Because I frequently get questions about the comparison between the law of consecration and socialism, I thought I would write a few things and post it here for anyone who is interested to read. I am not an expert on socialism or economics, and I don’t want to get off into political discussions, so I offer these thoughts as a few general insights and a beginning point for further research and discussion for those who are interested. These are my opinions and not official Church doctrine.
Elder Marion G. Romney gave a talk about the differences between socialism and the United Order (which is the term he used for the law of consecration) in General Conference in April 1966 (which I believe was a repeat of a talk he had given years earlier). You can find an excerpt of that talk in the D&C Institute manual at this link. (Look for Enrichment L-6.)
Socialism rose out of the horrors of the industrial revolution—capitalism in its purest form—and the terrible conditions in which people were forced to live and work. Consecration and socialism thus share the goal of eliminating poverty and inequality. Fundamentally, however, the two systems are completely different because consecration is based on stewardship (faith in God and an understanding that all things are His), personal righteousness, and agency, while socialism is a political system, based on the philosophies of men and implemented through use of state power, subject to the excesses and abuses that plague any political system.
In my opinion, it is important to note that there is no one type of “socialism” any more than there is one type of “capitalism” or “democracy.” There are many different forms of government and economics throughout the world, and some work better than others. Many countries in Europe, for example, have a system of democratic socialism in which some of the goals of public ownership of property and industry and equitable distribution of wealth are accomplished through democratic processes in which the people can vote for various parties and representatives and therefore have some choice in how things are done. We should keep in mind that many of the statements that were made by Church leaders in the twentieth century were made in the context of the Cold War and were responding to the Soviet communist system, which at that time was the largest representation in the world of “socialism.”
Furthermore, in our current political climate, the word “socialism” has been thrown around frequently and (I think) carelessly or ignorantly. It has become a scare tactic and a shorthand label for almost anything someone doesn’t agree with, and most of the uses of the term that I have seen in our political discourse in the past several years have been frankly irresponsible. As educated people seeking to have the Spirit in our lives, we need to be very careful about extremist rhetoric and political discourse based on anger, contention, and hatred. “Socialism” as an epithet is all too often part of that discourse.
I make these points by way of reminding us that as members of the Church we know that neither “socialism” or “capitalism” or any other “ism” is ordained of God. The Lord’s system—the law of the Celestial Kingdom—is consecration. Anything else is a counterfeit and we would do well to put our efforts into becoming more consecrated while participating responsibly in the system within which we must live now.
I appreciated the comment that Socialism rose from the horrors of the industrial revolution. It made me consider what the law of consecration "rose from." Of course it is the law of the Celestial Kingdom, but I also reflected on the situation the Saints were in at the time the law of consecration was given to them. I think that it came from a desire to lift and exalt all members of the church, rather than a reaction to the poverty of the saints. In this light the ultimate goal of the law of consecration was spiritual, not temporal. This aligns with my own personal view of the reasons God gives laws.
ReplyDeleteI like the point you make about the difference between the consecration and socialism. I believe that same difference exists in many aspects of the world when compared to God’s way of doing things. The Celestial Kingdom, for example, is just that: a kingdom. It has a King and a Queen. The closest thing we know on Earth is monarchy. Just as with socialism and the law of consecration, monarchy is only humanity’s attempt at the way God rules in the Celestial Kingdom. It is inherently flawed. I don’t think it is bad to try to imitate God’s perfection. We all do it as we try to become like Him. However, I do believe that we need to realize that there is a difference. A king on Earth should not assume that he will rule perfectly and absolutely just because he is attempting to have the same government organization as exists in the Celestial Kingdom. In general, I think that we need to be a little more careful when comparing our creations, inventions and ideas with those of God.
ReplyDelete