I’m occasionally asked if I consider myself a Liahona Mormon, or an Iron Rod Mormon.
I say “Liahona. Except that the Liahona keeps pointing straight at the Iron Rod.”
[And frankly, if your Liahona isn’t, it ain’t working. And we all know why the Liahona stopped working the first time].
{Don’t read too much into this post. I’m mostly just poking fun at what I think is a bad – and ultimately poisonous – metaphor}
I agree…it’s a horrible and divisive metaphor.
I agree that it isn’t a very good metaphor. All metaphors break down at some point; this one breaks down pretty early.
But would you agree, Ivan, that there is a tension in the Church between those members who do what they’re asked without question, versus those who are more inclined to question dogma, tradition, and authority?
Well, there’s a tension between those who are willing to question dogma, tradition, and authority publicly and those who aren’t.
But I think that accusing the “iron rodders” of blind obedience is, more often than not, a self-justification technique used by those who can’t bear the thought that another thinking person might not arrive at the same conclusion that they have.
Mike –
when it’s expressed in those terms, no.
I’ve always hated this metaphor. If they wanted something more workable why didn’t they contrast the Liahona with the Brass Plates instead? The image of the Iron Rod is so general; so unqualified that it’s a huge leap to pull anything out of it other than, simply, “The Word of God” with *all* of it’s ramifications.
I think that Terryl Givens has the right idea about this metaphor when he points out that while the Liahona/Iron Rod categorization is a poor tool, there are certain elements of Liahona”ism” and Iron Rod”ism” existing concurrently in each member and within the Church as a body, as well as in its constituent units. The different tendencies and elements express themselves with different force at different stages in our lives.
All right, I’ll take the bait.
I think that the metaphor is actually a pretty good one, which can simply be rephrased as follows:
Iron rods agree with Ivan’s qualifier: “And frankly, if your Liahona isn’t, it ain’t working” while Liahona’s do not.
And thus we see the divisiveness some insist on. 🙂
JeffG –
it’s amazing the number of people I see in the great and spacious building, mocking the iron rodders with one hand and holding a non-working Liahona in the other (and they keep insisting that the Liahona is telling them that the great and spacious is the place to be).
I wasn’t trying to mock anybody, only defend the metaphor as well as those I see as the “true” Liahonas from the mockery which YOU are heaping on them. If the metaphor is understood as I outlined it in #8 then it seems clear to me that the Iron Rods mock the Liahonas just as much as the latter do the former.
Actually,
Very few active members would even know what a “Liahona” is VS a “Iron Rodder”.
JeffG –
and thus you miss the point. I’m mocking the metaphor, which I think is a horrible, awful, no good, very bad metaphor.
I’m not mocking any one person or group of people, because I don’t believe “Iron Rodders” or “Liahona-types” exist (except maybe in the very limited sense in comment #7 where they might be seen as two elements in our own souls. But to classify people as them is, I think, very wrong).
Jeff G, welcome back. I haven’t heard from you in a while. It’s of course possible you have commented and I’ve missed it. It must be that the iron rod is leading you straight back to M* — 🙂
I never got that metaphor. I could never figure out where I was in it.
I have no idea what it’s supposed to mean — do I follow the will of God as expressed in scripture versus that expressed via revelation (which mostly comes about via studying scripture)? I mean, didn’t the Liahona only work when its users were following the commandments?
What I thought originally when I read that article in Dialogue, was some people follow the letter of the law and some people follow the spirit. Some people follow both. I should say attempt to follow, since none of us is perfect.
People who strictly attempt to follow the letter of the law are, I’ve found, fearful. I should know, since I’m one of them.
Those who follow the spirit are often more relaxed and kind and spiritual. They usually obey more than they disobey, but with a less worried manner.
CS Lewis describes it as believing in God in a less worried, less anxious way.
That’s my opinion. As far as Liahona and Iron Rod, I think they’re the same thing and the writer missed the mark in his analogy.
As far as Liahona and Iron Rod, I think they’re the same thing and the writer missed the mark in his analogy
Exactly.
Too often I find people who self-identify as Liahona-types are just being self-congratulatory. People who actually live by the spirit would never do such a thing.
And for those that need a point of reference, the followng link is to Dr. Richard D. Poll’s book, “History and Faith: Reflections of a Mormon Historian”, which contains his original 1967 talk, “What the Church Means to People Like Me”, followed by “Liahona and Iron Rod Revisited”, written more than 20 years later.
http://www.signaturebookslibrary.org/history/chapter1.htm#church
What arrogance to call oneself a Liahona Mormon! It is what we all strive for but claiming it is a smarmy incantation that denies itself.
I suppose one can call oneself whatever one wants to call oneself.
I call myself sane, which some who know me consider arrogant.
annegb –
sanity is overrated. But I would say you are probably one of the saner people in the Bloggernacle. 😉
it’s all good.
annegb’s use of the phrase letter-of-the law reminds me of New Testament times, where the Law of Moses was always read that way. typically against the Savior’s teachings. Not to say that the letter of it isn’t off mark, but it doesn’t always, most definitely apply to every single situation. If you “hold to the rod” and don’t allow your hand to move along it, you’re not going in any direction, right or wrong.