaking, and also the destruction of the people of Nephi. And whatsoever nation shall uphold such secret combinations, to get power and gain, until they shall spread over the nation, behold, they shall be destroyed; for the Lord will not suffer that the blood of his saints, which shall be shed by them, shall always cry unto him from the ground for vengeance upon them and yet he avenge them not.” (Ether 19-22 Book of Mormon)


Secrets. Oaths. Conspiracy. Murder. Wealth. Power. Dominion.

Of all the indictments laid against Mormonism as a fraud, their own scripture—the “Gold Bible”—is the most damning. Yet the credulity of its adherents, with their concomitant cognitive dissonance, prohibits the realization of this simple conclusion from their reading in the Book of Mormon. As a missionary, I was commissioned to present the Book of Mormon as a new witness for the divinity of Christ, and by logical extension, such testimony made it one of the Movement’s pillars of proof of the Restoration. Neither I, nor any of my peers, had any conception of the American social and religious environment from which it emanated.

Long before I had abused my senses with more than forty readings of this plagiarized, late eighteenth century tale, I came to the conclusion that the bulk of the story had far less to do with Christ and His appearance among these purported aborigines, than it had to do with the human impulse to form “combinations.” The wail of its baneful civil effects is the summation of Mormon’s story. From beginning to end, along with the interrogatory comments of the “chroniclers”, the lament has to do with the destruction of their civilization due directly to the lust for gain, power, and domination. The theme plays out like the worst of contemporary “B” movies, also produced by aspiring but untalented writers and playwrights. This IS the message of the book; the activities of the Gadianton robbers with their plundering, murdering, oaths, conspiracies, subversion of law and justice, according to the prophet-priests who allegedly witnessed and chronicled their civilization’s destruction.

Early in my reading of this fabulous production I came to the conclusion opposite of what Joseph Smith told his twelve apostles convened at Brigham Young’s house:

“I told the brethren that the Book of Mormon was the most correct of any book on earth, and the keystone of our religion, and a man would get nearer to God by abiding by its precepts, than by any other book.”  (4:461 History of the Church)

I did not get any closer to God reading this book than any other, ever, save The New Testament (and that poorly). It did however, raise a lot of questions and inconsistencies that I spent years trying to resolve. Among them were the unpaid priests who labored with their hands for their support, the secret oaths and signs of the Gadianton robbers, the discontinuity between the form of worship described by Mormon versus in the CJCLDS, and numerous other inconsistencies already dealt with by other church history investigators. When “Endowed” as a missionary, a person has little chance of reflecting on the presentation. Everyone is too busy with getting up and down periodically to fuss with “priesthood attire.” Upon returning from the mission for the Church I renewed temple attendance to gain an understanding of what was being taught there. I was further burdened by inconsistencies and obvious references to itself during that portion consisting of Lucifer, his preacher, and that all religion was a production of deceit and confusion. Especially noteworthy was the purpose of the oaths, signs, and death penalties. These I did not understand until years later gaining access to the history of Joseph’s involvement with Free Masonry, and Joseph and Sidney’s alienation after Sidney’s 1838 “Salt Sermon.”

What the unwary and fully credulous Mormon members do not realize, is that this story appears during a period in world history when secret societies were sweeping Europe and appearing in Colonial America. Free Masonry, the Illuminati, Jacobinism, and several others had found their way into the political world, as well as the more fundamentalist religious movements such as the Jesuits. Not long into the investigation of this period of world history the presence of societies of every imaginable kind appear on the world stage. Of all the anachronisms found in the Book of Mormon, this is the most glaring and obvious to the student of history. But Mormons are characteristically ignorant of early American history, while the ideologues of BYU in defense of the Faith interpret the period in support of the Joseph Smith Mystique. They would rather see a sinister motive against their faith in the determination of View to the Hebrews and Manuscript Found as the substance of the Book of Mormon plot, than to see in all three the elements of secret society angst extant in late Eighteenth century American culture. Such anxiety is nowhere to be identified in the histories of native American inhabitants, such that we so far have. The theme of secret societies was wholly and totally consistent with late Eighteenth century civilization, and not within that of the Maya, Aztec, Toltec, or any of the various aboriginal cultures.

Some people have equated the phrase “secret combination” to mean conspiracy. But Webster’s defines a conspiracy to be either open or secret. In my view, “society” is a much closer contextual synonym to “combination.”  Its usage also parallels the social fixation of the period in which the story was manufactured. Nevertheless, the important point of this topic is that secrecy, conspiracy, and the objectives of “secret combinations” as described in the Book of Mormon have been a fundamental part of Mormon history since before Joseph Smith courted Emma Hale.

One of the earliest persons to recognize the conspiracy surrounding the production of the Book of Mormon was Emma’s father, Isaac. Mormon ideologues have from the earliest days attempted to impugn Isaac’s eye-witness account of the book’s production as a hoax:

“…the whole "Book of Mormon" (so called) is a silly fabrication of falsehood and wickedness, got up for speculation, and with a design to dupe the credulous and unwary-and in order that its fabricators may live upon the spoils of those who swallow the deception.” Hale Affidavit

Since Isaac provided Joseph and Emma the very house in which this production began, who would know better what was going on therein and why? The problem I see with these refutations is they consistently extricate the eye-witness accounts from the historical context, and their polemics always have the unstated agenda of putting Joseph’s character in a positive light. What Rodger Anderson attempted to do was present a reasoned examination of why they should be accepted at face value, irregardless of imputed perjury. Why is it so difficult to let the testimonies of these contemporaries of Joseph Smith speak for themselves? Who knows better what was happening during the initial stages of the book’s “translation”, Isaac, or people who never knew Isaac, the conspirators in its production, or those who lived or now live removed in time and distance from the original events?

According to Cowdrey, Davis, and Vanick, the conspirators in the book’s production included at various stages, Joseph Smith, Oliver Cowdrey, Martin Harris, Orson Hyde, Sidney Rigdon, and Emma Hale. Today we have the confessed account of the stated objective of the book’s production by Joseph and his relatives. Yet at every turn the Mormon ideologues attempt to discredit those who recorded what they heard and saw from the lips of these conspirators. All this is sufficiently documented by various investigators of Mormon history and I shall not attempt to review their research. Getting the story from their hand I relegate to the reader.

While reading some of the writings of Hannah Arendt, particularly her treatise of Totalitarianism, I could not help but notice strong resemblance in the history of the leadership of Mormonism to the characteristics Hannah identifies in movements that culminate in Totalitarianism.  Hannah elucidates this fourth form of government that rose a century ago in the form of Bolshevism and Nazism. The parallels to the behavior of Mormon leaders and its organization are too numerous to be coincidental. Hannah explores further where Eric Hoffer leaves off in The True Believer, characterizing mass movements and their social development. Of particular interest germane to my thesis are the chapters  The Totalitarian Movement, Totalitarian Power, and her later essay On the Nature of Totalitarianism. All this material I found available in the local library network. With some diligence, the reader can likely find all these on the Web. They are not particularly demanding of intellect, although Hannah’s ability to write lucidly in English is hampered by her German origin. One can read through all this material in a matter of a few hours.

Hannah identifies four basic forms of government:

Republican Rule
Monarchial Rule
Authoritarian Rule
Totalitarian Rule

The principle of action by which each of these forms respectively operate are Virtue, Honor, Fear, and Ideology. The first three were identified by Montesquieu, the last by Arendt’s study of Nazism and Communism. The important point to keep in mind with this study is that none of these forms manifest in human society in complete purity. There is always some overlap of form and character among them. Hannah’s tremendous point in her research is that had Nazism achieved complete totalitarian rule, the world would have been in far worse condition than where it was on V-day, perhaps never achieving liberation from their human and property destruction at all. The terror that unfolded from these movements is largely absent in the experience of society today, for only the oldest segment of the world’s population can remember the conditions that produced the holocaust. Hannah is certain that Totalitarianism in its elemental form has never left the world scene since the destruction of Germany, and this is born out with the history of the USSR as well as our own US of A. An important point to contemporary citizens is that the elements of Totalitarianism have been fully functioning in our society since that time. Technically, we entered the beginning of Totalitarian rule in this country during the administration of George W. Bush and the passage of the Patriot Act which “legalized” the use of terror through the suspension of Habeas Corpus. It is a matter of no small significance that Mormons contributed to the loss of several civil rights under the Act, just as the conservative Religious Right in Nazi Germany did beginning in the 1920s.

In comparing the history of the CJCLDS from beginning to present to these forms, I have observed numerous similarities to Authoritarian and Totalitarian political domination. The virtue of Eric Hoffer’s analysis is the reduction of political, religious, and social institutions to human mass movements. He devotes an entire section in his book, The True Believer to the interchangeability of mass movements. Eric, like Hannah, identifies the basic human quality that is the root of the motive force generating the production of movements, and the manifestation within them of Leaders who personify the same characteristics. Political terrorists such as Stalin and Hitler (or Bush and Obama), and religious terrorists such as Sidney and Brigham (or Benson and Packer) don’t suddenly appear in a vacuum. These personalities ride the wave of people coagulating around a central paradigm intended to be a substitute for their common deficiencies. Like attracts like, and it is just as true of mass movements as it is of married couples. (Incidentally, this also accounts for the lament of single women uttering the cliché that “All the good men are taken” being none other than a myth.)

Hannah identifies the common human need of Distinction as the root of motive energy. Its antithesis is Superfluity. If a person cannot achieve distinction among his peers, then he tends to feel superfluous. Eric describes the individuals who start or gravitate to mass movements as those who feel frustrated, are malcontents, misfits, or disaffected in their social relations. It is the suppression or prevention of individuality that causes these persons to seek substitutes for that innate need of human expression and validation. Obviously it is this basic need that Christ’s Beatitudes address, but which are perverted in the same manner as the hypocritical priests did in His day when members today are purged for failing to adhere to the Church’s priesthood party ideology.

The perspicacious Dr. Szasz wrote “In a modern totalitarian society, such as the Soviet Union, only the right man, who is the spokesman for the Party, can speak, and what the Party says is right.”  This is a credible description of Mormonism, and the man who bemoaned of Communism coming to the center of Mormonism is precisely the man who entrenched and enlarged Totalitarianism in Mormonism.  He was the man who was widely celebrated as the advocate of Liberty as a Church authority—just like Hitler was exalted as the savior of Germany. This man was Ezra Taft Benson, who institutionalized the Church’s equivalent of the secret police in creating the Strengthening the Membership Committee. While Church leaders had employed spies all the way back to Joseph’s day, it was never incorporated into the hierarchical structure of the Church until Ezra institutionalized his own spying upon “subversive” members of the Church. The objective of this Committee is not the actual strengthening of members in their Faith, but of purging the dissidents who the Leaders fear will expose the man behind the curtain. It is the Church’s Correlation Committee who have charge of publishing the dogma.

The Church’s Correlation program was Totalitarianized with the restructuring of the Church hierarchy under Harold B. Lee. This formalization of a process begun decades earlier was a consolidation of power within the elite—the fifteen Apostates. Part of its intent was to remove various doctrines that had crept in during its creative phase, to be replaced by a consistent indoctrination methodology across all departments. It is no coincidence that since that time purges of dissident factions and the creation of such categories (Intellectuals, Feminists, Homosexuals) has increased. Such an organizational change was required to make spying an institutional facet of the Church’s organization. There was no divine inspiration in such changes. They were a normal and necessary part of the consolidation of hierarchical power at the top over the individual member’s life, far greater than it had been since the administration of John Taylor.

A totalitarian organization develops through a single party system, and this is precisely what the Correlation Program accomplished—the unification of the Priesthood “party” of the Church, thereby compressing the beliefs of the various organizations into a singular ideology run by a single party—the Priesthood. If women are ever allowed to hold priesthood positions, it will indubitably require the dissolution of the Relief Society as a woman’s function. When Joseph threw this bone to Emma (to silence her complaints on his philandering), it also included the creation of an inner Priesthood organization composed of those who were given a “fullness” of the Priesthood. Brigham sought to suppress women’s influence in Church priesthood. (The reader can find Brigham’s attitude about women in the Journal of Discourses, especially where he threatened to dissolve all Church marriages.) A hierarchical form of it exists today among those who receive their “Second Anointing.” But they are all essentially neutered in terms of real Church power which was Brigham’s implementation of Joseph’s objective.

In a Totalitarian movement, such doctrinal denials that Gordon Hinckley made on Larry King to the world are ignored by True Believing Mormons, for they see themselves faithful to the Ideology and Leader, keeping their “eye on the Prophet.”  Describing this same characteristic of Nazism Hannah explains:

“While the membership does not believe statements made for public consumption, it believes all the more fervently the standard clichés of ideological explanation, the keys to past and future history which totalitarian movements took from nineteenth-century ideologies, and transformed, through organization, into a working reality.” (p371-2 Burden of Our Time)

The entire point of secrecy in conspiracy is to conceal fraud. Fraud can only be imposed upon the ignorant and gullible. It is an instinctive reaction in human nature to disbelieve anyone who imposes upon one’s credulity. This instinct can be over-ridden by the emotional craving for distinction, and leads numerous people, lacking in self-esteem, self-confidence, and self-validation to attach themselves to movements where others of like deficiency can assuage the emotional emptiness. We hear this repeatedly in the news and television programs: I want to make a difference. Seldom do such people ever stop to consider that simply by being born into this world they are making a difference. Hannah is explicit about this.

The relation between secret societies and hierarchies in mass movements are described by Hannah in explicit detail throughout her writings. Reading the following passage I was startled in recognizing all the elements found in the Church’s “Endowment”:

“Secret societies also form hierarchies according to degrees of ‘initiation,’ regulate the life of their members according to a secret and fictitious assumption which makes everything look as though it were something else, adopt a strategy of consistent lying to deceive the noninitiated external masses, demand unquestioning obedience from their members who are held together by allegiance to a frequently unknown and always mysterious leader, who himself is surrounded, or supposed to be surrounded, by a small group of initiated who in turn are surrounded by the half-initiated who form a ‘buffer area’ against the hostile profane world. With secret societies, the totalitarian movements also share the dichotomic division of the world between "sworn blood brothers" and an indistinct inarticulate mass of sworn enemies.” (p364 Burden of Our Time)

A look at the Endowment dialogue a century ago reveals the blood oath of vengeance, removed in 1927, after it became known during Reed Smoot’s senatorial appointment.

The Church’s story of the Smith family is a whitewash of propaganda, intended to conceal the fact that this family was not humble, honest, pious frontier folk, but ignorant, indolent thieves, suffering therefrom in wretched poverty. After seeing the result of hard labor upon the life of his older brother Alvin, it would be no leap of the imagination to conclude that Joseph Jr. sought to employ the only skill he had—charlatanism (which he emulated observing the religious revivalism of the period). As a young man he could well have concluded that physical labor was likely to lead to a short life, especially if one suffered destitution from the indolence of a raging, often drunken father. Isaac Hale had the family pegged for what they did; “dupe the credulous and unwary-and in order that its fabricators may live upon the spoils.” Dupery depends on secrecy and gullibilty. The irony is Joseph was never fully accomplished at secrecy, though he strove for it his entire life. To the astute investigator of early Mormon history this is abundantly evident.

Because the fundamental nature of Man (and of Beast or Fowl etc.) is to obtain distinction, all associations congeal into hierarchies. Thus all mass movements inevitably develop hierarchies, whether they be political, religious, or social. Hierarchies therefore intensify the strife for distinction where self-confidence seeks substitution, becoming the motive force behind parties, groups, unions, and conspiracies. The history of the CJCLDS is no exception. Those who were at the fore of its formation and subsequent evolvement have been those bereft in varying degrees of self-confidence, esteem, and validation. One cannot scrutinize the lives of Sidney Rigdon, Martin Harris, Joseph Smith, Orson Hyde, Emma Hale, Brigham Young, Joseph F. Smith, Heber C. Kimball, Heber J. Grant, Harold B. Lee, Ezra T. Benson, Gordon B. Hinckley, Thomas S. Monson, and not observe this deficiency of character. In fact, it is an essential element of active hierarchies that the higher one ascends within them, the greater is the insecurity of confidence, and thus the more fervent the assertions of divine influence. A century ago theologian Reinhold Niebuhr observed:

“Extreme orthodoxy betrays by its very frenzy that the poison of skepticism has entered the soul of the church; for men insist most vehemently upon their certainties when their hold upon them has been shaken.  Frantic orthodoxy is a method for obscuring doubt.” (pp2-3 Does the World Need Religion?)

A classic depiction of this state of mind is Jeffrey Holland’s Book of Mormon speech in General Conference, October 2009.

Nowhere is secret conspiracy more prevalent, than where orthodoxy and passion join to fuel the Holy Cause. To the Orthodox, departure from the Right Way is heresy.  It doesn’t have anything to do with Truth—that is the nature of their scam.  Heresy is contravening their ideology, asserted by their power.  The seeming irony is, all Reformers (read prophets) throughout time were heretics who sought return to strict Orthodoxy. Purge of the heretic within hierarchies and conspiracies is an essential function to consolidate and maintain Power. Wars are not fought over scarce resources.  They're fought to consolidate power, and so it is with the conflict in hierarchies. The ultimate end of consolidation of power is total domination. As Hannah Arendt’s investigations have shown, the final end of domination is complete destruction for no other reason than they must be infallible:

“Mass leaders in power have one concern which overrules all utilitarian considerations: to make their predictions come true. The Nazis did not hesitate to use, at the end of the war, the concentrated force of their still intact organization to bring about as complete a destruction of Germany as possible, in order to make true their prediction that the German people would be ruined in case of defeat.” (p339 Burden of Our Time)

All prophecy is self-fulfilling. It is the manifestation of the votary’s ideology.  “Prophecy is a poor guide to the future. You only understand it when the events are already upon you.”(Ambassador Delen Babylon 5)

“…it is with prophecy as it is with miracle; it could not answer the purpose even if it were real. Those to whom a prophecy should be told, could not tell whether the man prophesied or lied, or whether it had been revealed to him, or whether he conceited it; and if the thing that he prophesied, or intended to prophesy, should happen, or something like it, among the multitude of things that are daily happening, nobody could again know whether he foreknew it, or guessed at it, or whether it was accidental. A prophet, therefore, is a character useless and unnecessary…” (p51 Age of Reason)


Michael Quinn who wrote Early Mormonism and the Magic World View chronicled the influence of astrology and necromancy in Smith's family and its influence in the Church.  For that he was censured and ultimately booted out for embarrassing the Church.  Brigham distanced himself from astrology and divination, but retained incantations and the secret oaths and combinations by formalizing the "Endowment" (while privately endorsing the Danite clan activity), which is nothing more than a loyalty test and covenant. The test used to be executed in the Temple upon threat of excruciating pain of death.  The second token of the Aaronic priesthood administered to the Endowment initiate requires them to covenant to avoid “every unholy and impure practice.” Mormon wrote that the Lord forbade all manner of secret combinations and murder. Yet here we have in the very ceremony meant to prevent such an occurrence, administration of the covenant by oath, signs, and until 1990, the death penalty imposed upon all who failed to abide the covenant. Such irony. Such hypocrisy. Such craftiness.

Apprehensive about the growing unrest of the residents outside of Nauvoo, and perceiving the real possibility of extradition for treason and bank fraud, Joseph began measures to surround himself with loyal followers who ultimately would commit themselves by death oath to protect him and the Church leadership. A partial history of such measures is:

Joseph’s April 1938 Conference injunction “that "any person who spoke or acted against the presidency or the church should leave the country to die; that he would suffer no such to remain there; that they should lose their heads.";

Sidney Rigdon’s June 1838 “Salt Sermon” injunction; "It is the duty of this people to trample them into the earth, and if the country cannot be freed from them any other way I will assist to trample them down, or to erect a gallows on the Square of Far West and hang them up.";

The 1838 formation of the secret Danite society with its oath to "Sustain, protect, defend, and obey the leaders of the Church, under any and all circumstances unto death; and to disobey the orders of the leaders of the Church, or divulge the name of a Danite to an outsider, or to make public any of the secrets of the order of the Danites, was to be punished by death." Several Danite members became Nauvoo policemen;

Joseph’s March 1842 adoption of Free Masonry in the Church leadership, organizes the first Nauvoo lodge then considered to a be a secret society, at the behest of John C. Bennett;

Joseph gives the first Masonic laden endowments to leaders May 1842;

Joseph’s April 1843 Nauvoo City council statement that instead of hanging "I will shoot him, or cut off his head, spill his blood on the ground, and let the smoke thereof ascend up to God; and if ever I have the privilege of making a law on that subject, I will have it so.";

The March 1844 creation of the secret theocratic council under charge, constitution, name, keyword, and penalty of death for divulgence;

The April 1844 Temple dedication where Joseph claims the temple is “the most substantial and best finished Masonic temple in the Western states.”;

Further secret killings post assassination period into the Great Basin Kingdom infamy.

Just these highlights of Church history bring to mind the passage in Helaman 6:

22 And it came to pass that they did have their signs, yea, their secret signs, and their secret words; and this that they might distinguish a brother who had entered into the covenant, that whatsoever wickedness his brother should do he should not be injured by his brother, nor by those who did belong to his band, who had taken this covenant.
23 And thus they might murder, and plunder, and steal, and commit whoredoms and all manner of wickedness, contrary to the laws of their country and also the laws of their God.
24 And whosoever of those who belonged to their band should reveal unto the world of their wickedness and their abominations, should be tried, not according to the laws of their country, but according to the laws of their wickedness, which had been given by Gadianton and Kishkumen.

The terror employed in the Church was a physical threat with the claim of saving a man’s soul by spilling his blood, as well as excommunication for offenses of disloyalty to Joseph Smith. All these threats when carried out were done in secret, with the sanction of a secret conspiracy.

Today the terror employed by Mormonism is the threat of, or actual consignment of, the offender to oblivion through excommunication. The person is not only out of the fold, but out of communication with anyone who is still a member. This often includes the destruction of family solidarity, marriages, and sometimes defamation with job loss. It is the equivalent of social and spiritual solitary confinement. Once this punishment was called an act of love. Now it is termed an act of discipline. It is neither. It is terror enacted to enforce conformity in the name of spiritual salvation.

Repeatedly in Church conferences members are admonished that spiritual safety can only be had through conformity, to obey without question, never be found disloyal to the Church’s head leadership, subjected to secret inquisition and reproach by the Bishop for voting opposed to Priesthood decree, investigated and subjected to threat of disfellowship or excommunication for publishing or preaching material embarrassing to the Church or its leaders. By these methods the Leadership compresses the boundaries between members wherein they define their own lives, their relations with their relatives, neighbors, and the world. This compression is possible when members feel lonely, fear, rootlessness, homelessness, and isolation. The compression drives out the individuality, the juridical and moral senses with the objective of amalgamating members into an unthinking mass, with only the Leader doing the thinking. It is no coincidence that Brigham chose the beehive as the State’s symbol. It represents the industry of drones who don’t think, only obey and do.

One consequence of terror is the destruction of moral judgment. In a web interview with Charles Moore, Catholic priest and district attorney he stated:

“If you base a religion on faith, and believing what somebody says, then you are vulnerable to believing a lie. And if you believe a lie, you are constantly in conflict with yourself, because your heart knows better. Your heart and your mind are divided. Consequently your whole life is in hostility, anger, and striking out. Faith based religions are the basic cause of war.” (Laura Lee Show History of Western Civilization 4-2003)

Along similar thought is this observation by Tom Paine:

 “When a man has so far corrupted and prostituted the chastity of his mind, as to subscribe his professional belief to things he does not believe, he has prepared himself for the commission of every other crime. He takes up the trade of a priest for the sake of gain, and in order to qualify himself for that trade, he begins with a perjury. Can we conceive any thing more destructive to morality than this? ” (p3 Age of Reason)

Conspiracies are not characteristic of the absence of proclaimed moral values. The ideology often requires the highest standards, while the Leader and his inner associates often act arbitrarily indifferent to them. Members of the Nazi SS were required to posses the highest moral standards, and simultaneously follow orders to exterminate innocent people without question, for the good of the Party, or Germany, or whatever reason Hitler decided. How do they get away with this contradiction?

“The chief value, however, of the secret or conspiratory societies' organizational structure and moral standards for purposes of mass organization does not even lie in the inherent guarantees of unconditional belonging and loyalty, and organizational manifestation of unquestioned hostility to the outside world, but in their unsurpassed capacity to establish and safeguard the fictitious world through consistent lying. The whole hierarchical structure of totalitarian movements, from naive fellow-travelers to party members, elite formations, the intimate circle around the Leader, and the Leader himself, could be described in terms of a curiously varying mixture of gullibility and cynicism with which each member, depending upon his rank and standing in the movement, is expected to react to the changing lying statements of the leaders and the central unchanging ideological fiction of the movement.” (p369 Burden of Our Time)

“A mixture of gullibility and cynicism is prevalent in all ranks of totalitarian movements, and the higher the rank the more cynicism weighs down gullibility. The essential conviction shared by all ranks, from fellow-traveler to leader, is that politics is a game of cheating and that the ‘first commandment’ of the movement: ‘The Fuehrer is always right,’ is as necessary for the purposes of world politics, i.e., world-wide cheating, as the rules of military discipline are for the purposes of war.” (p370 Totalitarianism)

Hannah’s analysis of Totaltarianism is that the leadership operates in a similar manner to the gangsterism of America’s 1920s, from which the Nazis learned it. The movement has its stated purpose for the gullible altruist which is the lie, but the real purpose is otherwise. Isaac Hale saw through the ruse to the true purpose. For some, it is often difficult to recognize the inconsistency of purpose, especially for lack of familiarity with the movers and shakers of the movement:

“The lies of the movements, on the other hand, are much subtler. They attach themselves to every aspect of social and political life that is hidden from the public eye. They succeed best where the official authorities have surrounded themselves with an atmosphere of secrecy. In the eyes of the masses, they then acquire the reputation of superior ‘realism’ because they touch upon real conditions whose existence is being hidden.” (p344 Burden of Our Time)

Members like ex-area authority Hans Mattsson cling to the idea there is some element of divine inspiration in the Church’s leadership. Yet they do not answer his questions, remaining mute on the most critical of historical issues. They can’t answer them, because to do so reveals the secret of their existence and ultimate agenda. The real purpose of Mormonism is not to extend true salvation to the world. Its purpose is exactly what the Council of Fifty, a secret conspiratorial society, was invented to do—fill the earth in fulfillment of Daniel’s dream of the stone cut out of the mountain (p129 Origins of Power):

“The true goal of totalitarian propaganda is not persuasion but organization-the ‘accumulation of power without the possession of the means of violence.’ For this purpose, originality in ideological content can only be considered an unnecessary obstacle. It is no accident that the two totalitarian movements of our time, so frightfully ‘new’ in methods of rule and ingenious in forms of organization, have never preached a new doctrine, have never invented an ideology which was not already popular. Not the passing successes of demagogy win the masses, but the visible reality and power of a ‘living organization.’” p351 Burden of Our Time)

This, the “True and living Church” of Christ.... As Hannah characterized the ideological processes of Hitler it became evident that there were no new ideas ever incorporated into National Socialism. And so it is with Mormonism. Take for example the concept of salvation wrought by the atonement of Christ. Morgdoc proclaims it covers all the creations of Jesus Christ. It is the basis of the Creation story in the temple ceremony. This was not a revelation to Joseph Smith (never mind the personal differences of belief among the Church’s Apostles in recent times). This was a tenet had among American religious theologians more than fifty years earlier:

 “From whence, then, could arise the solitary and strange conceit that the Almighty, who had millions of worlds equally dependent on his protection, should quit the care of all the rest, and come to die in our world, because, they say, one man and one woman had eaten an apple? And, on the other hand, are we to suppose that every world in the boundless creation had an Eve, an apple, a serpent, and a redeemer? In this case, the person who is irreverently called the Son of God, and sometimes God himself, would have nothing else to do than to travel from world to world, in an endless succession of deaths, with scarcely a momentary interval of life.” (p44 Age of Reason)

So where did Joseph’s or Sidney’s or Brigham’s ideas originate, really? Virtually every doctrine of Mormonism can be found in some American religious sect. This subject has been well covered by presenters at the Ex-Mormon Conferences, downloadable at their website.

Also an important part of Hannah’s analysis is that during the initial stage Totalitarianism destroys moral judgment, as also the sense of justice as established by civil Constitution and law. The holocaust of the last century was attributable to this state of mind, and that is what made the Nuremburg trials so difficult. Not just the inner circle of leaders, but many of the Germans had no sense of having committed any crime, much less affixing one appropriate to the magnitude of human destruction. In Hannah’s expositions we have the essence of what Voltaire meant:

"Those who can make you believe absurdities can make you commit atrocities...."

And I may add to this: and not feel guilty for them but believe one is doing a service to Mankind. Tom Paine was incensed by this perspective of the modern priest and his ability to turn inside out the doctrines of Jesus:

“…what can be greater blasphemy than to ascribe the wickedness of man to the orders of the Almighty?” (p69 Age of Reason)

Looking at the whole of it, which is only obtained by diligent reading of the references and reflection upon the same, it is a sad, disgusting revelation to discover in Mormon history the behavior proscribed in their own Scriptures. It seems never to have occurred to any of them the words of Jesus to Peter in the Garden: “Put up again thy sword into his place: for all they that take the sword shall perish with the sword”  (Matt 26:52), and his defense before Pilate:

“My kingdom is not of this world: if my kingdom were of this world, then would my servants fight, that I should not be delivered to the Jews: but now is my kingdom not from hence.” (Jn 18:36)

During the first Endowment sessions in the Nauvoo temple Heber C. Kimball told the initiates the purpose of it was “to bring us to an organization, and just as quick as we can get into that order and government, we have the Celestial Kingdom here”. But didn’t Jesus say the Kingdom was already here, within? (Lk 17:21) The organization Heber refers to then is not an other-world kingdom, but a Totalitarian organization as Hannah described, a gang of thieves, liars, and murderers the purpose of which is to fill the earth, so that they might dictate to all men, with Joseph at the head. The destruction of Nauvoo and the depredations committed leading to it is not any different than what happened to the Jews in 70 A.D..

Here is a vignette from the Mormon temple ceremony prior to 1990. The pretension to authority is palpable, an indictment of themselves:

NARRATOR: Adam, on finding himself in the lone and dreary world, built an altar and offered prayer, and these are the words he uttered:
ADAM: Oh God, hear the words of my mouth. Oh God, hear the words of my mouth. Oh God, hear the words of my mouth.
LUCIFER: I hear you; what is it you want.'?
ADAM: Who are you?
LUCIFER: I am the God of this world.
ADAM: You, the God of this world?
LUCIFER: Yes, what do you want?
ADAM: I am looking for messengers.
LUCIFER: Oh. you want someone to preach to you. You want religion, do you? I will have preachers
here presently. There will be many willing to preach to you the philosophies of men mingled with scripture.

Minister enters—

LUCIFER: Good Morning sir!
SECTARIAN MINISTER: Good morning!
SECTARIAN MINISTER: A fine congregation!
LUClFER: Yes, they are a very good people. They are concerned about religion. Are you a preacher?
SECTARIAN MINISTER: I am.
LUCIFER Have you been to college and received training for the ministry?
SECTARIAN MINISTER: Certainly! A man cannot preach unless he has been trained for the ministry.
LUCIFER: Do you preach the orthodox religion?
SECTARIAN MINISTER: Yes, that is what I preach.
LUCIFER: If you will preach your orthodox religion to these people, and convert them I will pay you well.
SECTARIAN MINISTER: I will do my best
LUCIFER: Here is a man who desires religion. He is very much exercised, and seems to be sincere.
SECTARIAN MINISTER: I understand that you are inquiring after religion.
ADAM: I was calling upon Father.
SECTARIAN MINISTER: I am glad that you were calling upon Father. Do you believe in a God who is without body, parts, or passions, who sits on the top of a topless throne; whose center is everywhere and whose circumference is nowhere; who fills the universe, and yet is so small that he can dwell in your heart, who is surrounded by myriads of beings who have been saved by grace, not for any act of theirs, but by His good pleasure. Do you believe in such a great Being?
ADAM: I do not. I cannot comprehend such a Being.
SECTARIAN MINISTER: That is the beauty of it. Perhaps you do not believe in a devil, and in that great hell, the bottom less pit, where there is a lake of fire and brimstone into which the wicked are cast, and where they are continually burning, but are never consumed?
ADAM: I do not believe in any such place.
LUCIFER: I am sorry, very very sorry! What is it you want?
ADAM: I am looking for messengers from my Father.

The scene changes to the Godhead talking to Peter James and John who subsequently walk in—

PETER: I am Peter.
JAMES: I am James.
JOHN: I am John.
LUCIFER: Yes, I thought I knew you, what are you going to do now? (Speaking to the minister) Do you know who these men are? They claim to be apostles. Try them!
SECTARIAN MINISTER: Do you profess to be apostles of the Lord Jesus Christ?
PETER: We do.
SECTARIAN MINISTER: This man told me that we should never have any revelation or apostles, but if any should come professing to be apostles, I was to ask them to cut off an arm or some other member of the body and restore it, so that the people might know that they came with power.
PETER: We do not satisfy men's curiosity in that manner. It is a wicked and an adulterous generation that seeks for a sign. Do you know who that man is? He is Satan!
SECTARIAN MINISTER: What? The devil?
PETER: That is one of his names.
SECTARIAN MINISTER: He is quite a different person from what he told me the devil is. He said the devil has claws like a bear's on his hands, horns on his head, and a cloven foot, and that when he speaks he has the roar of a lion!
PETER: He has said this to deceive you, and I would advise you to get out of his employ.
SECTARIAN MINISTER: Your advise is good; but, if I leave his employ, what will become of me?
PETER: We will preach the Gospel unto you, with the rest of Adam's posterity.
SECTARIAN MINISTER: That is good ....

The first of several Masonic signs and tokens are then administered to the congregation.

The level of gullibility throughout is astonishing. If this is how smart Lucifer is, he could not very well deceive the elect (whoever they truly are). And Peter, why does he assume the preacher just wants his curiosity satisfied? Or Lucifer thinking that Adam is stupid enough to be looking for religion? If this is truly part of the restoration of an ancient Endowment performed in the Solomon temple, how did Peter, James, and John, and the sectarian minister get in there? Previous to this version that I was introduced to, there used to be a Protestant hymn and service along with the preacher. So that was restored too? Isn’t this what is called an anachronism—the “restoration” of a Free Masonry ritual claimed to have existed in the tenth century B.C.?  The association of Lucifer with the devil was an early Catholic creation, and the word Satan had an entirely different meaning in Hebrew. Sidney Rigdon’s search for a Restoration is riddled with anachronisms.

Hannah tries to make a case for stupidity increasing over the previous century along with loss of common sense. But even two centuries ago it was on the decline, judging by the reference material. She does have a point to its presence among non-intellectuals:

“Stupidity has become as common as common sense was before; and this does not mean that it is a symptom of mass society or that "intelligent" people are exempt from it. The only difference is that stupidity remains blissfully inarticulate among the non-intellectuals and becomes unbearably offensive among "intelligent" people. Within the intelligentsia, one may even say that the more intelligent an individual happens to be, the more irritating is the stupidity which he has in common with all.” (p314 Essays in Understanding)

And this is precisely why Apostates Packer and Oaks were so adamant about Intellectuals being an enemy to the Church. They tend to peek behind the curtain to see who is really there. Intellectuals aren’t usually satisfied with walking down the yellow brick road with fools for companions.

Quite some time ago when Freud was perpetrating his fraud, Karl Kraus made this simple observation about fools and gullibility:

“Alas, journalists have fought with more success against corruption than the gods have against stupidity: …whereas profound stupidity carries deep conviction and cannot be bought off for any price." (p135 Anti-Freud)

I’m looking in the mirror. From the time I was inducted until I resigned was nearly fifty years. At least I woke up and smelled the pigsty. And this discussion takes the reader back to the beginning. Full circle.

Seth Smee

REFERENCES
John Robison, Professor of Natural Philosophy, 1798 Proofs of a Conspiracy
Hannah Arendt, political theorist,1994 Essays in Understanding
Hannah Arendt, political theorist, 1951 The Origin of Totalitarianism. Burden of Our Time
Hannah Arendt, On the Nature of Totalitarianism; http://www.cas.umt.edu/liberal/documents/152ArendtOnTheNatureofTotalitarianismAnEssayinUnderstanding-Copy.pdf
Eric Hoffer, American philosopher, 1951 The True Believer
Michael Quinn, historical investigator, 1994 Origins of Power
Cowdrey, Davis, Vanick, historical investigators, 2005 Who Really Wrote the Book of Mormon
Mark McKiernan, historical investigator, 1971 Sidney Rigdon
Rodger I. Anderson, 1990 Joseph Smith’s New York Reputation Re-examined
Thomas Szasz, Professor of Psychiatry, 1990 The Untamed Tongue
Thomas Szasz, Professor of Psychiatry, 1990 Anti-Freud
Reinhold Niebuhr, American theologian, 1927 Does Civilization Need religion?
Thomas Paine, Colonial philosopher, 1794 Age of Reason
Joseph Smith, Charlatan, 1844, History of the Church

Tuesday, May 7, 2013

Abraham, the Royal Cult lackey

                                      


                                                   What Dispensation?

    Abraham was a priest of the royal cult, back in the days when the weather was good and the Sumerian empire still had the virility to maintain its borders. Like many people, I was of the impression the Egyptian Dynasty was separate from the Sumerian civilization. But it is not so, as the tablets from Sumer attest. The Old Kingdom of Egypt was a vassalship of Sumer’s Anannage royalty. All the rulers are related, and derive their royal status through Cain, the son of Eve and Enki, her father. Adam’s firstborn son with Eve was Hevel (Abel) the elder of the other brother Sat-naal (Seth).

Abraham was also a sycophant. Being of royal Anannage descent he was entitled to a vassalship of his own, except that he was down the line, just a bit. While the Biblical ancestry of Abraham takes him through Shem, the fictitious son of a fictitious father Noah, the secular histories of the region put Abraham as a descendent of the Lords (Dukes) of Edom, who are direct descendents of Cain. Cain is the firstborn son of Adam’s wife Eve, by their mutual father Enki and their surrogate mother Nin-kharsag. The genetic origin of Adam and Eve through the ovum inplanted in Nin-kharsag is unknown, but it is known it was not of the Anannage Elohim. So Adam and Eve are half-brother and sister, a decidedly common practice of the Anannage royal cult, and practice of their descendents, the Egyptian pharaohs.

The Deuteronmists of the 6th century BC in their zeal to establish their supremacy as rulers post-Babylonian captivity, constructed a corrupted genealogy between Noah’s father Lamech and Adam’s second son, Seth. The Akkadian genealogy (the Mesopotamian civilization located between the Tigris and Euphrates rivers north of the Persian Gulf) is far more accurate and older than the Deuteronomist fraud. Noah and Shem do not appear in the lineage from the true Lamech, 5th generation from Cain and Lord of Ur. Tubal-Cain, son of Lamech, King of Ur and known as the Vulcan, established the first Egyptian dynasty through his two sons Ham, and Japhet. It has long been known that the rulers of Egypt were outsiders, and this is who they are. And of course, the Deuteronomists created a similar fraud surrounding Moses, or the Mosis (royal Egyptian heir), Akhenaten, the deposed pharaoh of partial Habiru descent, who sought to establish a Supreme God among the other Egyptian Gods. Smarting from his expulsion, he and his one-time pharaoh and feeding brother Smenkare (cousin Aaron) being the last of the royal line sought to wrest the Kingdom from Seti I, grandson of Horemheb, the son-in-law of Aye who was the son of Yusuf the Vizier. Suffice it to say the dynasty was dying off and with the deposition of Akhenaten, that line of Egyptian royalty came to an end.

If the book of Jubilees is correct, Abraham was a descendant of King Ur-Nammu through his great-grandmother Ora, and was of the caste of Kasdim or Kasdeems; scholars, mathematicians, and astronomers. They were a fairly wealthy lot who dwelt in the area of Ur/Uruk. This area was sacked by a coalition of neighboring marauders, a likely consequence of the devastation of a bolide impact in the Gulf 300 years earlier, the invasion coinciding with a weakening of local political power. Abraham along with a group of family escapees (the ensis, local governors) headed northwest along the Euphrates river to Haran, on the northeast border of Canaan. This is how Abraham and his associates came to be known as Habiru, a Syrian name for those who came from across the Euphrates. Abraham’s brother Lot is captured in the Valley of Siddim, near Sodom, by the Elamite king Chederlaomer, head of the coalition that sacked Ur. It is here that Abraham forms his own coalition and retrieves his brother, killing off Chederlaomer in the process. Celebrating this victory with Abraham is the king of Sodom, none other than Melchizedek, the high priest of Salem. Abraham shares with Melchizedek the spoils of this military venture, and it is out of this victory the story of Abraham paying tithes to king Melchizedek derives. Melchizedek is a worshipper of the god Shãlem (son of El-Elyon), and a priest of El-Elyon, father of all the Gods, the same god the Deuteronomists claim spoke to Jacob, grandson of Abraham. This is the same God that Moses later asserts is Yahweh, the God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob.

Is it any wonder the Christian/Muslim/Judaist religions have such conflicting ideas of God?  The only records bearing their true relationship with Man is found on clay tablets and stone inscriptions long buried in the sand.

Abraham was said to have married his sister, who just also happened to be the sister of Senuseret I, pharaoh of the 12th dynasty in Egypt. Sarah is the daughter of Abraham’s father, Terah and Tohwait. Abraham’s mother is Yawnu. Apparently Abraham is on the move from the time he left Ur, for he does not settle too long anywhere until he reaches Egypt and Senuseret gets his eye on Sarah. According to historical records this nomadic life is driven by increasingly arid conditions in the region, as well as political instability due to the disintegration of the Anannage rule. His status as prince exceeds Abraham’s and Sarah marries him in exchange for Abraham’s life which Senuseret’s priests want to terminate. Sarah up to this time is reportedly barren, but there are two factors deciding the case. First, she could have been too young, or more likely, was a priestess who was restricted from bearing children during her service and therefore according to the Hammurabi law received from Ur-Nammu, granted Abraham a handmaid by which he could have children. Abraham’s heir is Ishmael, born to Hagar. But the Deuteronomists twist the connection to make it look as though Isaac is his heir. Isaac is quite possibly Sarah’s second child by the pharaoh, his elder brother being Amenemhet II. Had Senuseret died without an heir the story of Isaac may have been entirely different.  As it is, it is quite plausible that Isaac’s sacrifice by Abraham had less to do with a commandment of “God” than it was the extinguishing of a competitor heir for either Abraham or Senuseret. Otherwise, why would Isaac have been circumcised, this being an Egyptian royal custom? Prior to the Abrahamic story in the Bible there is no mention of circumcision, and one would naturally conclude this is because it did not exist in Abraham’s ancestry, he not being of direct descent.

Again and again, the Deuteronomists exploit this apparent conflict between brothers and heirship, sometimes manufacturing the story through mistranslation (Cain and Abel), or by birthright (Ishmael and Isaac, Jacob and Esau). This twisting continues with the twin bastard sons of Judah by Tamar (widow of Judah’s sons Er, and Onan), Zerah and Pharez. With the death of both of Judah’s sons one has to wonder about his motive to sire offspring by his daughter-in-law under the guise of her “harlotry.” It is through Pharez (lit. breach/burst forth. born first, even though Zerah’s hand had protruded first) that king David and Jesus derive their “royal” heirship. But Reuben who is the oldest of the twelve sons is conveniently forgotten, as is Zerah, who by rights was the first to exit his mother’s womb.

The dogma that Abraham had a prophetic dispensation is a complete fabrication of modern religious interpretation, and therefore anachronistic. The form and function of priests prior to the formalization of Israel was of a distinctly different character. It is Moses (Akhenaten) who imbues a new flavor to the function of priesthood with the sacrifices, rites, and laws established for the sole purpose of solidifying his One God religion. But even with him, there was no “restoration of the Gospel” by priesthood authority, as there was none with Noah (the great Flood was several thousand years before Noah’s invention), nor with any of the Old Testament prophets. In truth Akhenaten’s revision was not a monotheistic religion, but an attempt to return to the fundamental beliefs of their ancestors, where An was the chief God among the Elohim, or Grand Council, composed of his immediate family members. The children of Israel continued to worship the various deities that had accrued over the millennia who were descendents of the original Anannage Nine. Akhenaten attempted to pare these away and return to the original Order. The priests of Egypt did not share his True Believership, as it impacted their credibility as wise men of the royal cult. The Peter Principle was just as active in 1400 BC as it is in business and politics today. Without a means to save face and a piece of the action the Egyptian priests found it easier to eject Ahkenaten from his throne and install the Vizier Yusuf’s line in his stead.

Once it is understood that priests were not just the conservators of cult beliefs, but of the sciences and all matters pertaining to the maintenance and perpetuation of the kingdom, the concept of priesthood as proclaimed by Morgdumb fails in efficacy and validity. Correspondingly, the concept of dispensation, a “modern” anachronism born of contemporaries of Paul the Apostle also dissolves. The only “restoration” that took place over the millennia between Adam and Christ were feeble attempts by various True Believers who wanted to revive the Ancient Order and return to the genuine belief in God. The problem has been however, that in every instance, the available records have been corrupted and anachronistic, now verified by the Sumerian tablets, Dead Sea Scrolls, Amarna letters, Ras Shamra tablets, etc. as compared to the Christian and Hebrew Old Testaments.

There are no dispensations of Gospel or Priesthood. Such a thing was unknown in ancient times, predating the Exodus, just as there never was a Restoration as spoken of in the D&C section 86. Nor was there ever a priesthood authority that was passed down over the millennia, to be restored along with the Gospel with every “Apostacy", as taught by Morgdoc. Hugh Nibley’s book, Abraham in Egypt is as much a work of contrived fiction as the Deuteronomists’ version of history and heirship in the Old Testament. And so is Joseph Smith’s books of Abraham and Moses as contained in the Pearl of Great Price.

With such a monstrous discrepancy, it is no wonder with every scholarly exhumation of ancient texts, religious leaders of the major religions continually impede the translation and dissemination of these discoveries. The contents if allowed to propagate among Believers would completely destroy these religions in a few short years. But the truth has a way of defending itself and finding its way into the hands of those who treasure its possession. Persecutions, intimidations, excommunications, Inquisitions, and suppression ultimately fail. I look forward to the day when people everywhere will throw off the yoke of bondage promulgated by purveyors of religion, and political elitism. In light of this knowledge, not only does the religious strife have no foundation, but the striving for political ascendancy has no merit. There is no point to Gog and Magog; it is all just an ancient feud by those who lust for power, left over from a world struggling to revive a destroyed civilization 12,000 years ago.

SethSmee


REFERENCES
Laurence Gardner The Origin of God
Laurence Gardner  Realm of the Ring Lords
Hugh Nibley Abraham in Egypt
CJCLDS scriptural additions The Doctrine and Covenants, The Pearl of Great Price

Saturday, April 13, 2013

The Feuding of Feudalism



Nothing is as it seems

My "wayward" brother who has spent his life going to and fro upon the earth once remarked to me that one of the aspects of Morgdumb that always bothered him was the focus on lording over other people. He was quite adamant that he did not have the desire to rule over anyone, much less to seek a priest-king anointing, ruling forever over ever-increasing posterity, worlds without end. When Morgdoc was phrased in this manner I had to agree with him that I had no such aspirations either. Yet every member of that misbegotten church is prodded, provoked, and prevailed upon to exert all their energies to that end--even at the cost of all their earthly and familial resources. From whence comes this obsession?

There is certainly a lot we have not learned about the Kirtland period and the association between Joshua Seixas and Joseph Smith. But since most of this Priesthood-ascendancy has its roots in the time of the School of the Prophets, we can infer by historical counterpart what kinds of conversations Joseph had with Joshua. None of the doctrines presented in the temple and corresponding priesthood "ordinances" appear in MorgMyth earlier than this.

For decades I searched for an understanding of the temple "endowment", but never arrived at a core understanding of its origin until delving into ancient history. The answers have been coming in a staccato rate, and a picture is forming out of a Sumerian Creation story 2,000 years older than the Genesis dating (~6,000 BC). Like all discoveries, it is illuminating and integrative. What formerly seemed an eternal mystery is now comprehensible connective patterns of human behavior.

If there is one word that describes the history of Israel and its impact on the civilizations of the world it would be feud. Feuding is how it all began, and what has driven the ideologies of the three major world religions. Feuding is over ascendancy, the right and privilege to govern others, and the mainspring of exaltation. Joseph was attracted to it as naturally as water droplets coalesce during rain. We have the writings of the Sumerians upon clay to thank for this insight, recently coming forward in scholarly publications and the popular press. The Creation account in Morgdum's "endowment", is none other than a bastardized and butchered story of the feuding between two brothers, Enlil and Enki, sons of the chief Anannage ruler, An. The mantle of authority was given to Enlil, and Enlil sought to undermine Enki's work. In Joseph's version of the Deuteronomist's Creation account, Enlil is Jehovah (YHWH), while in the Sumerian, Enki is the Serpent Nahash (NHSH). Already informed Mormons perceive a corruption.

Jesus was not the God of the Old Testament, Jehovah, as proclaimed by the CES. Dr Raphael Patai (lecturer at the Hebew University in Jerusalem), taught that Jehovah is the consonantal form of the acronym YHWH. Y represents the father El/Eloah/Ilu, known as El Shaddai, El Elyon, and mistranslated as God Almighty, the Most High, who was known Semitically as the "Shining Lord of the Mountain." (Ilu Kur-gal). Margaret Barker strove in vain to identify El Elyon in her books, The Older Testament, and The Great Angel. She was definitely on to something when she observed traces of the ancient Royal Cult in the Old Testament were erased by the Deuteronomists, of which their part in this comes later in this post.

Lucifer is not Satan nor the Serpent, as taught by the Morg's fifteen Apostates. It is common scholarly knowledge that the word Lucifer means "bearer of light" and has reference to the planet Venus. The passage in Isaiah 14:12 does not refer to Satan, but to the king of Babylon. The conflation of Lucifer with Satan came many centuries after Isaiah's diatribe. Nahash, the consonantal form of NHSH, means "wise one" and was commonly used when referring to sages. The Serpent figure is older than the Deluge, and not associated with evil as Deuteronomists bastardized it in the O.T..

These two debauched and misdirecting definitions are at the core of Morgdoc's errors. Whether Joseph took liberties with the Creation characters, or Joshua was ill informed we shall likely never know. I have been unable to turn up further information on the rabbi than what is covered in MorgMyth. It is such irony that we are able to identify the original characters of the Creation account superseding the Deuteronomic Genesis renovation circa 600 BC (a story that originated about 9500 BC) but nearly impossible to trace how Joseph got the idea Jesus was Jehovah and put him in as co-creator in his "endowment", and making Jesus' brother a noncorporeal competitor taking control of a serpent's body to disrupt their father's procreation.

The first H letter Dr. Patai identifies as Ashtoreth/Asherah/Elath/Ninlil/Ishtar, consort to El. She was venerated by the Hebrews until the Deuteronomist priests excised her from the list of worshiped Gods. It is important to keep in mind that Isaiah wrote after the Deuteronomist priests butchered their history. Any references Isaiah makes to the Creation figures is necessarily unreliable.

The letter W refers to the son of El and Ashtoreth, Baal, which name is a concatenation meaning Lord, and otherwise known as Hadad. The second H refers to Baal's sister, Anath/Inanna/Astarte, known as the goddess of love and war. Enlil was the son of El and Ki (Earth Mother), while Enki was the son of El and Antu (Lady of the Sky). Both mothers were sisters to El.

The feuding between the brothers began when Enlil, although older than Enki, was born of El's younger sister, Ki. Enki was born of Ki's older sister, Antu. Enki held to the matrilineal tradition, and therefore thought he should be heir to their father's throne when he died. This rivalry between older/younger sons, and between senior and junior mothers features as the predominant theme in Hebrew/Israeli history. Feudalism is the institutionalizing of this rivalry, and drives the movement of the New World Order today. Those people who lay claim to the ancient Hebrew traditions and right to lordship, elitism, and divine right are seeking the re-establishment of Feudalism, and the Ancient Order of the World which heralds back to the destruction of the world as told to Plato by the Egyptian priest, Manetho. All of the New World Order symbols are pre-Diluvian, products of an earlier culture and civilization.

These nine figures constitute the Elohim, or council of the Gods. The usage of Elohim as a proper name by Morgdumb is another of their errors, for it has reference to these Sumerian rulers, where El/An, is the senior ruler who binds the decision of the council and each wore a ring as symbolic identification of their position (Yes, Tolkien did some borrowing of the Anannage myth).  El and his siblings were speculatively Atlantean survivors of the world-wide catastrophe circa 11,000 BC and found themselves desperately trying to revive the high civilization they had before the cataclysms of meteorite fires and flooding destroyed and sank most of it. In this revival effort we find Nin becoming the surrogate mother of an early "in-vitro-fertilzation" project where Enki fertilizes the ova of a common woman, and the embryo was born by Nin. The successful result was Atappa/Adapa/Adamu, our "father" Adam, being the first successful hybrid of Anannage DNA and the common folk. The purpose of the experiment was to produce a more intelligent but obedient race that could assist in rebuilding the gardens essential for human survival. To this end, Adam was anointed a priest and ruler over the garden project--until the brotherly feuding disrupted it, resulting in Adam being ejected from the Garden.

Priests in those days were not religious preservers, but guardians of the "secret" high knowledge of civilization held by the Anannage. It was the Egyptians who turned the priesthood into a caste system, in order to maintain strict adherence to the teachings of Horus, the system dating back to the Osiris Kingdom around 37,000 BC. Enlil swayed the Council against dissenting vote to flood the area and destroy the existing Sumerian race. They were too noisy and unruly. This act is what precipitated the creation of the Adamu strain that replaced them. The scope of the fraternal feud was enlarged when Enki sought to educate Adam (the race he spawned) in priestly knowledge as a facility of his stewardship. Enlil wanted to keep the Adamu ignorant. The entire venture became academic when the area was swept with further natural destruction and climate change, resulting in arid and windy conditions, destroying the fertility of the region. As in other subsequent ages, depredations are committed against peaceful, productive people and the combined circumstances enforced the migration of the ruling descendants of An, one of which was Abraham of Ur. So the original Creation account covers a period between 9500 and 2250 BC, with descending rulers acquiring the original titles of the Elohim council.


At junctures like these I hear G'Kar's advice to his friends: "Nothing on Babylon 5 is as it seems." The coup de grace in this corruption is Morgdumb's Godhead error concerning the Holy Spirit. Originally Ashtoreth was venerated as the female Goddess. But the Kaballah asserts that in time this veneration was amalgamated with her daughter, Anath. They were then referred to as the Shekhina (consort to Yahweh), an extraction of the Hebrew sh'kinah, meaning "to dwell." By the first century the Shekhina was said to have dwelt in the Tabernacle of Sinai and later in Solomon's Temple. It was associated with wisdom and an opposition to Yahweh's destructive behavior. The Shekhina is the Holy Spirit. Once feminine, corporeal, and possessed of wisdom and forebearance to violence, associated by the time of Jesus as a non-corporeal personage presumably of the same mind and will as Jehovah. We shouldn't feel too chagrined, Jesus was just as ignorant of the ancient corruptions in the old Hebrew texts as we are today. Just less so than the chauvinistic Morgdumb version.

Such is the secular history of the Biblical "Creation", and it begs the question: "What feelings does this incite in the religious person, especially the True Believer, when (s)he discovers that their beliefs are nothing more than an instrument of subjection and control, and that Man's religious history was invented for just such purpose?"  To realize your beliefs are a product of the corruption of the priests returning from Babylonian captivity (Deuteronomists) that was deliberately performed to justify ascendancy of those priests over the priestly caste left behind in the wake of Nebuchadnezzar's wasting of Israel, --makes you feel good about your free agency and your eternal salvation, doesn't it, Morgites?

SethSmee

REFERENCES

The Origin of God, Laurence Gardner
The Hebrew Goddess  Raphael Patai
The Older Testament, The Great Angel, Margaret Barker
Ancient State: The Rulers and the Ruled, Old Testament and Related Studies Hugh Nibley

Thursday, February 7, 2013

Pink Mastodons in the Livingroom

                                       
                                                The Phenomenon of Porn

My sister linked me to the Ask Mormon Girl blogsite thinking it might be of interest to me. Dismayed at some of the problems wanting of advice from this kindly, knowledgeable young matron (a Neo-religious Ann Landers), I caught the post about Porn. I find myself vexed with ire over the misconceptions and misunderstandings of 90% of the responses. It is difficult when observing such heartache to adhere to my motto of minding my own business. At first I thought I could keep my response short and pointed, but in the midst of such ignorance, it is difficult. There were a few people posting who have sufficient grasp of the essential issues who will realize improved relationships. The rest I predict will continue in frustration, misunderstanding, rancor, and marital dissolution.

The first misconception is with the definition of “addiction.” My Sage dictionary is faithful to English: “1. Someone who is physiologically dependent on a substance; abrupt deprivation of the substance produces [physiological] withdrawal symptoms. 2. Someone who is so ardently devoted to something that it resembles an addiction.” Looking and acting like a duck does not necessarily mean the action is performed by a duck. There is a distinct, marked difference between addiction, and obsessive, or compulsive behaviors. Those people who cannot understand the fine distinctions will continue to have relational problems, especially with intimacy. An excellent book discussing addiction, behavior, and healing is The Codependency Conspiracy, written by forensic psychologist, Stan Katz. Dr Katz also illuminates the fundamental flaws in the 12 step program used by AA, and plagiarized into numerous recovery groups, a variation apparently adopted by LDS practitioners. Look for it in your local library system. It is well worth the read.

Sixty years ago as a child, I learned it was common knowledge in this country that psychiatry was quackery. Since then, the acceptance of its scientific validity has swept through our culture, in spite of the material published by their own researchers invalidating the efficacy of its techniques. The church leadership, finding increasing membership behavioral problems, as often provoked by local leaders as otherwise, incorporated psychotherapy into its administrative structure in order to get members help and attention diverted from those local priesthood officials who exacerbated these kinds of problems. During this same period, Donald Cameron, one time president of the APA, was investigated for civil liberty and psychological abuse violations in connection with his “psychic driving” research funded by the CIA, then classified as MK Ultra. For a brief period, some of these same techniques in diminutive form were employed by BYU officials on campus, in an attempt to heterosexualize homosexual church members with disastrous results, seriously damaging the lives of these “patients.” This psychic driving consisted of pornography, electroshock, and drugs. Its abysmal failure precipitated its discontinuance.

The second area of misunderstanding is the sexual chastity elephant being forced into the living rooms of church members. Obsession with sexual purity is one of the chief contributory causes of porn’s increasing usage among church members. I have two brothers who spent time incarcerated for their arson, all because our father’s obsession with certain behavioral issues of his kids. This obsession was driven by his own weaknesses in these same areas, unwittingly producing the same problems in us he had struggled with as a youth. It can be taken as a cardinal guide that those who are obsessed with the behavior of others are sufferers of the same weakness, and are propagating their dysfunctional relationship habits upon all those they have influence. This is precisely what Jesus had reference to with His Beam & Mote in the Eye parable.

This second area of misunderstanding is characterized by suppressing or medicating the symptom, which is porn, when the actual problem lies elsewhere. Western society has devolved into treating symptoms, while classifying them as disorders or diseases. This cancerous solution to symptomatic problems is spreading throughout the world and has caused me considerable alarm for the well being of my posterity. A few years ago I broke a tooth crown and went to a specialist to have it reworked. The doctor discovered an infection in the tooth so severe that he was nearly forced to remove the tooth to terminate the infection. Yet I felt no discomfort anywhere near it. But I had been suffering increasing nerve pain in my arm, to the point I could barely hold a spoon to feed myself. Once the tooth infection was cured, the nerve problems disappeared in my arm and my natural strength returned. When church officials pound the pulpit unceasingly over chastity they are effectively scratching at a skin lesion that cannot heal. The cause of the infection must be eliminated, not bandaided. Failure to address the underlying cause of behavioral problems is a clear sign of spiritual impotence in religious leaders and quackery in the behavioral modification professions. Now, what did I just say?

Those who have done their historical investigation on this subject know that the period when porn, whorehouses and legal regulations, and the incidence of venereal disease all spread like grass fire with the sexual suppression of the Victorian era. In America, we barely regained our senses with the passing of the 21st amendment, for corruption and drunkenness had spread to the center of the Federal government with the passing of the 18th amendment. One would think Americans learned something from that debacle.

In my professional career I encountered the concept of Root Cause Analysis. Because my career was in physical science, it was often a mistaken assumption by associates that product failure was a physical phenomenon. What I discovered early on was that RCA has to do with people, not physical impurities. All solutions to product failures focused on misunderstanding and procedural errors in people’s behavior. The same RCA principles apply to human social dysfunctions. The manifestation of porn is symptomatic of a systemic problem, and its treatment and elimination requires involvement of both men and women, because both are involved in its root cause in society. Women who do not go beyond the first step in their man’s ownership of porn obsession are destined to fail in their relationship until they perceive their interactive part in the overall development of intimacy substitutes.

The third misunderstanding is not realizing that porn usage (true of all other symptomatic behaviors), is a substitute for an underlying deficiency. Without attention to the underlying deficiency, substitutes will always be employed. Suppression or other behavior modification methods will always fail, with its attendant guilt and shame in a religious context, perpetuating the failure cycle. A large portion of this misunderstanding of overt sexual “misbehavior” is a failure at understanding human sexuality, its biological nature, and its successful socialization. Men have often been denigrated because they are inept at initiating sex with women. But it works both ways. My experience has been that very few women understand how to love, and “make love” (that is, understand how to implement sexual pleasure in males), to the men in their lives, becoming frustrated and hurt because their man begins looking for intimacy augmentation or substitutes elsewhere. What men are looking for is intimacy, overridden in their early adult years by sex hormones. Those women who are successful rarely are able to articulate exactly why how they treat their husband/lover keeps them returning and bonding with them. The sexualization process in American culture has few if any rituals, rites of passage, or socialization processes providing a vehicle for healthy sexual development and its perpetuation. Most of it is implanted by the mother before the child is aware of themselves.

Charles Moore, Santa Cruz District Attorney and Catholic priest, extemporized on the hormonal differences between men and women entering puberty. He declared that when women enter this transition, their hormones can increase at least three times that in childhood. But for men, that increase can peak at least fifteen times the previous level. A woman’s sexual nature will usually remain fairly constant within normal hormonal fluctuations until menopause where interest doesn’t decline, but shifts. For men, hormonal peaking takes place in early adulthood and can begin decline as early as thirty, or as late as seventy. This 5/1 disparity underscores the difficulties in women understanding male sexual behavior, male disappointment in female responses, and for men, completely overshadows their underlying needs for intimacy.

Without effective socialization from both mother and father, males can have considerable difficulty in expressing their intimate desires with women because their brains are suffused with testosterone, clouding their judgment. Such is common knowledge among men, and even depicted in the Epics with the island of Sirens. For every male who has difficulty expressing his sexuality in productive, meaningful hetero relationships, there will be a mother who did not, or was unable to, communicate to her son effective and appropriate methods of developing intimacy with a woman. Likewise, there will also exist a father who did not, or was unable to, instruct and model his son on appropriate methods and boundaries for releasing sexual energy. For those sports-minded males, that activity is a useful diversion, but does nothing for his need for feminine intimacy and expressing the creative force. Fortunately, most of this is communicated through parental interaction with children in an atmosphere free of guilt, shame, or berating, but rather laced with physical expressions of affection, open discussion (listening to the kid!), and building the child’s confidence in making their own analysis and solutions to problems.

Emotional isolation is likely to be at the root of every human social dysfunction. Obviously, if parents are not communicating freely and effectively on the emotional level, children will not learn effective techniques either. I am reminded of my 4 year old redhead daughter who, after having heard her mother frequently query her daughter: Do you need some loving and attention?, one day told her mother emphatically: Put the baby down, I want some loving and attention!

The female complainant who expressed frustration, disillusionment, repugnance, and disdain over males who engaged in pornographic media was forlorn that she would not find in today’s society a male who did not have the “problem.” What she was totally unaware of is that even if she had found someone that fit her bill of values, in time he likely would have developed the problem because her attitudes on the matter were invisible to herself. As Grandma Betty tells me; she’s missing a puzzle piece in her character. This woman does not realize that what she finds repugnant in men who indulge in porn is likely to be a reflection of herself in the same area and despises herself for it. Such people don’t like being reminded of their own deficiency. Mote and the Beam principle. As Eric Hoffer wrote:

“The awareness of their individual blemishes and short-comings inclines the frustrated to detect ill will and meanness in their fellow men. Self-contempt, however vague, sharpens our eyes for the imperfections of others. We usually strive to reveal in others the blemishes we hide in ourselves.”

This woman is attempting hypergamy (looking to “trade up”) and marry someone less defective than she perceives herself to be. Often this takes the form of looking for a man who appears to be the idealized image of her own father. The same can be said of women who point out the “degradation” of women in pornographic productions. It is quite often the fact that those who object to being exploited do it themselves and to others. Another respondent who expressed this disgust, does not realize that the “degradation” she believes exists in the photography is a projection of her own feelings of degradation, were she to be the person being photographed. There is no way she could possibly know what the feelings were of the woman who was in the photographed material. She is projecting her own feelings of inadequacy. Religious harpies, whether cloaked in black suits or white veils or ties, who focus on sexual “perversion” at the pulpit or in the press, are merely revealing the spiritual emptiness, depravity of soul, and bereft intimacy existing within themselves. This principle is true across the board for any vice humans use as a substitute for the missing “puzzle piece.”

The quest for intimacy runs deep and can be found in a human yearning. I have yet to find explored in public literature. It concerns the differences in the creative force, actualized by men and women.

The yearning a man has for intimacy is an expression of the creative, the need to find greater expression of self, and perpetuate the self beyond his own mortality. I expect the same is true for women. Women are so constructed that all of their reproductive organs for bearing offspring and sustaining them are also sexual organs that men are drawn to, who find deep satisfaction in observing, touching, and manipulating. Indeed, medical research recently has pointed to such action prior, during, and post delivery can significantly enhance a woman’s birthing process and recovery from its stress. The entire act of conceiving, gestating, and delivery is a sexual one—a symbol which they frequently are blind to. Men have no such organs. There is only one through which they can be creative, and use to perpetuate their identity immortally. In exceptional instances they may be able to nurse an infant. But that is the extent of the physical connection to their offspring. For women, having a baby is an act of fulfillment. For men it is the culmination of her sexuality; it is the power of her sex that he cannot do, and cannot participate in, unless she involves him in it all the way. The way men see it, symbolically women are having a sexual experience in the production and physical nurturing of a child. Men cannot have a similar sexual experience with their children, except vicariously through the woman’s inclusion. This is the crux of Kyle Pruett’s book, Father Need. The benefits of such maternal inclusion in her sexual expression Doctor Pruett covers in his book, The Nurturing Father.

Let me interject right here that it is precisely the absence of nurturance as a dominant male characteristic that makes the Proclamation on the Family a piece of trash. Women are not the primary nurturers. This view is ae perpetuation of a myth, begun post WWII. It is at the core of the war between the sexes. Likewise, making a living has nothing to do with men or women, but with parents. Virtually all of society’s ills can be traced to this single process of exclusion of males from the sexual aspect of creating and nurturing a replica of themselves.

Doctor Pruett has demonstrated that in those families where the father has been intimately included in the gestation and delivery process the incidence of all male forms of abuse are dramatically reduced. The more the father can be encouraged to nurture his child, the more fulfilled he becomes, the more fulfilled and developmentally sound the child is. When a child’s mother alienates its father from herself, she is alienating him from the child. A man’s connection to his children is the symbolic connection of his umbilical organ uniting through a woman’s sexual organs in an act of completeness and transcendence. If she does things that inhibits his natural bonding urges, she destroys those links that not only tie him to her, but generatively to their offspring. The day my first daughter was born I transformed from the identity of being male, to being a father. The entire concept of fatherhood in American culture has been denigrated and neglected to the point that virtually our entire society does not know what it means.

My first wife refused to allow me to touch her in any way during her delivery (and incidentally in many other natural ways otherwise), and that single act almost lost me. Had I been of a more impulsive nature, I would have walked out of the hospital at that moment, never to be seen or heard from again. But I waited, until being the last of the line of “attendants”, I could hold my newborn daughter in my arms and get acquainted with her. (Medical personnel just don’t get it. A newborn does not need immediate fussing over cleanliness and inspection. What they need is to be introduced to their father immediately—to be reassured by that man who created them they are and will be safe, and they are the central figure in his life.) Until that moment my daughter was in distress, refusing to be consoled by anyone, including her mother. When I took her in my arms she immediately ceased her crying, and we bonded. In that instant, I became a father. I felt the mantle of responsibility for her care in all its parameters descend upon me and I became transformed. It was magical. I was fortunate to have similar experiences with each successive child. But their mother continually refused to initiate, much less participate in those moments, to the detriment of our children and our ultimate divorcement. Each of the children today are bearing the scars of that schism between my first wife and I. While I have attempted to repair the breach and damage in my relations to my children from that lack of parental intimacy, their mother’s inability to initiate and sustain intimacy has produced similar difficulties in the children, of which the oldest is now the greatest of sufferers. In time, the children have become emotionally estranged from their mother, suffering feelings of isolation and sometimes rejection. It shows in their hetero relationships.

Women must come to this understanding: a man’s fullest expression of his sexuality can only be achieved through inclusion of a woman’s sexual power in his life. It is through not only his physical union with her, but with the emotional and spiritual union that he is empowered to define and obtain his highest creative self. He cannot do this alone, and if he must be alone, will often seek the substitute of imagination, stimulated by visual sexual artifacts. Males are visual, at least as far as sex is concerned. There isn’t a person alive that is capable of articulating why this is so. A large percentage of women do not understand the nuances of what stimulates a man. Those that do predominantly use it to manipulate men, rather than use it to exalt him. Only a few women become self-aware of their sexual power and its impact on the male psyche, and use it to improve both her well-being, and his. Visual imagery of a woman in various states of erotic ecstasy is the vehicle through which an isolated male obtains a modicum of sexual release. Men are quite well aware that it is lonely, that it is sterile, that it can be a symbol of objectification. But the alternative is no sexual release at all, and this is the ultimate state of loneliness and isolation. A man never feels more disconnected from life than at that moment he resorts to isolated sex. At least for those few moments spent with visual erotica they can experience the pleasure of self-love, even though the real thing is denied them. This is not a justification of porn, but an explanation of the human dynamic that creates it! The solution to its eradication is greater sensitivity to a man’s emotional state of being and the production in marriage and social settings; those rites, rituals, and activities that healthily facilitate the gratification of the male’s creative urge.

Karl Kraus journalist and satirist wrote during the rise of promiscuity in the Weimar Republic:

“When it comes to sex, the whole world is utterly stupid: it sees sexual life in terms either of a division between the sexes, or of decisions made on moral grounds.”

“Intercourse with a woman is sometimes a satisfactory substitute for masturbation. But it takes a lot of imagination to make it work.”

It should be a lot clearer at this point how women are involved in the phenomenon of porn (beyond exhibitionism, or debauching themselves for money) which requires a lot less imagination than real sex with a woman, and what they must do as their part in diminishing its presence. Far too many women are clueless to the signs of male isolation. Sometimes they remove themselves from female association for personal recharge. Other times it is an act of resignation. Developing those cues is part of the courtship process, which must be enhanced in marriage if it is to be productive of intimacy.

Women should also realize that celebration of the nude female form has always, and is always going to find public expression, and therefore learn ways to celebrate themselves wherever it exists, and also help their children to understand its healthy expression. When the sexual dynamic of men and women are fully understood, there is nothing to fear, no shame, no guilt, and no embarrassment. None of this crap like Spencer W. Kimball wrote about the first time he attended a nude female follies exhibition. That was his insecurity and character defect, and he should have kept it to himself, rather than shoving it in the livingrooms of members of the Church through his book The Miracle of Forgiveness. What a prude!

SethSmee

REFERENCES
The Codependency Conspiracy Stan Katz/Aimee Liu
The Myth of Neurosis Garth Wood
Sex by Prescription Thomas Szasz
The Myth of Psychotherapy Thomas Szasz
Lexicon of Lunacy Thomas Szasz
Anti Freud Thomas Szasz
Father Need Kyle Pruett
The Nurturing Father Kyle Pruett